UPenn swimmer comes out as trans / switches to women's team after competing on men's team for 3 years and is dominating NCAA

it's gonna take a large uprising from female-from-birth athletes to stop this.

and they will take massive heat for doing it. Some of their lives will be destroyed.

but in the end that's the only way.

admins will NEVER have the guts to make the tough sex-not-gender decisions. they don't really care.

but starts like the williams sisters, US women soccer players, a basketball player, maybe someone like allyson felix after she retires.

But obviously people like this swimmer should not be a part of women's NCAA sports.

RossiCheated wrote:

Interesting how the athletic department hasn't included any meaningful details on her Bio page on the roster:

5

Great point. Althought truth be told, I'm not sure her male bio page had many details either.

Regardless"my mind, it should say, "Competed on men's team for 3 years....." That's a fact. What are you hiding? The point of the bio page is to show their past athletic exploits to put ther current athletic exploits into context.

But remember HBO cancelled a trans special becaue there was outrage that they were going to show pictures and mention the name of the trans athlete as their old sex (was it June Eastwood?) . There's some term for this. I call it reporting but in the trans community it's viewed as being REALLY bad.

I think this is the male bio page:

Armstronglivs wrote:

But really - none of them can ever be mothers. Ever. Or even a period or two. Isn't that a little unusual for women?

Women aren't defined by their womb. Go back to the 1950s please!

Tatar... wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

But really - none of them can ever be mothers. Ever. Or even a period or two. Isn't that a little unusual for women?

Women aren't defined by their womb. Go back to the 1950s please!

Isn't it a little unusual to be a woman who has never had one? Or ovaries? Or maybe periods? Testicles are certainly quite a turn up for the books.

agip wrote:

it's gonna take a large uprising from female-from-birth athletes to stop this.

and they will take massive heat for doing it. Some of their lives will be destroyed.

but in the end that's the only way.

admins will NEVER have the guts to make the tough sex-not-gender decisions. they don't really care.

but starts like the williams sisters, US women soccer players, a basketball player, maybe someone like allyson felix after she retires.

But obviously people like this swimmer should not be a part of women's NCAA sports.

No, it's going to have to go through the courts and a massive uprising over a handful of athletes would be ridiculous. Obviously, no athlete is going to forfeit a scholarship to fight NCAA rules.

The organization, Alliance Defending Freedom, that represented the plaintiffs in Connecticut, is hell-bent 9n having transgender athletes banned and are always looking for plaintiffs and that's what it's going to take.

Tatar... wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

But really - none of them can ever be mothers. Ever. Or even a period or two. Isn't that a little unusual for women?

Women aren't defined by their womb. Go back to the 1950s please!

Of course we do see that is how most women define themselves. And if it weren't so our populations would have been in decline since the 1950's, when you say women stopped defining themselves by having a womb.

Too rational for this space.

This thread is 100% men up in arms about this saying that it's not fair to women when you have no problem bashing women & women's rights in plenty of other ways. You haven't seen a big push from athletes saying that they feel this is unfair. Younger folks who are a part of the sport don't seem to have the same reaction. Maybe it's because plenty of people swim faster. Maybe it's because they want to create an inclusive environment for the trans community. Maybe some of ya'll should take their lead & not make it about yourself when this has zero impact on you.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

astro wrote:

And compounding this nonsense, if any of the female athletes spoke up for themselves they would immediately be thrown off the team, dragged before the dean of equity, forced to issue a groveling apology and accused of bigotry. All because they said what everyone knows, that this is a travesty. It is just pure bullying all around.

No, they won't. A woman saying transgender females can have an unfair advantage won't receive any criticism. Countless people have said so and polls show that 60% oppose transgender athletes competiting in women's sports.

The other poster's claim that transgender athletes are treated as heros is nonsense. The vast majority of people are either vehemently opposed or don't care.

The claims you keep making in your posts show that you are not up-to-date on this issue nor are you closely involved in it.

You say, "A woman saying transgender females [sic] can have an unfair advantage won't receive any criticism."

The torrents of vile abuse - including rape, battery and death threats along with lots of dick pics and disgusting porn imagery - that have been hurled at women who have spoken up in defense of female-only sports show this is not true. Women such as Martina Navratilova, legendary UK swim champion Sharron Davies, former Connecticut HS runners Selina Soule and Chelsea Mitchell, Beth Stelzer of Save Women's Sports, developmental biologist Emma Hilton, coach Linda Blade and a number of female professors and teachers, all have been pilloried as bigots and haters for pointing out that males who identify as trans have unfair physical advantages, as have women like me.

You also say, "The other poster's claim that transgender athletes are treated as heros is nonsense."

Your claim is actually the one that's nonsense. The media platforms given to trans athletes, the fawning press coverage lionizing them, and the awards and accolades heaped upon them prove it.

US runners CeCe Telfer, Andraya Yearwood, Terry Miller, June Eastwood; Stephanie Barrett, who represented Canada in women's archery at the Tokyo Olympics; New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard, who also competed in the women's division at the Tokyo Olympics; world mountain biking champions Michelle Dumaresq and Kate Weatherly; Italian masters parathlete sprinter Valentina Petrillo; masters track cyclist Veronica Ivy/Rachel McKinnon and many more have been sought out by the mainstream and alternative media and given considerable sympathetic coverage around the world.

Trans athletes, particularly the male ones making inroads into girls' and women's sports, have been featured as heroes in documentaries, feted at film festivals, invited to give public talks at places as prestigious as Harvard, and depicted in a glowing light in profiles that present them as civil rights pioneers on par with Jesse Owens, Jackie Robinson, Arthur Ashe and Rosa Parks.

ESPN and the NY Times have hailed Telfer as a "trailblazer." Hubbard recently was named "Female Athlete of the Year" by one of New Zealand's leading universities. Yearwood and Miller received the Connecticut state "Courage Award" as well as the annual Athlete Action Award for their "heroism" from Athlete Ally - a US organization founded to promote LGBTQ participation in sports.

Tellingly, as Athlete Ally bestowed its highest honor on Yearwood and Miller, the org denounced and kicked out Navratilova - one of its founding members and arguably the person who singlehandedly has done the most to promote LGBTQ acceptance in sports over 40 years - precisely because she has pointed out that male athletes who identify as trans have an unfair advantage, a POV you say - without any evidence - that women can voice without receiving any criticism at all.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Tatar... wrote:

Women aren't defined by their womb. Go back to the 1950s please!

Of course we do see that is how most women define themselves. And if it weren't so our populations would have been in decline since the 1950's, when you say women stopped defining themselves by having a womb.

Women aren't just reproductive vehicles. For centuries women fought to free themselves from such reductionist views.

came to say wrote:

People on the left are the most evil despicable people in the world. The only way they can live with their extreme immorality is by pretending. They either pretend this is normal or pretend the things they voted for had nothing to do with this outcome. Every thing they claim to love they actually hate. In this case equal rights for women.

you sound angry....yikes.

if you substitute "religious people" for "people on the left" your paragraph is also spot on.

energeticlotuseater wrote:

I remember when this whole “gender is relative” nonsense got going a few years back the defenders of said gender fluid theory would dismiss those who pointed out this theory could present a problem for real female athletes when put into practice. It was dismissed as a “slippery slope argument” or “Such a small percentage of people will switch genders it won’t effect female athletes”.

Well, here it is.

You are right.

I was the person who was defending this position 7 years ago, and felt strongly that governing bodies would not allow it to corrupt athletics in the way that it has.

I suppose it seems foolish in hindsight, but I fully believed it at the time. I was very wrong.

Tatar... wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Of course we do see that is how most women define themselves. And if it weren't so our populations would have been in decline since the 1950's, when you say women stopped defining themselves by having a womb.

Women aren't just reproductive vehicles. For centuries women fought to free themselves from such reductionist views.

I think what he is trying to say is that the most obvious biological way to distinguish between XX and XY is that women can carry babies. He is not (I think) trying to say women are ONLY baby carriers. You are just trying to add noise to the conversation.

We as a people will never get anywhere on this conversation because if we try to reduce to sex, XX and XY, the "other side" will continually drag the conversation back to gender and act as if we are trying to denouce multi-genderism. Not true. What you call yourself, what you see yourself as, how you dress and act should have no bearing on which "division" you compete in. It was ALWAYS meant to be based on sex, and old tradition also only recognized two gender, and they were tied together. Fine, break that tie. But the INTENTION of divisions was always SEX based regardless of how much people want to whine. It is specifically because XY is bigger, stronger, faster. It is indisputable. From humans to lions to zebras to whatever, XY (male) is bigger, stronger, faster. Sorry that nature disapoints you.

What a loser. How isn’t this person embarrassed every time they win?

Time to re-write the record books. Females identifying as females is old school. Move over for the new kid, or guy, or whatever letter you want us to use

"The torrents of vile abuse - including rape, battery and death threats along with lots of dick pics and disgusting porn imagery - that have been hurled at women who have spoken up in defense of female-only sports show this is not true.#

Bullsh*t. States have banned transgender athletes and I doubt any of the politicians have been singled out. As I mentioned before, a recent poll indicated that 60% of Americans are opposed to transgender athletes competiting in the women's divisions. A few shrill people doesn't prove your point.

Believing transgender athletes could have an advantage is very reasonable and is not anti-transgender in the least. It's my opinion as well. Some of the people you cited, did more than just say that. For example, Martina Navratilova called transgender athletes "cheaters" which can easily be considered as transphobic. Salina Soule acted as if she got bumped from an Olympic team rather than bumped from 6th to 8th in a HS qualifying race. She also allowed a transphobic entity represent her in her lawsuit.

If you believe Thomas is considered a hero, please Google her name to see what kind of articles there are. She sure isn’t receiving an "atta girl" from Fox news.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Tatar... wrote:

Women aren't defined by their womb. Go back to the 1950s please!

Isn't it a little unusual to be a woman who has never had one? Or ovaries? Or maybe periods? Testicles are certainly quite a turn up for the books.

Have you done no reading as to the difference between sex and gender.

Oh I forgot; are proud to admit that you post on subjects you refuse to read about.

the world turned upside down wrote:

It is only a matter of time before a man competing as a woman defeats a major American female star athlete on the Olympic stage in front of a huge American audience. It will take a man beating Katie Ledecky, Sydney McLaughlin, Simone Biles (although I doubt a man could beat a woman in women's gymnastics any more than a woman could beat a man in men's gymnastics), Mikaela Shiffrin, Serena Williams, or some other famous American woman for people to wake up. Some guy swimming on the UPenn swim team isn't even a slight ripple in the water. A man beating Ledecky in Paris would be a tsunami and will bring about a return to common sense.

At least there is no risk for a competitor getting her skull fractured in swimming, unlike MMA and Fallon Fox.

Sadly, you are right. It needs to happen soon so as to end this nonsense.

liar soorer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Isn't it a little unusual to be a woman who has never had one? Or ovaries? Or maybe periods? Testicles are certainly quite a turn up for the books.

Have you done no reading as to the difference between sex and gender.

Oh I forgot; are proud to admit that you post on subjects you refuse to read about.

Making things up to feel special about yourself isn't a free pass to invade women's sports.

America's fury wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

Have you done no reading as to the difference between sex and gender.

Oh I forgot; are proud to admit that you post on subjects you refuse to read about.

Making things up to feel special about yourself isn't a free pass to invade women's sports.

Never said trans should compete with women and indeed I don’t think they should.