I recall a news item in which it was reported that a boys team beat the national women's side. It would seem then that Megan Rapinoe or a team member could possibly lose their place in the side to a 15 year old boy who identifies as female. That's a strange way for Ms Rapinoe to champion women's sport.
She got her money off the guys team.
Now she can go about being the lesbo kaep she's always wanted to be
Who the hell cares? The guy sounds like a complete douche bag (assuming the story is true as it sounds like something from the Onion) but who really cares? Nobody cares about this skateboarding nonsense. Obviously.
Lots of women and girls care, and we happen to make up a significant proportion of the population. Many guys care too.
Males like this particular dirt bag have been using gender identity claims to horn in on and dominate in girls and women's sports of all kinds at all levels for years now - and it's having a demoralizing impact on many of us. Women who stand up for female sports in public get a barrage of death and rape threats and tons of abusive messages from male trans activists saying STFU and "suck girl dxck" - some with photos of said body part.
A lot of the coverage of the stunning and brave blokes intruding upon female sports sound like Onion parodies. But they're not. Look at the fawning coverage given to Lia Thomas by Sports Illustrated and many TV shows, for example. NBC News even likened Thomas to Jackie Robinson - and not as a joke, either.
Just because you personally don't care doesn't mean nobody does.
Here is what I don’t understand. What the hell does this guy get out of it? He does not have the esteem of the community, does he? His esteem for himself is unlikely to inflate because he beat a girl at skateboarding, is it? I suppose he gets some recognition but is it positive recognition? The whole deal seems so odd.
To be fair, she's not wrong (entire quote): “We’re talking about people’s lives. I’m sorry, your kid’s high school volleyball team just isn’t that important. It’s not more important than any one kid’s life.”
You can debate whether her underlying assumptions are true (that inclusivity prevents deaths, which seems a reasonable position), but if you're arguing that the purity of a high school sport is more important than someone's life, I've got to disagree.
Even the comparison is debatable, inasmuch as it implies that ends justify means. Most philosophical and ethical schools of thought (e.g., Rawls) treat justice as more than simply a matter of outcomes.
I've argued elsewhere that asking which approach leads to the most psychic harm is incorrect. Suppose it's possible to determine that including the trans woman will inflict 1 unit of psychological harm on each team member, multiplied by 15 team members, for 15 total units. Suppose that excluding the trans woman inflicts 20 units of harm on her. I don't think that alone tells us what to do, though it can be a relevant consideration. We also have to ask if the means by which we inflict the harm are just. I believe that in this case, imposing less total harm is actually unjust because it requires dishonesty. Specifically, it requires people to pretend that the sporting event is fair, when it clearly is not.
I also think there's a serious problem with the way people are attempting to tally up harms in these situations. They act as though the only people harmed by inclusion are the athletes who are displaced, and they act as though excluding trans women is itself responsible for all psychic harm that these people experience. I think both are false.
First, allowing trans women to compete against biological women harms all female athletes by devaluing them. It's not just about the people who get bumped off of podiums. It sends the message that your sport isn't serious business. Rapinoe may have climbed to the highest pinnacle of professional athletics, but she seems to have forgotten how important high school sports are for the dedicated athletes who will probably never compete at such a high level again in their lives. Of course, if someone said, "who cares about the Women's World Cup; they're terrible compared to the men," she'd be outraged. But her message is essentially the same: "You're not good enough at your sport to matter."
Second, and this is something about which I'm less confident, I think people are attributing too much harm to sports exclusion. Trans teenagers are depressed and suicidal because it's REALLY FREAKING HARD to be a trans teenager. Sports might give them an arena where they can feel included (though I think it's equally possible that they'll simply be subject to more abuse because of their participation). But the fact that sports can be a lifeline doesn't mean that the inability to play on the team is what is causing the harm. Effectively, we're turning women's sports into a big "make a wish" foundation for depressed teenagers. And it might make them feel better, just like pretending to be Batman made that cancer kid feel better. But I don't know that it follows that we should be compelling people, who have their own hopes and dreams, to be unwilling participants in someone else's fantasy world.
To be fair, she's not wrong (entire quote): “We’re talking about people’s lives. I’m sorry, your kid’s high school volleyball team just isn’t that important. It’s not more important than any one kid’s life.”
You can debate whether her underlying assumptions are true (that inclusivity prevents deaths, which seems a reasonable position), but if you're arguing that the purity of a high school sport is more important than someone's life, I've got to disagree.
Even the comparison is debatable, inasmuch as it implies that ends justify means. Most philosophical and ethical schools of thought (e.g., Rawls) treat justice as more than simply a matter of outcomes.
I've argued elsewhere that asking which approach leads to the most psychic harm is incorrect. Suppose it's possible to determine that including the trans woman will inflict 1 unit of psychological harm on each team member, multiplied by 15 team members, for 15 total units. Suppose that excluding the trans woman inflicts 20 units of harm on her. I don't think that alone tells us what to do, though it can be a relevant consideration. We also have to ask if the means by which we inflict the harm are just. I believe that in this case, imposing less total harm is actually unjust because it requires dishonesty. Specifically, it requires people to pretend that the sporting event is fair, when it clearly is not.
I also think there's a serious problem with the way people are attempting to tally up harms in these situations. They act as though the only people harmed by inclusion are the athletes who are displaced, and they act as though excluding trans women is itself responsible for all psychic harm that these people experience. I think both are false.
First, allowing trans women to compete against biological women harms all female athletes by devaluing them. It's not just about the people who get bumped off of podiums. It sends the message that your sport isn't serious business. Rapinoe may have climbed to the highest pinnacle of professional athletics, but she seems to have forgotten how important high school sports are for the dedicated athletes who will probably never compete at such a high level again in their lives. Of course, if someone said, "who cares about the Women's World Cup; they're terrible compared to the men," she'd be outraged. But her message is essentially the same: "You're not good enough at your sport to matter."
Second, and this is something about which I'm less confident, I think people are attributing too much harm to sports exclusion. Trans teenagers are depressed and suicidal because it's REALLY FREAKING HARD to be a trans teenager. Sports might give them an arena where they can feel included (though I think it's equally possible that they'll simply be subject to more abuse because of their participation). But the fact that sports can be a lifeline doesn't mean that the inability to play on the team is what is causing the harm. Effectively, we're turning women's sports into a big "make a wish" foundation for depressed teenagers. And it might make them feel better, just like pretending to be Batman made that cancer kid feel better. But I don't know that it follows that we should be compelling people, who have their own hopes and dreams, to be unwilling participants in someone else's fantasy world.
Well to your point about transgenders being excluded from sports not being the reason for their psychological distress I would say that is rather obvious. But that is what Rapinoe essentially said too EXCEPT she did imply that the exclusion made matters worse or even had some role in suicides, which I am not sure about. It is sort of like saying 100 years ago that blacks are made to feel inferior by society due to discrimination and maybe we should let them play sports. The bigger issue is the discrimination period. Sports participation is NOT going to cure society of discriminating against transgenders. However many here discriminate against transgenders and then camouflage it with some alleged concern about the sanctity of female sports while many are also contending that these female superheroes are doping. It is a mess.
It’s a long diatribe written about how their child who identifies as a they (but has testicles) was discriminated against (likely because they weren’t allowed to play on the girl’s team). But at the end, they were just fine because they were allowed to participate in the coed league. That league has always been open to everybody, because there is an expectation among the participants and parents that those are the rules. What is not okay is for an individual with testicles who has undergone puberty intact to participate in a competitive female only league.
Why are you assuming that "E" was not allowed to play on the girls' team? Nothing in the article mentions what team E quit. It could well be that E was on the boys' team and was told by the teammates and the coach "to act like a real boy."
And the co-ed team E now plays did not exist when they quit the previous team. It was created by people like E's mother for kids who did not fit into single-sex teams. (Co-ed "league" had existed.)
So this is a positive story of a non-binary kid who found their place on a co-ed team where they truly belong. This team could accomodate male-to-female, or female-to-male trans kids as well as any cis kid who want to join. What's wrong with that?
27,715 "gender diverse" people were surveyed, and of which 17,151 sought some level of transition. The rest either did not seek transtion, or did not answer the question on transition.
Of 17.751, 2242 (13.1%) reported that they detrantioned.
989 of 7191 trans women (13.8%) detransitioned.
361 of 6289 trans men (5.7%) detransitioned.
1125 of 12406 people who started hormone replacement therapy detransitioned. (9.1%)
371 of 5415 people who had gender affriming surgery detransitioned. (6.9%)
82.5% of people who detransitioned cited at least one external factor. (Parental pressure, pressure for other family members, pressure from community and social stigma among the most common factors.)
15.9% cited internal factors, including 2.4% (54) who reported "uncertainty or doubt around gender" and 10.5% (235) who reported "fluctuations in identity or desire."
So out of 17,751 people who pursued some level of transition, 0.3% detransitioned because of "uncertainty or doubt around gender" and another 1.3% detranstioned because of "fluctuations in identity or desire."
So should we discourage people from transition because there are about one in 60 chances that they will regret?
Purpose: There is a paucity of data regarding transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people who “detransition,” or go back to living as their sex assigned at birth. This study examined reasons for past detransition among TGD pe...
So, I caught a little of the USWNT game against Haiti yesterday when I was grilling food for our 4th of July party, and it hit me: How prevalent do you think DSD and transgenderism are in women's soccer? The CONCACAF tournament is a pretty major tournament (Qualifier for the World Cup and Olympics), but the attendance was laughable (maybe 1,000 spectators in a stadium designed for 42,000). Which makes me think that drug testing is not likely all that extensive as there is not enough funding available. With many of these countries never reaching the world cup or Olympics, it is likely that they are never drug tested (and even then, they probably only test a handful of players). If athletes are not getting drug tested, there is no way to empirically determine if they are DSD. There have only been two or three doping positives in women's soccer ever, which is a good indication there is not a whole lot of testing taking place.
Shocked to see we have so many fans of women’s sports in this thread.
Some of us have firsthand knowledge of women's sports from playing, competing in, doing women's sports. Shocking, isn't it? I mean, how dare we.
You'll have to forgive Rick. He's just your average TDS troll that decided his meaning in life is to be contrarian to establishment, no matter how deranged it makes him look.
Already some in the press in Zambia are alleging that racism against black Africans is the reason that the Confederation of African Football has denied eligibility for the Women's African Cup of Nations to such a significant number of athletes from sub-Saharan African countries for having testosterone levels that are too high. Only this time, the ostensible racists aren't white Europeans, they're Arabs and the North Africans of Morocco. From the Zambia Telegraph:
TOO FIT TO BE A WOMAN…WHAT NONSENSE IS THAT?
The ban of copper queens captain Barbara Banda and 7 other fit African women from playing in the Africa Women’s Cup of Nations tournament is a clear case of racism and rigging meant to give the weak Arab players and hosts Morocco, a decisive headstart!
It’s reminiscent of Caster Simenya [sic], the South African athlete whom the Olympics committee tried to ban, until South Africans protested!
Meanwhile, back home, FAZ [Football Association of Zambia] has it’s [sic] tail between its legs, sheepishly agreeing with CAF’s nonsensical decision to ban Barbara Banda from playing, alleging that she’s too fit and powerful to be a woman!
What nonsense is this ‘testosterone test’ kansi, and why does it only target African women sports personalities?
My wife's cousin is the department head at a major university in the United States. Easily ranked in the top 10 - perhaps a small notch below a Johns Hopkins. Of course he has peer review work - lots of it - medicine requires it, lots of it. And he is the department chairman. I am hesitant to state his name because his position on this generates a lot of flak. It is also not the main focus of his research. And while he supports transgender people, and supports transition in the right circumstances, his lifelong peer reviewed endocrinology work reflects that there are consequences to medical intervention. Even if you don't agree with him - and frankly you don't seem all that tolerant of divergent views - i can't see how his focus on the externalities that obtain with medical intervention with young people is a negative. We want people to be healthy and happy, and to the extent that some opt for medical intervention when there are underlying mental issues that have not been addressed, well, I think that is a valid point to be made. Your who cares statement reflects a certain amount of arrogance. I have educational credentials few have (including likely you). I could easily say who cares what you say. But it doesn't advance any understanding. What do you think of Abigail Shrier's book? I suspect it might invoke an emotional response from you. A logical one would be desirable, however.
Researches cited in the two reviews below contradict the findings of your wife's cousin's research.
So can you kindly inform me why I should take your words over those researches?
Gender-affirming care remains the evidence-based standard of care for gender dysphoria in transgender adolescents, despite claims by some laws and lawmakers that it is “experimental”.
A lot of the "facts" about providing healthcare to transgender youth turn out to be not actually facts. We present here a summary of the evidence relating to transition-related health care for transge
Trans youth who have had medical treatment have significantly better mental health outcomes than those who do not
While RCTs are not feasible, comparisons of youth receiving treatment and those who haven’t have been done using convenience samples. A 2018 study of young transgender men who underwent chest reconstruction found their mental health was significantly better than the control cohort who were denied the surgery. A 2019 study of 47 trans youth before and after receiving hormone therapy found that the hormone therapy improved their mental wellbeing. It also found that those who had received puberty blockers for some time prior to hormone therapy ultimately reported even lower suicidality than those who had not previously received puberty blockers. In the largest study of this to date, researchers compared 272 transgender adolescents referred to the gender clinic who had not yet received pubertal suppression with 178 transgender adolescents who had received pubertal suppression. They found those who received pubertal suppression had better mental health outcomes than those who did not receive pubertal suppression. A study released in December 2021 compared two groups of transgender youth: those who wanted Gender Affirming Hormone Therapy (GAHT) but did not receive it, and those who wanted and received it. The study found that those who received GAHT had lower odds of recent depression and of a past-year suicide attempt.
