Women's sports may be saved!! CT's policy of allowing transgender women to compete w/o treatment found to violate Title IX

You can say that again, brother. All those ridiculous social justice warriors like Martin Luther King Jr and Susan B. Anthony and their ludicrous ideas about civil rights and voting rights. The nerve of them! Good thing our boy in the oval office and freedom fighter McConnell are getting things back where they should be. God bless America.

Psychology Professor wrote:

You only have to look at the history of social justice warriors and have over the past century they have put forth more and more ludicrous ideas and not enough people spoke up and said, "No, enough is enough". So society is like a frog in a slow boiling pot. You get the crazies coming left and right and before you know it you can even say no and they are insane without them lynching you.

This is exactly the insane SJW behavior we see in the coronavirus where anyone that dares question the corrupt death counts or whether it is sane to shut down society for the 0.26%. We are so far from sanity that you can't even say a man is a man is a man without SJWs piling on you. The greatest threat to the world today is the SJWs.

Less than 0.26%, and everyone sane realized this within the first week.

As for the rest, unfortunately, our society both surveils all communications and uses comments on controversial topics against you, not for you, regardless of what you say. So, I will not comment besides the observation children unable to carry full responsibility for their lives should not undergo such severe treatments.

malmo wrote:

What's amazing to me was how did 18 states approve of allowing young men to compete with girls? Who proposed this? Why?

There are multiple layers of transphobia in this statement.

But but but, SDSU guy said blah blah blah never happen blah blah blah. Why does it matter to you blah blah blah , 60 years ago won't be changed blah blah blah

rojo wrote:

Huge news. The AP has the story.

Hopefully this puts an end to the madness in all 18 states.

"Connecticut is one of 18 states, along with Washington, D.C., that allow transgender high school athletes to compete without restrictions, according to Transathlete.com."

The interesting thing is that local authorities appear to not be backing down citing state law so the local school district may lose all federal funding.

I think that many people are under a serious misapprenhension about the significance and legal effects and implications of this letter from the Office of Civil RIghts (OCR) in the Department of Education.

It's important to understand the procedural history. These girls (through a representative) filed a complaint wth the OCR, which investigated the matter, concluded that these school districts had violated TItle IX (or regulations promulgated thereunder), and told the school districts that they had ninety days to negotiate and resolve this matter. The school districts responded, in effect, that they didn't need ninety days; the matter wasn't going to get resolved through negotiations. The schools districts said they were following state law and weren't violating Title IX. The OCR concluded that an impasse in the matter had been reached, and it intended to initiate administrative proceedings or refer the case to the Department of Justice for judicial proceedings if things didn't get resolved within twenty days.

That's pretty much it. The lawyer for the girls says, "Around the nation, districts are going to want to be reading this, because it does have legal implications,” since it's “a first decision from the agency charged with enforcing Title IX addressing the question of whether males on the playing field or on the track are depriving girls of opportunities consistent with Title IX.” An ACLU lawyer says, “All that today’s finding represents is yet another attack from the Trump administration on transgender students." But neither lawyer is suggesting that this letter resolves anything, or that any factual findings or legal conclusions expressed in the letter are binding on any of the school districts or anyone else. The girls' lawyer expressed his hope that the federal court in an ongoing case might take the letter into consideration, and perhaps the court might give some weight to the letter under case law (now controversial) regarding deference to a federal agency's interpretation of a governing statute or regulations promulgated thereunder, but even that seems highly uncertain in this particular procedural posture.

Regardless of anyone's views about whether it seems sensible to allow certain individuals to compete as girls, questions about whether federal law -- specifically, Title IX -- mandates the exclusion of those individuals from competition still remain, and seem unlikely to go away quickly where, as here, state law has been interpreted to compel a different result. So far, I haven't seen much (if any) discussion of those questions on this message board.

David S wrote:

malmo wrote:

What's amazing to me was how did 18 states approve of allowing young men to compete with girls? Who proposed this? Why?

There are multiple layers of transphobia in this statement.

Would you mind itemizing all the layers for those of us too ignorant to understand?

David S wrote:

There are multiple layers of transphobia in this statement.

Leftists like you are the ones that are crazy.

"Puberty blocking hormones gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists or GnRH agonists arrest bone growth, decrease bone density, prevent the sex-steroid dependent organization and maturation of the adolescent brain, and inhibit fertility by preventing the development of gonadal tissue and mature gametes for the duration of treatment."

An 11-year-old child cannot buy a beer or drive a car. He or she is not developed enough to make life-altering decisions that might harm his or her health.

A former transgender says, "I have these seeds of doubt and confusion from the dress, from being affirmed as a girl and from being abused as a boy... I am contacted by people every single day, thousands of people over the ten years I've run the site, who have experienced failed gender reassignment surgery."

Another former transgender said, "It became apparent that transitioning was a big mistake. The session where I realised this was so bad that I had a complete break down and panic attack, because I realised it was a huge mistake."

Another former transgender said, "I think people have this idea that transitioning is a great fix all and end up doing it for the wrong reasons."

You leftists live in a fantasy.

Biological males have the Y chromosome and elevated testosterone. This is unfair for girls. Period.

Title IX refers to exclusion based on sex; that is, male and female students. Transwomen are not female since female is a biological classification. If transwomen (male) athletes take opportunities (classes, scholarships, etc) originally allocated to females, they are depriving females of equal opportunities. There are obviously many transphobic people out there, but that's not sufficient to disprove any of the facts above.

Avocado's Number wrote:

Regardless of anyone's views about whether it seems sensible to allow certain individuals to compete as girls, questions about whether federal law -- specifically, Title IX -- mandates the exclusion of those individuals from competition still remain, and seem unlikely to go away quickly where, as here, state law has been interpreted to compel a different result. So far, I haven't seen much (if any) discussion of those questions on this message board.

malmo wrote:

What's amazing to me was how did 18 states approve of allowing young men to compete with girls? Who proposed this? Why?

Because if you don't play along, even if it's nonsense, you will be accused of discrimination and your life/organization will be publicly shamed and probably ruined forever. It's the world we live in now. It's safer just to let all the specials have their way.

justausername1912 wrote:

What I will say is that at the high school level, I feel that encouraging participation is important ultimately.

They took this way beyond participating, they made a mockery of state championships and took up spots at exclusive meets like NBIN

Malmo is right about this. It's amazing to me that this is even in dispute.

The simple division you're suggesting in accordance with "nature" doesn't really make sense, biologically or culturally.

But what really bothers me is that this issue is portrayed in extremes, as either transphobic fascism or liberal political correctness run amok. We have transgender inclusion and rights on one hand, and preserving competitive integrity/equal opportunity for female athletics on the other-- I think there's a solution somewhere, but claiming that it's simple and people on the other side are just blind or crazy isn't helping.

CT liberals got what they deserved when they elected leftist extremists whose agenda isn't equality and fairness but power and control to cram their version social justice down the throats of anybody that gets in their way, even if it is high school girls.

Cool. So we can just say we're a woman and compete against women? Sounds totally fair!

This is so unfair to a child confused and bullied by society.

Looks like a victory for the MAGAts, er maggots.

Holly came from Miami, F.L.A.

Hitch-hiked her way across the U.S.A.

Plucked her eyebrows on the way

Shaved her legs and then he was a she

She says, "Hey babe, take a walk on the wild side"

And a victory for the 99.99% of adolescent females not confused about their gender.

Oxford scholar NT Wright wrote a letter in 2017 to The Times of London that, in a way, summarizes the evidence of your post.

"The confusion about gender identity is a modern, and now internet-fuelled, form of the ancient philosophy of Gnosticism. The Gnostic, one who “knows”, has discovered the secret of “who I really am”, behind the deceptive outward appearance (in Rifkind’s apt phrase, the “ungainly, boring, fleshy one”). This involves denying the goodness, or even the ultimate reality, of the natural world. Nature, however, tends to strike back, with the likely victims in this case being vulnerable and impressionable youngsters who, as confused adults, will pay the price for their elders’ fashionable fantasies." [Emphasis added.]