Congratulations on being a "normal" parent of "normal" daughters. You should be really proud of your normalcy.
Unfortunaely, some people are not as lucky as you and your daugthers. This person's mother had a traffic accident while being pregnant, and had to go through all kinds of tests at a hospital. She was told the baby would be a boy, so they were preparing for a boy's name and all that.
And then, they were completely surprised when this person was born.
Good for you that you and your daughters do not have to go through all this.
Yeah, lots of strong stands on these threads, but things are a lot different when you have to confront these issues in real life. If you are the actual parent of a non binary or trans or intersex child and have to tell them, no, they can’t can’t compete in the category in which they identify as belonging. That’s not easy and takes empathy to see how hard that would be. Wejo, you ready for that if it happens in your family? I’m sure you are. Yes, I realize it also would be hard to console your child who was out of the medals because of a trans athlete won instead. Everybody should visualize these scenarios before posting, especially when dealing with children (middle school, high school athletes).
Yeah there are a lot of strong stands. But some curious ones as well. Having a child run the full length of house league hockey and competitive baseball (A and AA) I find it surprising the resistance to the idea that a girl (cis or trans) wouldn’t be on a boy’s team. Frankly there were one or two girls in the league each year we played A baseball (U16) and from all accounts they were respected players who loved playing with the boys. I’m not suggesting removing sex categories in sports rather that there is precedent in practice to considering the boy’s team to be open and the girl’s team to be closed based on sex at birth. As to the parent part, I agree it requires empathy to put yourself in the shoes of another parent. But the path I would have taken with a trans daughter would have been to explain the fairness issue that it only relates to competitive sports and not their other activities, and point out the examples of other girls playing on boy’s teams. How many trans boys are still on competitive girls teams/races pre-medical transition because they wouldn’t necessarily be competitive (or even make the cut) on the boys team/race?
The decisions on this need to be made on a sport-by-sport basis, but "you're ineligible for the length of time, from first modifying your hormones to the allowed female levels, that any other woman would be banned for testosterone doping" seems like a good place to start. In some sports it probably makes sense to keep anyone who ever went through male puberty out of the women's division. Trans women who didn't probably don't have a meaningful advantage, if they have one at all.
Yes, a fundamental issue is that women are not simply men with lower testosterone. There are other physical differences accrued from being a male and going through male puberty that can never be reversed.
Even studies of children show boys as young as 6 having greater athletic abilities than girls of the same age.
Trans"women" are FORCING their mental disorder (according the authoritative medical text of the land) upon a vast number of female athletes, IN PUBLIC, and without those females consent.
Gender incongruence is NOT mental disorder. I don't know what "authoritative medical text" you are talking about, but it is outdated.
Everybody understands that your sex organs in the common case correlate with a performance advantage or lack thereof. It is also true that those advantages lie on a distribution, and that intra-group differences far outweigh the average inter-group advantage.
There is no inherent reason why sport “should be” any particular way. It’s primary purposes are entertainment for society and money-making for organizers, so sport is just what society wants it to be. Right now, trans women as a whole don’t seem to causing any apocalyptic upheavals with their alleged performance advantages. Let those who are most affected by it — the women athletes — talk if they feel like something is egregiously unfair to them.
They are talking. They talked in the wake of the Penn swimmer; the tweet at the top of this thread is from a women's sports account. They speak out and are tarred with the epithet TrAnSpHoBe for doing so. Don't underestimate the power of social media psychos to shut down conversations these days, and don't underestimate the bravery it takes to speak against what seems to be prevailing trends (backed with threats) no matter what the subject. In many cases, people making the same argument you're making are basically saying loudly, "well if I haven't heard complaints from the 15 year old girls, I guess it's all fair!" and often then whispering "and I might send death threats to her if she does, but that's totally unrelated." But regardless of whether the whispered bit is there, it should never be incumbent on minors to fix problems of adults' making, the adults should be the sensible ones.
Indeed, everyone with an interest in fair sport ought to speak up, regardless of whether their event is afflicted by the issue or not. Bear in mind too that on average, women are more likely to take an agreeable, don't-rock-the-boat approach. It's awesome when women stand up and stop taking crap, but as in all things, men and women bring different advantages to any situation, on average. Sometimes you need someone who DGAF about personal attacks and will just say what needs to be said. I love when a person like that is a woman but let's be honest, there are more men like that. If you care about fair sport, you should be talking about this regardless of sex.
Anyone can talk of course. If you talk without taking the time to educate yourself about the nuanced issues and without putting yourself or your child in the shoes of a transwoman, you will understandably be labeled a transphobe. The average LR poster’s cognitive abilities and empathy don’t appear to extend beyond “just because I feel like a chair doesn’t make me a chair”, so transphobe is a reasonable characterization of such people as well people who call transwomen “mentally ill”, “self delusional”, “perverted”, “voyeurs”, “exhibitionists”, “males”, “men”, “he” etc.
It’s in your imagination that women are afraid or are adopting a “don’t rock the boat approach” and need your help in voicing their concerns. Sounds chauvinistic.
The decisions on this need to be made on a sport-by-sport basis, but "you're ineligible for the length of time, from first modifying your hormones to the allowed female levels, that any other woman would be banned for testosterone doping" seems like a good place to start. In some sports it probably makes sense to keep anyone who ever went through male puberty out of the women's division. Trans women who didn't probably don't have a meaningful advantage, if they have one at all.
Yes, a fundamental issue is that women are not simply men with lower testosterone. There are other physical differences accrued from being a male and going through male puberty that can never be reversed.
Even studies of children show boys as young as 6 having greater athletic abilities than girls of the same age.
You are not saying anything incorrect, but testosterone is still, despite the overlap in male/female levels’ distributions, a simple and pretty good discriminator predictive of performance in most (but not all) events, and the science on other discriminators that can be reliably used for fairness doesn’t yet exist.
Puberty effects can not be reversed, so that’s a nonstarter for inclusivity and fairness towards transwomen to say (except at FINA for the moment) they have become permanently ineligible to compete as a woman. Fairness can take on various definitions, so one could say that if the percentage of wins by transwomen are comparable to the percentage of transwomen in the population, both relative to ciswomen, then it’s all fair. When it starts to look unfair, we will probably be forced to come up with better discriminators, but when that happens, be warned that it might well take the form of excluding women — including cis women — based on, say, shoulder width or muscle ratio or other such physiological discriminators.
Yes, a fundamental issue is that women are not simply men with lower testosterone. There are other physical differences accrued from being a male and going through male puberty that can never be reversed.
Even studies of children show boys as young as 6 having greater athletic abilities than girls of the same age.
You are not saying anything incorrect, but testosterone is still, despite the overlap in male/female levels’ distributions, a simple and pretty good discriminator predictive of performance in most (but not all) events, and the science on other discriminators that can be reliably used for fairness doesn’t yet exist.
Puberty effects can not be reversed, so that’s a nonstarter for inclusivity and fairness towards transwomen to say (except at FINA for the moment) they have become permanently ineligible to compete as a woman. Fairness can take on various definitions, so one could say that if the percentage of wins by transwomen are comparable to the percentage of transwomen in the population, both relative to ciswomen, then it’s all fair. When it starts to look unfair, we will probably be forced to come up with better discriminators, but when that happens, be warned that it might well take the form of excluding women — including cis women — based on, say, shoulder width or muscle ratio or other such physiological discriminators.
It already does, and we already have better discriminators. Sex of birth determines if you can compete in the women's category. The "men's" category is in almost cases really an "open" category, as proved by various girls/women playing HS/college football, girls and women playing goalie in hockey, a few women pitchers in indy-league pro baseball (look up Ila Borders for example). We already had a good system. If anything it should be incumbent on the trans activists to put together a really comprehensive and convincing set of standards that they'd like us to use instead. You don't get to just shove a bunch of trans women into women's sports and the nsay, well crap, we're in there, so it's on other people to tell us where to draw the line. 100 years of sports history tells YOU where the line is drawn, you have to convince US that it was wrong. No one's been able to do that yet. "But muh inclusion" isn't going to do it, because having a female category is inherently exclusive. "They don't ALWAYS win" isn't gonna do it, because our argument is that it still isn't fair competition, even if some women can beat the trans woman. Whatever you're trying to get at with percentage-of-wins vs percentage-of-population is just silly. Your warning about "we might have to kick women with broad shoulders out!" is also only a problem if we accepted your general argument that trans women should be in the women's division in the first place. You don't have to measure shoulder width if you just do what we'd always done and said, natal women only.
You are not saying anything incorrect, but testosterone is still, despite the overlap in male/female levels’ distributions, a simple and pretty good discriminator predictive of performance in most (but not all) events, and the science on other discriminators that can be reliably used for fairness doesn’t yet exist.
Puberty effects can not be reversed, so that’s a nonstarter for inclusivity and fairness towards transwomen to say (except at FINA for the moment) they have become permanently ineligible to compete as a woman. Fairness can take on various definitions, so one could say that if the percentage of wins by transwomen are comparable to the percentage of transwomen in the population, both relative to ciswomen, then it’s all fair. When it starts to look unfair, we will probably be forced to come up with better discriminators, but when that happens, be warned that it might well take the form of excluding women — including cis women — based on, say, shoulder width or muscle ratio or other such physiological discriminators.
It already does, and we already have better discriminators. Sex of birth determines if you can compete in the women's category. The "men's" category is in almost cases really an "open" category, as proved by various girls/women playing HS/college football, girls and women playing goalie in hockey, a few women pitchers in indy-league pro baseball (look up Ila Borders for example). We already had a good system. If anything it should be incumbent on the trans activists to put together a really comprehensive and convincing set of standards that they'd like us to use instead. You don't get to just shove a bunch of trans women into women's sports and the nsay, well crap, we're in there, so it's on other people to tell us where to draw the line. 100 years of sports history tells YOU where the line is drawn, you have to convince US that it was wrong. No one's been able to do that yet. "But muh inclusion" isn't going to do it, because having a female category is inherently exclusive. "They don't ALWAYS win" isn't gonna do it, because our argument is that it still isn't fair competition, even if some women can beat the trans woman. Whatever you're trying to get at with percentage-of-wins vs percentage-of-population is just silly. Your warning about "we might have to kick women with broad shoulders out!" is also only a problem if we accepted your general argument that trans women should be in the women's division in the first place. You don't have to measure shoulder width if you just do what we'd always done and said, natal women only.
Ok, no one’s listening to you though, but you are the one trying to change what’s happening without needing your approval.
The trans population are hypocrites. They claim that all they really want is to be authentic to themselves. To publicly identify as transgender. For society to welcome them with open arms and accept them as transgender. Yet, the trans women athletes vehemently reject having their own separate divisions in sporting events. Instead, they demand to compete against the female cisgender population. What’s so authentic about that?
In running events, wheel chair competitors don’t complain about inclusivity. They compete against themselves. Cisgenders used to compete against themselves. Not anymore. The majority (cisgender) gave the minority (transgender) an inch and they took a mile. And it’ll never be enough. For Christ's sake, we can't even call a woman a woman anymore without clarification. Get used to it cisgender women. For every courageous step forward in the history of women's sports, the trans population have set you back two. This is what you get when you acquiesce to left-wing radicals. They trample on your human rights.
In running events, wheel chair competitors don’t complain about inclusivity. They compete against themselves.
In 2005 Tatyana and Deborah McFadden filed suit against the Howard County Public School System and won the right for her to race at the same time as the runners starting in 2006, though her score would not be counted for her team.
Tatyana McFadden (Russian: Татьяна Макфадден; born April 21, 1989) is an American Paralympic athlete of Russian descent competing in the category T54. McFadden has won twenty Paralympic medals in multiple Summer Paralympic Ga...
In 2005 Tatyana and Deborah McFadden filed suit against the Howard County Public School System and won the right for her to race at the same time as the runners starting in 2006, though her score would not be counted for her team.
Thanks for your counterargument. My point is that wheelchair competitors generally don't demand to compete directly against the runners. Otherwise, they would mostly dominate both male and female runners in distances 800m to marathon.
Can you image wheelchair athletes collecting all the prize money and accolades at every competition? It'll be a cold day in hell before that ever happens. Yet, in the name of so-called fairness, real women (dare I say) are supposed to accept trans women dominating women's sports. I will always defend fairness in sports. And that's not fair.
They are talking. They talked in the wake of the Penn swimmer; the tweet at the top of this thread is from a women's sports account. They speak out and are tarred with the epithet TrAnSpHoBe for doing so. Don't underestimate the power of social media psychos to shut down conversations these days, and don't underestimate the bravery it takes to speak against what seems to be prevailing trends (backed with threats) no matter what the subject. In many cases, people making the same argument you're making are basically saying loudly, "well if I haven't heard complaints from the 15 year old girls, I guess it's all fair!" and often then whispering "and I might send death threats to her if she does, but that's totally unrelated." But regardless of whether the whispered bit is there, it should never be incumbent on minors to fix problems of adults' making, the adults should be the sensible ones.
Indeed, everyone with an interest in fair sport ought to speak up, regardless of whether their event is afflicted by the issue or not. Bear in mind too that on average, women are more likely to take an agreeable, don't-rock-the-boat approach. It's awesome when women stand up and stop taking crap, but as in all things, men and women bring different advantages to any situation, on average. Sometimes you need someone who DGAF about personal attacks and will just say what needs to be said. I love when a person like that is a woman but let's be honest, there are more men like that. If you care about fair sport, you should be talking about this regardless of sex.
Anyone can talk of course. If you talk without taking the time to educate yourself about the nuanced issues and without putting yourself or your child in the shoes of a transwoman, you will understandably be labeled a transphobe. The average LR poster’s cognitive abilities and empathy don’t appear to extend beyond “just because I feel like a chair doesn’t make me a chair”, so transphobe is a reasonable characterization of such people as well people who call transwomen “mentally ill”, “self delusional”, “perverted”, “voyeurs”, “exhibitionists”, “males”, “men”, “he” etc.
It’s in your imagination that women are afraid or are adopting a “don’t rock the boat approach” and need your help in voicing their concerns. Sounds chauvinistic.
I'm with you that we shouldn't call transwomen mentally ill, but "males" and "men" do not belong in your list. Transwomen are objectively men, that's the whole point of being trans.
The trans population are hypocrites. They claim that all they really want is to be authentic to themselves. To publicly identify as transgender. For society to welcome them with open arms and accept them as transgender. Yet, the trans women athletes vehemently reject having their own separate divisions in sporting events. Instead, they demand to compete against the female cisgender population. What’s so authentic about that?
In running events, wheel chair competitors don’t complain about inclusivity. They compete against themselves. Cisgenders used to compete against themselves. Not anymore. The majority (cisgender) gave the minority (transgender) an inch and they took a mile. And it’ll never be enough. For Christ's sake, we can't even call a woman a woman anymore without clarification. Get used to it cisgender women. For every courageous step forward in the history of women's sports, the trans population have set you back two. This is what you get when you acquiesce to left-wing radicals. They trample on your human rights.
You don’t seem to get it that they are women. Some people are slow but eventually get it, and some never get it but don’t matter coz society keeps progressing leaving the self-annointed white knight warriors behind.
Trans"women" are FORCING their mental disorder (according the authoritative medical text of the land) upon a vast number of female athletes, IN PUBLIC, and without those females consent.
Gender incongruence is NOT mental disorder. I don't know what "authoritative medical text" you are talking about, but it is outdated.
Some people may say it's not - for various political and social reasons - but it fits the criteria of a disorder. If someone is willing to kill themselves over gender dysphoria it's a mental disorder. It's really not more complicated than that.
American Psychological Association wrote:
The American Psychiatric Association kept this question in mind while preparing their latest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Definitions of mental disorders in the DSM-5 consider these 5 factors:
A behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual Reflects an underlying psychobiological dysfunction The consequences of which are clinically significant distress (e.g., a painful symptom) or disability (i.e., impairment in one or more important areas of functioning)
Anyone can talk of course. If you talk without taking the time to educate yourself about the nuanced issues and without putting yourself or your child in the shoes of a transwoman, you will understandably be labeled a transphobe. The average LR poster’s cognitive abilities and empathy don’t appear to extend beyond “just because I feel like a chair doesn’t make me a chair”, so transphobe is a reasonable characterization of such people as well people who call transwomen “mentally ill”, “self delusional”, “perverted”, “voyeurs”, “exhibitionists”, “males”, “men”, “he” etc.
It’s in your imagination that women are afraid or are adopting a “don’t rock the boat approach” and need your help in voicing their concerns. Sounds chauvinistic.
I'm with you that we shouldn't call transwomen mentally ill, but "males" and "men" do not belong in your list. Transwomen are objectively men, that's the whole point of being trans.
I hear what you are saying as in I well understand what you are trying to say. My position is they are women because they identify as such. You believe in the overarching importance of something called biological sex — a concept that I don’t believe can be defined as a binary — but I don’t believe in its overarching importance or importance for anything outside the bedroom. Equity and pursuit of happiness in a society largely organized around the binary is more overarching in importance.
As for sports, the regulatory bodies already have eligibility requirements striving for fairness that are mostly working well for everybody to the extent possible, and they continue to evolve informed by the science of performance discriminators.
The trans population are hypocrites. They claim that all they really want is to be authentic to themselves. To publicly identify as transgender. For society to welcome them with open arms and accept them as transgender. Yet, the trans women athletes vehemently reject having their own separate divisions in sporting events. Instead, they demand to compete against the female cisgender population. What’s so authentic about that?
In running events, wheel chair competitors don’t complain about inclusivity. They compete against themselves. Cisgenders used to compete against themselves. Not anymore. The majority (cisgender) gave the minority (transgender) an inch and they took a mile. And it’ll never be enough. For Christ's sake, we can't even call a woman a woman anymore without clarification. Get used to it cisgender women. For every courageous step forward in the history of women's sports, the trans population have set you back two. This is what you get when you acquiesce to left-wing radicals. They trample on your human rights.
You don’t seem to get it that they are women. Some people are slow but eventually get it, and some never get it but don’t matter coz society keeps progressing leaving the self-annointed white knight warriors behind.
You don’t seem to get it that they are women. Some people are slow but eventually get it, and some never get it but don’t matter coz society keeps progressing leaving the self-annointed white knight warriors behind.
In what sense are they women?
The answer is in my post in response to yours above.
