Also I am not asking them to give up anything, they are choosing not to participate because they do not want to be in either a male or coed team.....
In post #141 on page 8, you wrote:
"If trans girls and women want to "fly under the radar" and not be outed as males, then they should not be competing in female sports."
So you ARE asking them to give up sports. You get outed immediately if you try out for a boys' team. If you happen to make the team, then the whole school will know that you are trans. People from other schools in your district will know that you are trans. That's sounds like a disaster.
Nope, they are eligible to compete in other categories. Stop saying they have to give up sports completely, that's a lie
11
3
No one gets everything they want in life, especially not in spor
Your assertion here is a false equivalency. Marrying someone is completely different than sporting events, you cannot compare the two, one has to do with sexuality, and one has to do with what you want to look like and the clothes you wear. Unless you believe that it is actually possible to change your sex, do you? Transwomen are not male anymore?
If anyone can be a woman just by declaring they are a woman, then that renders the word and category of "woman", meaningless. If this is not the case, how do you define what a woman is?
Sports decide categories to make it as even a playing field as possible. Do you think sports shouldn't make any categories at all?
Why are there separate categories for women and men? Do you think they should still exist? If so, who fits in what category? And what criteria are you using to decide who is a woman, and who is a man (again, if it is just self declaration, then those words are meaningless).
World Aquatics have already figured this out. We created separate categories because men and women have different physiology related to athletic performance. It's not because we have different reproductive organs. People swim with their arms and legs, and not with their gonads.
1. If you never experienced male puberty because of androgen insensitivity, you are allowed to compete as women.
2. If you had suppressed male puberty before age 12 or Tanner Stage 2, and maintained your testosterone level within normal female range, you are allowed to compete as women.
If people in #1 are allowed to compete as women, why can't people in #2 also compete as women? The latter might have some advantage in competition, but so do the former. (Their training not interrupted by periods is an advantage by itself.)
You didn't answer any of my questions. I'll make it simple, is anyone a woman just because they declare they are?
You didn't answer any of my questions. I'll make it simple, is anyone a woman just because they declare they are?
No. I have never suggested that.
Let me ask you a question. What determines whether someone is a woman?
Easy, Adult human female, and that is determined by your sex, which is not changeable. And do not spout the lies about intersex being something that actually means someone is both male and female, that is not true. They still are male or female, just have a disorder of how their sexual organs have formed, or how their genes have been expressed. And we know they are malformed because we know that the person is still either male or female. Not either or, and not both, we have a standard of which to discern what is normal. It's not that hard, and it does not have to be controversial.
Also I am not asking them to give up anything, they are choosing not to participate because they do not want to be in either a male or coed team.....
In post #141 on page 8, you wrote:
"If trans girls and women want to "fly under the radar" and not be outed as males, then they should not be competing in female sports."
So you ARE asking them to give up sports. You get outed immediately if you try out for a boys' team. If you happen to make the team, then the whole school will know that you are trans. People from other schools in your district will know that you are trans. That's sounds like a disaster.
What is wrong with being trans and being outed as being trans? That is the problem with your argument here. It sounds like they do not accept themselves for who they are, and do not want anyone to know who they are....that is not reasonable and actually that is transphobic. If it is too much for them to handle, then yes they should stay hidden and not participate in sports, that's a personal choice not societal problem. I think the healthiest thing to do is to help them get to a place where they do accept themselves for who they are (which is a male that wants to appear female, there is NOTHING wrong with that) and this is achieved via therapy, rather than making everyone in society accept them as a "woman". What society needs to work on, is to also say "yes you are trans and that is ok", but what's going on is people are being pushed to say "Yes you are a woman and so therefore deserve to be in woman's sports and other spaces" which is affirming too far, and the majority of the country believes this as well. Differences in sex matter....not in everything but in a few aspects of society, one is sports, another area is locker rooms, prisons and places like rape crisis centers. For example, many lesbians are not ok with Transwomen calling themselves lesbians, however are being coerced into accepting them as "lesbians" otherwise they are being called "transphobic". That's wrong and homophobic, lesbians should be able to have a preference in "sex", not "gender":
Another area where this is an issue, there are Male inmates that have labeled themselves as "trans", and have been moved to female prisons where they have victimized and committed terrible acts of violence including rape against several female inmates:
The California prison system has received 261 applications since January 1 from transgender, intersex, or non-binary inmates to transfer to facilities that match their preferred gender identity, the Los Angeles Times reported...
(The Center Square) - A biologically male, transgender prison inmate in California was transferred from a women’s prison to a men’s prison after being charged with two rape counts against
So sex matters in these areas, and it matters in sport. And it is not ok that transgirls and transwomen's feelings are prioritized over girls and women for these issues, it has gone too far.
why don't you post data on high school and middle school students athletes to show that allowing trans girls into girls sports reduced the participation by cis girls.
Do you see any pattern between the transgender policy in a state and the participation rate by girls?
Why don't you post data which shows that allowing males to use gender identity claims to compete and clean up in girls' and women's school sports - and in girls' and women's sports in other contexts ranging from community and club running, softball, cycling, swimming, roller derby, tennis professional sports and the Olympics - has led to an increase in the percentages and numbers of females participating?
Surely you must have reams of data on hand which proves beyond doubt that allowing males to use gender identity claims to participate and compete in girls and women’s sports - and to use female locker rooms, toilets, showers, etc - not only leads to greater female participation in sports, but it makes girls’ and women’s sports fairer, safer, more enjoyable, more rewarding, more confidence-building and generally more beneficial all around for females who partake.
So why don't you ever post any of the mountains of data you have? Why are you keeping it all to yourself?
This post was edited 9 minutes after it was posted.
1) competed and cleaned up in girls' high school sports; 2) filed lawsuits claiming it's unlawful to bar them from girls' high school sports; 3) testified in legislatures against excluding males from girls' school sports; 4) given interviews to media outlets in which they've said the only reason they perform better in sports than the female students they've trounced is that they work and train harder, they're more dedicated and driven, and they've been doing sports longer and thus they've had more time to develop their skills and the kind of attitude it takes to win.
I’m not aware of even one HS transgender athlete in California, that has done any of those things.
Neither am I. Which is why I never said that anyone in/from California did any of those things.
In the post of mine you're quoting (#164, page 8 of this thread), I clearly said that the athletes who did those four things are all from New England states. But you chose to snip out the part where I made it clear that I was speaking about athletes solely from New England states.
Here's what I said in full with the part you chose to delete kept in:
In my state and the other New England states alone, at least or possibly more than a dozen male students with trans gender identities have appeared in news stories and social media since 2018 because they've done one, severl or all of the following: 1) competed and cleaned up in girls' high school sports; 2) filed lawsuits claiming it's unlawful to bar them from girls' high school sports; 3) testified in legislatures against excluding males from girls' school sports; 4) given interviews to media outlets in which they've said the only reason they perform better in sports than the female students they've trounced is that they work and train harder, they're more dedicated and driven, and they've been doing sports longer and thus they've had more time to develop their skills and the kind of attitude it takes to win.
Or are you taking issue with what I said in the above passage because you're under the mistaken impression that California is a New England state? If that's the case, I can't help you. Yikes.
I'm a lawyer and while constitutional law isn't my specialty, I have been following this issue. Like it or not,laws based on gender (not biological sex) are subject to constitutional intermediate scrutiny, also called heightened scrutiny under which the government must provide an exceedingly persuasive justification for its actions. Conservative federal district and appeals courts might rule in favor of government trans restrictions and liberal courts against it; both have occurred. So this Congressionallaw may or may not survive judges' scrutiny. I think the law is right to make clear that biological sex must prevail over gender identity to ensure fair play and safety in order to preserve women's sports. As it now exists, Title IX bars discrimination based on sex.
But the House bill that was passed last weeek - the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025 - is an amendment to Title IX clarifying that Title IX is solely about sex. The new bill doesn't mention gender, gender identity or gender expression at all.
So as I understand it, if this bill comes under heightened scrutiny, it's because it and the earlier law it adds to - Title IX - are about sex discrimination. Not about discrimination based on gender - meaning the set of sex sterotypes that make up cultural concepts of masculinity and feminity - gender identity or gender expression.
Specifically, this bill amending and clarifying Title IX is based on the view of Title IX that was established when Title IX's first implementation regulations were issued and came into force 50 years ago - which is that in order for female students in the US not to be denied equal opportunity in education based on their sex - which is what Title IX prohibits - then in certain limited situations/contexts schools subject to Title IX must be allowed to make sex-based distinctions, treat the two sexes differently and arrange for separation of the sexes.
The certain limited contexts where this is allowed in US education are those in which the physical differences between the sexes come into play and really matter - especially settings and situations where failing to take into account the realities of biolgical sex and physical sex differences would disadvantage or endanger female students, and deprive students of both sexes of bodily privacy. These contexts include many school sports and sports competitions, school locker rooms, toilets, showers, housing, roommate assignments, sleeping accommodations on overnight school trips, sororities and fraternities, some PE and sex ed lessons, school health services, the uniforms worn for some school activities like sports, marching band and cheerleading, and school policies and services for students and staff related to menstruation, contraception, pregnancy, miscarriage, maternity, breastfeeding and menopause.
Also, all the state and local laws, sports policies, proposed federal legislation and federal guidance that I've seen that have been written in an attempt to provide protections and special entitlements to people who say they are transgender, nonbinary - or another novel gender identity like genderfluid, genderqueer, femme, masc - have specified that the characteristics they're aiming to protect and accommodate are "gender identity" and "gender expression" - not just plain "gender."
If it were true that "laws based on gender (not biological sex) are subject to constitutional intermediate scrutiny" like you say, then wouldn't the US Department of Justice and the ACLU have taken an entirely different tack in the written and oral arguments they made to SCOTUS against Tennessee in the Skirmetti case now awaiting a final SCOTUS ruling ?
In that case, the DoJ and ACLU contended - rather bizarrely and nconvicingly, in my view - that the Tennessee state law prohibiting HCPs in TN from prescribing, administering and performing "youth gender medicine" interventions to/on minors in an effort to make them appear/sound more like the opposite sex warrants heightened scrutiny by the federal courts for Constitutional rasons because, they claimed, the statute discriminates against minors in TN who identify as trans - or who've been identified as trans by the adults in their lives, rather - based on the minors' sex. As I understood it, DoJ and ACLU only made this argument because they couldn't claim that the TN law requires heightened scrutiny on the grounds that it discriminates against minors in TN who've been dubbed "transgender" based on their gender identity - or their gender expression or just plain gender (here meaning the set of sex stereotypes that make up cultural concepts of masculinity and femininity) - because in US constitutional law, gender identity, gender expression and gender meaning masculinity and femininity don't have anywhere near the same weight as biological sex does.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
What claim exactly have I made that you're you referring to here? And in what post did I make said claim?
Please copy & paste exactly what I said and give the post number and page where I said it. TYA.
#152 on page 8.
Allowing male students in the USA to use gender identity claims to join girls' and women's school sports teams and to compete in school sports contests meant for females - and to use girls' and women's locker rooms - is a great way to insure that female students in the US will continue participating in high school and college sports at rates much lower than male students. In fact, it's a surefire way to get female students who are already participating in girls' and women's school sports in the US to give up and bail out of school sports - and to get female students who are potential athletes to decide not to bother going out for girls' and women's school sports in the first place.
You are the one who made this claim. I didn't make any statement on the relationship between the female participation rate and the transgender policy. So I have no obligation to present any data.
Your claim is as credible as Schuyler Bailar's claim in this video that the participation rate of girls increases when there is an "inclusive" policy. He didn't provide any data just like you didn't.
What is wrong with being trans and being outed as being trans? That is the problem with your argument here. It sounds like they do not accept themselves for who they are, and do not want anyone to know who they are....that is not reasonable and actually that is transphobic.
Many light-skinned Black people tried to pass as white during the Jim Crow era. Were they racist?
0
10
No one gets everything they want in life, especially not in spor
What is wrong with being trans and being outed as being trans? That is the problem with your argument here. It sounds like they do not accept themselves for who they are, and do not want anyone to know who they are....that is not reasonable and actually that is transphobic.
Many light-skinned Black people tried to pass as white during the Jim Crow era. Were they racist?
Yes, that's called internalized racism. Look it up.
What claim exactly have I made that you're you referring to here? And in what post did I make said claim?
Please copy & paste exactly what I said and give the post number and page where I said it. TYA.
#152 on page 8.
Allowing male students in the USA to use gender identity claims to join girls' and women's school sports teams and to compete in school sports contests meant for females - and to use girls' and women's locker rooms - is a great way to insure that female students in the US will continue participating in high school and college sports at rates much lower than male students. In fact, it's a surefire way to get female students who are already participating in girls' and women's school sports in the US to give up and bail out of school sports - and to get female students who are potential athletes to decide not to bother going out for girls' and women's school sports in the first place.
You are the one who made this claim. I didn't make any statement on the relationship between the female participation rate and the transgender policy. So I have no obligation to present any data.
Your claim is as credible as Schuyler Bailar's claim in this video that the participation rate of girls increases when there is an "inclusive" policy. He didn't provide any data just like you didn't.
But in your usual way, you've chosen to misinterpret that statement so you can pretend it says something it that it doesn't say. So you can put words in my mouth in an effort to make make me out to be an idiot.
That statement does not claim, suggest, or in any way imply that the reason females nowadays and in the past have always participated in high school and college sports at markedly lower rates than males is because in the past 10-15 years, some states in the USA and some sports governing bodies like the NCAA have adopted laws and policies which allow males to use gender identity claims to horn in on in girls' and women's sports.
Only a fool would say such a thing. If I had said that, you'd be entirely justified in criticizing and challenging me. You'd have every right to tell me I'm talking nonsense and I need to have my head examined.
The statement I made is predictive of what's ahead. It's not an attempt to explain why the marked disparity between the percentages of males and females who participate in high school and college sports that exists today first came into being. It's not an attempt to explain why there has been a school sports participation gap between males and females in the USA ever since girls and women first won the legal right to school sports 50 years ago - and long before then too.
That statement is a forecast about the future, of things to come - or rather, of things that I believe will come to pass if the misogynistic policies you support so wholeheartedly are allowed to remain in place.
That statement says that if the aim/objective is to insure that female students in the USA continue participating in high school and college sports at considerably lower rates than male students in the future, then a great way to make sure that happens is to continue allowing males to use gender identity claims to compete and clean up in girls and women's school sports.
But since you're so unwilling to grasp what I'm saying, I'll say it again, mate, only in stronger language.
The new practice that you champion on LRC day in and day out of allowing males to use gender identity claims to muscle in on girls' and women's sports so that misogynists claiming to be "on the right side of history" can enjoy the sick thrill of seeing female high school and college students - and women in other sports arenas like the Olympics - forced to compete against, and lose out to, males in the sports category that was created to give females a fair shot at the equal participation we were historically denied
is a great way to insure that female students in the US will continue participating in high school and college sports at rates much lower than male students.
The new misogynisitic custom that you spend your time on LRC promoting with missionary zeal of allowing males to use gender identity claims to muscle in on girls' and women's sports so that sadistic male supremacists who pretend to be morally superior to everyone else can chortle in glee watching female athletes being robbed of their hard-won rights in broad daylight and seeing/hearing how dismayed female athletes whom gender ideologues denigrate as "cis girls," "menstruators," "uterus owners," "sore losers" and "bad sports" are when they're forced to give up roster spots and podium places to a group of males whom the world is supposed to believe are deserving of extra helpings of male privilege because they're supposedly "the most vulnerable, marginalized, oppressed" and put-upon people ever to walk planet earth
is a surefire way to get female students who are already participating in girls' and women's school sports in the US to give up and bail out of school sports - and to get female students who are potential athletes to decide not to bother going out for girls' and women's school sports in the first place.
This post was edited 11 minutes after it was posted.
What is wrong with being trans and being outed as being trans? That is the problem with your argument here. It sounds like they do not accept themselves for who they are, and do not want anyone to know who they are....that is not reasonable and actually that is transphobic.
Many light-skinned Black people tried to pass as white during the Jim Crow era. Were they racist?
Please explain exactly what laws are currently oppressing trans people that are comparable to Jim Crow era laws...
What claim exactly have I made that you're you referring to here? And in what post did I make said claim?
Please copy & paste exactly what I said and give the post number and page where I said it. TYA.
#152 on page 8.
Allowing male students in the USA to use gender identity claims to join girls' and women's school sports teams and to compete in school sports contests meant for females - and to use girls' and women's locker rooms - is a great way to insure that female students in the US will continue participating in high school and college sports at rates much lower than male students. In fact, it's a surefire way to get female students who are already participating in girls' and women's school sports in the US to give up and bail out of school sports - and to get female students who are potential athletes to decide not to bother going out for girls' and women's school sports in the first place.
You are the one who made this claim. I didn't make any statement on the relationship between the female participation rate and the transgender policy. So I have no obligation to present any data.
Your claim is as credible as Schuyler Bailar's claim in this video that the participation rate of girls increases when there is an "inclusive" policy. He didn't provide any data just like you didn't.
This child is a male that has possibly taken medication (and potentially surgeries, I hope not for the child's sake) in order to appear female. That does not make them a female, it makes them a male that looks like a female. Big distinction. And you cannot in any way say they are now trying to "hide" and not get outed. No, they are already out as "trans". They want everyone to believe and accept that they've actually changed sex, which is impossible. There is absolutely nothing stopping this child from participating in the male category in sports while still looking like they do. Again, they've already acknowledged their trans-ness, which means they are acknowledging that they are male. Sports categories are based on sex, not gender. If sports are that important to them, and they are already acknowledging that they are trans, there is nothing stopping them, except again, this ridiculous push for people to accept that they have actually changed their sex.
Please explain exactly what laws are currently oppressing trans people that are comparable to Jim Crow era laws...
Really dude? Banning them from sports. That’s like straight Outta Jim Crow.
They are not banned, they just have to participate in the male category because they are male. That is absolutely not the same thing and to compare it this way is insulting and diminishes the seriousness of the Jim Crow era abuses. Do you believe there should not be categories based on sex? And/or do you believe that they have actually changed their sex?
1) competed and cleaned up in girls' high school sports; 2) filed lawsuits claiming it's unlawful to bar them from girls' high school sports; 3) testified in legislatures against excluding males from girls' school sports; 4) given interviews to media outlets in which they've said the only reason they perform better in sports than the female students they've trounced is that they work and train harder, they're more dedicated and driven, and they've been doing sports longer and thus they've had more time to develop their skills and the kind of attitude it takes to win.
I’m not aware of even one HS transgender athlete in California, that has done any of those things.
Neither am I. Which is why I never said that anyone in/from California did any of those things.
In the post of mine you're quoting (#164, page 8 of this thread), I clearly said that the athletes who did those four things are all from New England states. But you chose to snip out the part where I made it clear that I was speaking about athletes solely from New England states.
Here's what I said in full with the part you chose to delete kept in:
In my state and the other New England states alone, at least or possibly more than a dozen male students with trans gender identities have appeared in news stories and social media since 2018 because they've done one, severl or all of the following: 1) competed and cleaned up in girls' high school sports; 2) filed lawsuits claiming it's unlawful to bar them from girls' high school sports; 3) testified in legislatures against excluding males from girls' school sports; 4) given interviews to media outlets in which they've said the only reason they perform better in sports than the female students they've trounced is that they work and train harder, they're more dedicated and driven, and they've been doing sports longer and thus they've had more time to develop their skills and the kind of attitude it takes to win.
Or are you taking issue with what I said in the above passage because you're under the mistaken impression that California is a New England state? If that's the case, I can't help you. Yikes.
You’re implying there are hordes of transgender athletes in school sports and you use stats from New Hampshire to support your claims. Meanwhile, in California with a population of 34M, and which is comprised of lunatic liberals, they seem to be non-existent. The only ones I heard about during 2024, was Fleming at SJSU and the 19:00 XC runner in L.A. Can you name one, at least average transgender athlete NH?
If NH is as populated by transgender athletes as much as you say, you should focus your activism there.
That statement does not claim, suggest, or in any way imply that the reason females nowadays and in the past have always participated in high school and college sports at markedly lower rates than males is because in the past 10-15 years, some states in the USA and some sports governing bodies like the NCAA have adopted laws and policies which allow males to use gender identity claims to horn in on in girls' and women's sports.
No one had made that claim. What I claimed is that you don't find any correlation between the female participation rate in high school and middle school sports and the state's policy on transgender athletes.
And then you claim it is about the future and not the present. But those policies have in place for 10-15 years now. If they did not have any impact in 15 years, how much longer would it take before it has impacts? Another 10, 15, 20, 30 or maybe even 50 years?
Ever since we learned about Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller winning some HS sprint races, we have been told how this will erase all girls from high school sports. Well, where are all those trans athletes who are wiping cis girls out of competition? Oh, wait. It has not happened yet, but it will soon happen. If it does not happen, it will happen next year, or the year after that, but it will surely happen, right?
