Nope, still never ever okay for Letsrun to attack kids.
Never ever, for any reason.
Not sure why this has to be explained after all these years.
And aren't the broJos parents now? Do they still not get it?
What if one of their kids turns out LGBT ? You think "nah not my kid" - that's not how any of this works. Nature doesn't care what your politics are.
See that visceral reaction, someone talking about your kids?
That's why it's not anyone else's business no matter how "right" you think you are.
And if some day one of these verbal attacks turns into a physical attack or causes a suicide, well then I hope the broJos are held to the fire like Alex Jones for their promotion of hate.
Because "hate speech" is not "free speech".
There's no way your lawyer is telling you it's okay to go after kids on your front page and allow this threads in your forums. Not a trial lawyer. You'll lose your income, you'll lose your savings, you'll lose your house.
Hands of the kids, physically and verbally. Just no, stop, no excuses.
Back to the omnibus strategy. We're not discussing LGB. Just T. They're not the same thing. Not even close. Stop using LGBs to further your T agenda.
As sure as night follows day, there’s always a moment when ‘justanotherhobbyjogger’ realises he’s losing the debate and employs his 'gish gallop' method that attempts to spam the boards into submission.
Translation: I have nothing to say about the substance of his post. So I will just engage in personal attack.
If that's not the case, tell us whether you think those trans women are towering over their cisgender peers. Can RunRagged prover her point with ONE case?
You just have a very reliable habit of derailing any threads about a male's right to participate in female sport. So rather than discussing whether or not this male should or should not have been in this race, you instead focus on a throwaway comment about the average height of males and gish gallop the thread with a load of cherry-picked pictures of trans people who aren't that tall. As if this proves anything whatsoever. Newsflash; some men are the same height or smaller than some women, is this a surprise to anyone? It certainly doesn't change fairness or safety in regard to women competing against men. And- to pre-empt your inevitable 'see you couldn't even name one trans athlete who is noticeably bigger than their competitors!' nonsense; Veronica Ivy, Leah Thomas, Hannah Mouncey, etc. But know that this list is also meaningless and irrelevant- the core issue is males competing in female sports; their appearance, height or bulk is merely a distraction from the more fundamental question. I don't think it should be allowed at any level of female sport, you apparently disagree.
You just have a very reliable habit of derailing any threads about a male's right to participate in female sport. So rather than discussing whether or not this male should or should not have been in this race, you instead focus on a throwaway comment about the average height of males and gish gallop the thread with a load of cherry-picked pictures of trans people who aren't that tall. As if this proves anything whatsoever. Newsflash; some men are the same height or smaller than some women, is this a surprise to anyone? It certainly doesn't change fairness or safety in regard to women competing against men. And- to pre-empt your inevitable 'see you couldn't even name one trans athlete who is noticeably bigger than their competitors!' nonsense; Veronica Ivy, Leah Thomas, Hannah Mouncey, etc. But know that this list is also meaningless and irrelevant- the core issue is males competing in female sports; their appearance, height or bulk is merely a distraction from the more fundamental question. I don't think it should be allowed at any level of female sport, you apparently disagree.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
You just have a very reliable habit of derailing any threads about a male's right to participate in female sport. So rather than discussing whether or not this male should or should not have been in this race, you instead focus on a throwaway comment about the average height of males and gish gallop the thread with a load of cherry-picked pictures of trans people who aren't that tall. As if this proves anything whatsoever. Newsflash; some men are the same height or smaller than some women, is this a surprise to anyone? It certainly doesn't change fairness or safety in regard to women competing against men. And- to pre-empt your inevitable 'see you couldn't even name one trans athlete who is noticeably bigger than their competitors!' nonsense; Veronica Ivy, Leah Thomas, Hannah Mouncey, etc. But know that this list is also meaningless and irrelevant- the core issue is males competing in female sports; their appearance, height or bulk is merely a distraction from the more fundamental question. I don't think it should be allowed at any level of female sport, you apparently disagree.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
But none of these matters to you.
You're right, clogging up the thread with random examples doesn't matter to me because, in my opinion, early medical transition should:
a) be illegal and those responsible for it should be imprisoned.
b) not exempt a male from having to compete in the correct sex category.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Celebrity makeup artist Nikkie de Jager is not an athlete, but Nikkie's example is still relevant here because Nikkie is one of the "child transitioners" in the Netherlands put on "puberty blockers" and estrogen early enough that Nikkie has supposedly completely skipped all aspects of male-typical development during adolescence and early adulthood. Now that Nikkie is an adult pushing 30, everyone is expected to pretend no can tell Nikkie's sex and it would be totally fair and safe for women of the female sort to have to go up against Nikkie in sport. Here's Nikkie with Ellen DeGeneres, who is 5'7:
My point is that you keep making the claim - without a shred of evidence - that male children put on "puberty blockers" and Big Pharma estrogen at an early enough age/stage do not and will not develop any of the numerous male-typical physical characteristics that give adolescent boys and grown men such a huge advantage over adolescent girls and grown women in sports. And in other situations where many boys and men - including quite a few who "identify as" trans - "have form" for using their distinctly male physical characteristics to intimidate, threaten, menace, push around, restrain, beat up, slap around, strangle/choke, sexually assault, overpower, force themselves on, and lord it over girls and women so that we "know our place."
Height is hardly the only factor that matters here.
The massive advantage that adolescent and adult males have over females in sports - and in other physical contests like fist fights, beat downs, muggings, sexual assaults, gang fights and on-the-ground military combat mano a mano - comes from the combination of all the many different ways in which the two sexes are physically different.
Many of of the ways the two sexes are physically different that give males an advantage are not apparent from the outside. Most of them have nothing at all to do with whether a person of either sex isnaturally pretty or beautiful, has a "feminine" or "girly" appearance and affect, sports long locks and colored nail polish, has a penchant wearing for pink like Becky Peppr Jackson and Kim Petras, and likes getting dolled up and swanning around in dresses, high heels and oodles of face paint.
The male advantage in sports - and other realms of life where the physical differences between the sexes matter - come from factors such as teenage and adult males having hearts that are 25-38% larger and more powerful; lungs that are 10-12% larger; throats that are 40% bigger; muscle fibers that are far greater in number, more densely packed, more responsive, and behave in ways that are unique to males; tendons that are far stronger and thus enable males to use their larger, denser and more powerful male muscles to move their joints with more force; head and neck vasculature and anatomy - inlcuding thicker skulls and a thicker layer of dura surrounding the brain - that make males significantly less susceptible to concussion, whiplash, skull fracture, TBI and longterm negative health consequences including disability and death from head and neck injuries than females.
You constinually insist - again without any evidence - that because males put on "puberty blockers" and estrogen in childhood like Nikkie de Jager usually don't develop certain superficial secondary sex characteristics typical of males that are easy for observers to discern from the outside - namely male-typical facial and body hair, deepened voices, Adam's apples, rougher male skin - that this means these male people also grow up without developing a single one of the myriad male physical traits that give males such a big advantage over females in sports.
The massive size of de Jager's head, neck and shoulders relative to size of DeGeneres' head, neck and shoulders suggests otherwise. Chances are, a look at Nikkie de Jager's internal organs and cells, skeletal scans, and lab tests would show that Nikkie has quite a few physical features typical of Nikkie's male sex other than Nikke's outwardly-obvious huge head, neck and shoulders.
Moreover, you continually insist - without a shred of evidence - that males who grow up chemically castrated by "puberty blockers" and Big Pharma estrogen somehow magically develop the distinctive features of female biology that also play a major role in creating the huge discrepancies between the sexes in sports, to the massive advantage of males and the disadvantage of females.
Just because there are some women in the world like Breanna Stewart and A'ja Wilson who are 6'4" like Nikkie De Jager doesn't mean all the other important physical sex differences between them have magically vanished.
A female person who is 6'4 still doesn't come anywhere near a male person of the same height in terms of her heart, lung and throat size; thickness of her skull and dura layer; amount, type and distribution of muscle she is able to develop; tendon strength; grip strength; punching and kicking power, ability to jump and throw, etc.
A female person who is 6'4 still will have to deal with all the pesky aspects of female biology that are such a big drawback in sports that no male person on earth will ever have to deal with. Not even males who were put on "puberty blockers" at age 9, 10 or 11, have been taking large doses of Big Pharma estrogen on the daily since their youth, and like to get glammed up to look "girly" like Nikkie de Jager and all the other pretty male people whose photos you keep posting.
This post was edited 9 minutes after it was posted.
You just have a very reliable habit of derailing any threads about a male's right to participate in female sport. So rather than discussing whether or not this male should or should not have been in this race, you instead focus on a throwaway comment about the average height of males and gish gallop the thread with a load of cherry-picked pictures of trans people who aren't that tall. As if this proves anything whatsoever. Newsflash; some men are the same height or smaller than some women, is this a surprise to anyone? It certainly doesn't change fairness or safety in regard to women competing against men. And- to pre-empt your inevitable 'see you couldn't even name one trans athlete who is noticeably bigger than their competitors!' nonsense; Veronica Ivy, Leah Thomas, Hannah Mouncey, etc. But know that this list is also meaningless and irrelevant- the core issue is males competing in female sports; their appearance, height or bulk is merely a distraction from the more fundamental question. I don't think it should be allowed at any level of female sport, you apparently disagree.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
But none of these matters to you.
All of the reasonably successful transgender athletes, such as Eastwood and Thomas did not start treatments until college and high the high school ones haven’t started. The question is whether there has been a single transgender athlete at the HS, NCAA or open division that started treatments before puberty.
It’s difficult to find totals of kids starting puberty blockers but the new requirements by FINA and WA have probably reduced the pool of potential transgender athletes by over 90%.
The male advantage in sports - and other realms of life where the physical differences between the sexes matter - come from factors such as teenage and adult males having hearts that are 25-38% larger and more powerful; lungs that are 10-12% larger; throats that are 40% bigger; muscle fibers that are far greater in number, more densely packed, more responsive, and behave in ways that are unique to males; tendons that are far stronger and thus enable males to use their larger, denser and more powerful male muscles to move their joints with more force; head and neck vasculature and anatomy - inlcuding thicker skulls and a thicker layer of dura surrounding the brain - that make males significantly less susceptible to concussion, whiplash, skull fracture, TBI and longterm negative health consequences including disability and death from head and neck injuries than females.
And where is the evidence that trans women retain all those advantages after taking puberty blockers and cross hormone? Oh, I forgot. You don't have to provide any evidence. It's only required on the other side.
And you really seem to be obsessed with the physical appearance of trans women. I posted those photos to show those trans women have similar height and build as their cis peers. It has nothing to do with whether they are "pretty" or not. But you seem to be extremely triggered whenever you see a "pretty" trans woman. You need to examine why you have this unhealthy obsession.
And where is the evidence that trans women retain all those advantages after taking puberty blockers and cross hormone? Oh, I forgot. You don't have to provide any evidence. It's only required on the other side.
Why don't you remind everyone of how many pre-pubescent track and field world records for each age are held by girls? As it'll really prove your point about how relevant early transition is to fair sport.
Why have girls' and women's sports at all if males are allowed to compete?
And it is frightening how easily the propagandists get you guys to swear 2+2=5.
Our future is dystopian thanks to the weak minded
You seem confused. Males are not allowed to compete. They are females. They said so.
It’s sport, a recreational or professional activity but not a reproductive activity, so having a vagina and ovaries and all is not considered a requirement.
Are you saying gender and sex are the same thing? It sure sounds like it.
You just have a very reliable habit of derailing any threads about a male's right to participate in female sport. So rather than discussing whether or not this male should or should not have been in this race, you instead focus on a throwaway comment about the average height of males and gish gallop the thread with a load of cherry-picked pictures of trans people who aren't that tall. As if this proves anything whatsoever. Newsflash; some men are the same height or smaller than some women, is this a surprise to anyone? It certainly doesn't change fairness or safety in regard to women competing against men. And- to pre-empt your inevitable 'see you couldn't even name one trans athlete who is noticeably bigger than their competitors!' nonsense; Veronica Ivy, Leah Thomas, Hannah Mouncey, etc. But know that this list is also meaningless and irrelevant- the core issue is males competing in female sports; their appearance, height or bulk is merely a distraction from the more fundamental question. I don't think it should be allowed at any level of female sport, you apparently disagree.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
But none of these matters to you.
You continually ignore the very real evidence that medical transition doesn't even the playing field no matter how early it is started.
And where is the evidence that trans women retain all those advantages after taking puberty blockers and cross hormone? Oh, I forgot. You don't have to provide any evidence. It's only required on the other side.
Why don't you remind everyone of how many pre-pubescent track and field world records for each age are held by girls? As it'll really prove your point about how relevant early transition is to fair sport.
Pre-pubescent world records are meaningless because most kids are not training seriously at that age. The most talented may not even be competing. Some kids may run faster because their parents push them harder. They don't grow up to be elite athletes unless you are Mondo Duplantis.
Why don't you, or someone else, list successful trans athletes who transitioned early? Every single one of them known to the public is pretty mediocre, like that back-up catcher on 6-13 HS team. (She didn't even start transitioning until she was 14. A rather late starter.) What titles did they take away from cis girls?
If a trans girl finishes 90/100 in a XC race, she is relegating ten other girls to one spot lower in the standings. Is that something you should be outraged about?
The male advantage in sports - and other realms of life where the physical differences between the sexes matter - come from factors such as teenage and adult males having hearts that are 25-38% larger and more powerful; lungs that are 10-12% larger; throats that are 40% bigger; muscle fibers that are far greater in number, more densely packed, more responsive, and behave in ways that are unique to males; tendons that are far stronger and thus enable males to use their larger, denser and more powerful male muscles to move their joints with more force; head and neck vasculature and anatomy - inlcuding thicker skulls and a thicker layer of dura surrounding the brain - that make males significantly less susceptible to concussion, whiplash, skull fracture, TBI and longterm negative health consequences including disability and death from head and neck injuries than females.
And where is the evidence that trans women retain all those advantages after taking puberty blockers and cross hormone? Oh, I forgot. You don't have to provide any evidence. It's only required on the other side.
And you really seem to be obsessed with the physical appearance of trans women. I posted those photos to show those trans women have similar height and build as their cis peers. It has nothing to do with whether they are "pretty" or not. But you seem to be extremely triggered whenever you see a "pretty" trans woman. You need to examine why you have this unhealthy obsession.
You are the one that is obsessed with physical appearance. You are the one that constantly (exploits) posts pictures of trans children. You are the one that over and over asks if others can identify the trans person based on a photo.
Everyone else is talking about fairness in sport. You are the one that thinks appearance is somehow related to this issue. You do this because you have nothing substantive to offer.
Why don't you remind everyone of how many pre-pubescent track and field world records for each age are held by girls? As it'll really prove your point about how relevant early transition is to fair sport.
Pre-pubescent world records are meaningless because most kids are not training seriously at that age. The most talented may not even be competing. Some kids may run faster because their parents push them harder. They don't grow up to be elite athletes unless you are Mondo Duplantis.
Why don't you, or someone else, list successful trans athletes who transitioned early? Every single one of them known to the public is pretty mediocre, like that back-up catcher on 6-13 HS team. (She didn't even start transitioning until she was 14. A rather late starter.) What titles did they take away from cis girls?
If a trans girl finishes 90/100 in a XC race, she is relegating ten other girls to one spot lower in the standings. Is that something you should be outraged about?
Translation - You proved me wrong so I'll ignore the point you made.
To your second point. - There is an actual girl that doesn't get to be backup catcher, because of the trans kid. That girl matters. There are 9 girls that have to accept a lower position. Those 9 girls matter.
You just have a very reliable habit of derailing any threads about a male's right to participate in female sport. So rather than discussing whether or not this male should or should not have been in this race, you instead focus on a throwaway comment about the average height of males and gish gallop the thread with a load of cherry-picked pictures of trans people who aren't that tall. As if this proves anything whatsoever. Newsflash; some men are the same height or smaller than some women, is this a surprise to anyone? It certainly doesn't change fairness or safety in regard to women competing against men. And- to pre-empt your inevitable 'see you couldn't even name one trans athlete who is noticeably bigger than their competitors!' nonsense; Veronica Ivy, Leah Thomas, Hannah Mouncey, etc. But know that this list is also meaningless and irrelevant- the core issue is males competing in female sports; their appearance, height or bulk is merely a distraction from the more fundamental question. I don't think it should be allowed at any level of female sport, you apparently disagree.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
But none of these matters to you.
A paper published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism last year gives plenty more examples.
The paper - "Transgender Girls Grow Tall: Adult Height Is Unaffected by GnRH Analogue and Estradiol Treatment" - is about a large group of males who each "started transitioning as a child" via early administration and continual use of GnRHa drugs aka "puberty blockers" along with hefty, continual use of estrogen.
Despite the fact that these medical interventions left these young males chemically castrated and permanently sterile, they all grew to adult heights normal for the adult male population and consistent with the predicted adult heights they as individuals would have reached if no medical attempts had been made to alter their development.
AbstractContext. Transgender adolescents can receive gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRH) and gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT), but little is
Going by the medical records and clinical measurements of 161 males in the Netherlands who "started medically transitioning" in childhood, the clinicians who wrote this paper came to the conclusion that
the treatment does not affect adult height
Overall, regular treatment seems to have little effect on adult height.
The finding that transgender girls, who have XY chromosomes and are treated with estradiol, reach an adult height close to the population mean for males suggests a minor role for sex hormones. This is in line with findings from studies in individuals with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS) or XY complete gonadal dysgenesis in whom adult height was closer to male target height or average height in the male population (40, 41). This supports the idea that genetic factors, rather than sex hormones, are important in the regulation of growth (41, 42).
Since it turns out that the use of "puberty blockers" and Big Pharma estrogen doesn't stop male genetics, the "gender medicine" clinicians ghouls who wrote this paper say that surgical means to shorten the leg bones of male "early transitioners" are another possible medical intevention to try on these poor kids:
Some transgender girls wish to reduce their growth in order to reach an adult height within the normal female range. Surgical treatment, that is, an epiphysiodesis, can be used to limit growth (8, 9).
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
But none of these matters to you.
You continually ignore the very real evidence that medical transition doesn't even the playing field no matter how early it is started.
Why don't you present that evidence to World Athletics, World Aquatics and all other sports organizations that disagree with you? If your evidence is good enough, they might listen.
Nope, still never ever okay for Letsrun to attack kids.
Never ever, for any reason.
Not sure why this has to be explained after all these years.
And aren't the broJos parents now? Do they still not get it?
What if one of their kids turns out LGBT ? You think "nah not my kid" - that's not how any of this works. Nature doesn't care what your politics are.
See that visceral reaction, someone talking about your kids?
That's why it's not anyone else's business no matter how "right" you think you are.
And if some day one of these verbal attacks turns into a physical attack or causes a suicide, well then I hope the broJos are held to the fire like Alex Jones for their promotion of hate.
Because "hate speech" is not "free speech".
There's no way your lawyer is telling you it's okay to go after kids on your front page and allow this threads in your forums. Not a trial lawyer. You'll lose your income, you'll lose your savings, you'll lose your house.
Hands of the kids, physically and verbally. Just no, stop, no excuses.
Homie said hands of the kids. How about y'all groomers stay off the kids entirely and stop ruining the lives of precious children.
You seem to have missed the point RunRagged was trying to make. How many of those people started transitioning as a child?
Her point was that early medical transition did not stop trans women from becoming taller than cis women. And she used ONE example to "prove" her point.
But none of these matters to you.
You're right, clogging up the thread with random examples doesn't matter to me because, in my opinion, early medical transition should:
a) be illegal and those responsible for it should be imprisoned.
b) not exempt a male from having to compete in the correct sex category.
This I agree with. Someone born male but identifying as female is a female, full stop no exceptions. That means they shouldn't have to do anything medical, just declare their preferred gender and you are that gender.
You continually ignore the very real evidence that medical transition doesn't even the playing field no matter how early it is started.
Why don't you present that evidence to World Athletics, World Aquatics and all other sports organizations that disagree with you? If your evidence is good enough, they might listen.
Read the post directly above yours. It's actual evidence that you will ignore.
