I didn’t say whether I thought transgender athletes should be allowed to compete against women. My point is if transgender athletes are banned by the CIF, it’s likely to be challenged in court and the judge isn’t going to read your cut and paste to make his ruling.
In CA there will never be a ban unless a dramatic change occurs with the state’s politics,
The change would be driven by a Title IX lawsuit (Federal law) that affirms that when Title IX was signed into law, it intended to protect opportunities based on sex (not gender) and that relative to sports that means chromosomes.
I think it is fair to assume that in the early 1970s, lawmakers did not pass a law that said, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” to create a world in which XY humans beat up an XX humans in sports.
I also think it is fair to assume that today's Supreme Court would know this.
Clearly it is XX humans who are being denied the "benefits of" sports participation when XY humans are allowed into their competitions.
In CA there will never be a ban unless a dramatic change occurs with the state’s politics,
The change would be driven by a Title IX lawsuit (Federal law) that affirms that when Title IX was signed into law, it intended to protect opportunities based on sex (not gender) and that relative to sports that means chromosomes.
I think it is fair to assume that in the early 1970s, lawmakers did not pass a law that said, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” to create a world in which XY humans beat up an XX humans in sports.
I also think it is fair to assume that today's Supreme Court would know this.
Clearly it is XX humans who are being denied the "benefits of" sports participation when XY humans are allowed into their competitions.
Don’t be so sure. Ketanji Brown from Supreme Court does not know what a woman is
The change would be driven by a Title IX lawsuit (Federal law) that affirms that when Title IX was signed into law, it intended to protect opportunities based on sex (not gender) and that relative to sports that means chromosomes.
I think it is fair to assume that in the early 1970s, lawmakers did not pass a law that said, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” to create a world in which XY humans beat up an XX humans in sports.
I also think it is fair to assume that today's Supreme Court would know this.
Clearly it is XX humans who are being denied the "benefits of" sports participation when XY humans are allowed into their competitions.
Don’t be so sure. Ketanji Brown from Supreme Court does not know what a woman is
And apparently you don't know how many votes are needed to win a Supreme Court case.
Honestly, I'd rather have her dodge an obvious trap than lie about what is "settled law," how it should be respected, and whether a Justice would overturn a law that has already been tested ("a super precedent").
In CA there will never be a ban unless a dramatic change occurs with the state’s politics,
The change would be driven by a Title IX lawsuit (Federal law) that affirms that when Title IX was signed into law, it intended to protect opportunities based on sex (not gender) and that relative to sports that means chromosomes.
I think it is fair to assume that in the early 1970s, lawmakers did not pass a law that said, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” to create a world in which XY humans beat up an XX humans in sports.
I also think it is fair to assume that today's Supreme Court would know this.
Clearly it is XX humans who are being denied the "benefits of" sports participation when XY humans are allowed into their competitions.
Yes, possible, but doubtful any time soon.
A few reasons
1) The executive branch has latitude regarding Title IX interpretation and enforcement.
2) There is already precedent that sex and gender are inexorably intertwined as a matter of law, and discrimination based on gender boils down to a form of sex discrimination. I think this was a major underpinning of Obergefell.
3) Title IX mandates equal participation, but not equal outcomes.
4) Plaintiffs need to be injured to bring suit. Not sure that missing out on the state meet would meet the threshold for example, especially for a plaintiff who would have long ago graduated.
5) Before the SC, the 9th circuit as constituted now would find the CIF is not violating Title IX.
6)G-d only knows who will be on the supreme court when a case about this arrives.
You are missing the point. "The current rules" are not working. They need to be either changed or modified. If not for this year, certainly the next year and beyond.
And being "discriminatory" does not automatically mean it will be overturned in the court. The court will accept "reasonable discrimination" (e.g. not allowing blind people to drive.) That's the precedent established in Semenya v. IAAF.
Semenya was not forced to compete in a separate division and neither was Lia Thomas. Neither FINA or WA went for a ban and that’s what you proposal is. The separate division will P-off just about everyone. The athletes won’t want to run it and the spectators won’t want to watch it.
Umm...
I didn't say anything about "my proposal" except for a stopgap measure I wrote earlier. That will not exclude anyone from the competition, and not even from the awards. So I don't know what you are talking about.
And my point about the Semenya case is that the court will allow "discriminatory measure" if the sports organization can prove such a measure is necessary. There was a recent case involving a disc golfer where a trans athlete lost.
It’s highly unlikely CIF will change its policies.
From Gavin Newsom last year:
“When asked for Newsom’s position on trans athletes, the spokesperson said the governor wants to ensure “trans Californians are fully acknowledged in accordance with their gender identity while interacting with public services”. The spokesperson added that California already allows students to “participate in activities consistent with their gender identity”, and assured voters that the state “isn’t going backwards on these issues”.
The state senator from the area covered by the NCS, Scott Weiner, was asked specifically about last weeks race:
“It’s a very dangerous time for LGBTQ young people in the U.S., and especially for trans young people,” Wiener said. “In California, it absolutely needs to go in the other direction and we support these kids and embrace them to succeed.”
From Larry Strauss a CIF member (2 yr old opinion, however)
HS varsity sports are not your Sunday night basketball game at the local gym. And comparing Sjostrom and Spitz fifty years apart is quite disingenuous.
It’s highly unlikely CIF will change its policies.
From Gavin Newsom last year:
“When asked for Newsom’s position on trans athletes, the spokesperson said the governor wants to ensure “trans Californians are fully acknowledged in accordance with their gender identity while interacting with public services”. The spokesperson added that California already allows students to “participate in activities consistent with their gender identity”, and assured voters that the state “isn’t going backwards on these issues”.
The state senator from the area covered by the NCS, Scott Weiner, was asked specifically about last weeks race:
“It’s a very dangerous time for LGBTQ young people in the U.S., and especially for trans young people,” Wiener said. “In California, it absolutely needs to go in the other direction and we support these kids and embrace them to succeed.”
From Larry Strauss a CIF member (2 yr old opinion, however)
HS varsity sports are not your Sunday night basketball game at the local gym. And comparing Sjostrom and Spitz fifty years apart is quite disingenuous.
Like you, I’m not saying if I agree with everything Strauss has to say on the topic, just that he was part of the CIF decision makers when this was written. So just pointing out that in CA the rules are NOT going to change, certainly not to a ban, in the current political environment. The comment about federal intervention is harder to predict, but if the rules do change on that basis, I don’t think the case of a young woman missing the state meet, but who is already headed to Cal on a track scholarship, is going to be the right case to bring. Do you disagree with any of this?
This post was edited 59 seconds after it was posted.
In CA there will never be a ban unless a dramatic change occurs with the state’s politics, and I think even a hormone requirement for HS sports and below is highly unlikely. Did you just see what happened to the Dodgers? The ONLY way a major change is possible in this state is if the main stream LGBTQ organizations with political clout come out and say they support a rule change with respect to trans athletes and sports. Nobody on LRC should be holding their breath. Any of the posters here can feel free to engage those organizations and the state’s political leadership instead of the LRC echo chamber. Good luck. Love to see some of them get into it with Scott Weiner.
There is a transgender field hockey player in NJ who has become the poster child for this issue among the organizations like Human Rights Campaign and Congressional Equality Caucus.
Sometime last year, her mother posted a photo of her FH game on her Facebook page, expressing her concerns about the recent moves to ban trans kids from HS sports. Someone posted a comment that she should not be allowed to play because she has unfair advantage. Her reply was "my daughter has been on puberty blocker since age ten, and she is taking estrogen now."
The kid herself does not say anything about the hormone treatment, but the comment section of her Instagram is filled with posts by her supporters who express their frustration over "athletes like Lia Thomas."
So the "LGBTQ organizations" may not be as monolithic as you think.
I for one don't think a person has to present "feminine" to be considered a female. I know many trans people who present as traditionally male, but their personal gender identity is female. Those people should get to compete in their gender category that corresponds to their identity. There's no misogyny there. It's just empathy.
You are the one trying to set up male vs female sports as advantaged vs. disadvantaged. It does not have to be that. The question is what does the person define themselves as. It doesn't matter if they have an advantage or not. Who are they as a person? That is the only question that matters for their gender category.
If everyone should be able to compete according to their "personal gender identity" and how they define themselves, rather than on the basis of their physical sex, then there's no point of having two separate categories for girls/women and boys/men at all.
After all, there are more than a hundred different "gender identities," and more are being invented on Tumblr and announced on TikTok every day. Similarly, there's no end to the varieties and permutations of the ways that people can define themselves.
If sports were no longer segregated by sex, then sports would go back to being an area of life in which the vast majority of opportunties to participate, make teams and compete end up going solely to males, and nearly all the chances to win events, gain glory, get scholarships, have careers and so on would end up going to males too.
Moreover, if sports were no longer segregated by sex, then inevitably the small number of female people who get a chance to participate will be at much higher risk of ending up injured or even dead from doing sports.
As to your claim that I am "the one who is try to set up male vs female sports as advantaged vs. disadvantaged" - that's hogwash.
I'm not responsible for creating, nor am I imagining, the myriad physical differences between human males and females that give one sex a clear advantage over the other in nearly all sports.
I'm also not imagining things when I point out that nearly all sports and types of sports competition were invented by men originally for the express purpose of giving boys and men a chance to try, hone and show off the particualar kinds of physical feats that human male bodies are naturally best at and most suited to performing.
This post was edited 13 minutes after it was posted.
Like you, I’m not saying if I agree with everything Strauss has to say on the topic, just that he was part of the CIF decision makers when this was written. So just pointing out that in CA the rules are NOT going to change, certainly not to a ban, in the current political environment. The comment about federal intervention is harder to predict, but if the rules do change on that basis, I don’t think the case of a young woman missing the state meet, but who is already headed to Cal on a track scholarship, is going to be the right case to bring. Do you disagree with any of this?
Who is head to Cal on a scholarship? Adeline Johnson? She is not missing the state meet. Someone else is. (I am too lazy to look up who is the next in line.)
The bottom line is that if CIF does nothing about this issue, there will eventually be a very draconian measure taken at the national level. Something similar to HR734 will become the federal law, and the conservative court filled with Republican appointed judges will uphold it. And they will keep pushing this issue to mobilize the votes so that they can appoint more judges at all levels of courts. LGBTQ community will lose something much bigger than some HS students' right to play sports.
Biden administration has already issued a guideline for enforcing Title IX on this issue that allows schools (and school associations) to limit the participation of trans athletes based on concerns over safety and competitive opportunities. Some trans activists vocally objected, but most responses were more like "we look forward to keep working on this issue." They know some restrictions are necessary to avoid the complete ban.
So to be clear the female competitors of these trans identifying males are actually not stoked to compete against the TiM's this weekend. They don't think it's fair. They think something should be done about it. They aren't old enough yet to become lightning rods, the way Riley has bravely chosen to do.
If you are grown, stand with Riley and speak up. Don't let this farce continues. It matters to women to girls to participants and fans of the sport.
There is a transgender field hockey player in NJ who has become the poster child for this issue among the organizations like Human Rights Campaign and Congressional Equality Caucus.
Sometime last year, her mother posted a photo of her FH game on her Facebook page, expressing her concerns about the recent moves to ban trans kids from HS sports. Someone posted a comment that she should not be allowed to play because she has unfair advantage. Her reply was "my daughter has been on puberty blocker since age ten, and she is taking estrogen now."
The kid herself does not say anything about the hormone treatment, but the comment section of her Instagram is filled with posts by her supporters who express their frustration over "athletes like Lia Thomas."
So the "LGBTQ organizations" may not be as monolithic as you think.
If the groups like those that went bonkers when the Dodgers temporarily disinvited the sisters of perpetual indulgence, come out and say kids like Athena should not be able to compete according to their gender identity, then yes, that would be a major shift with outsize influence on CA decision makers. So far, it’s not happening. If anything, the out and out trans hate unleashed by these incidents, just strengthens the resolve and the alliance of LGB and T.
If everyone should be able to compete according to their "personal gender identity" and how they define themselves, rather than on the basis of their physical sex, then there's no point of having two separate categories for girls/women and boys/men at all.
After all, there are more than a hundred different "gender identities," and more are being invented on Tumblr and announced on TikTok every day. Similarly, there's no end to the varieties of the way that people can define themselves.
If soorts were no longer segregated by sex, then sports would go back to being an area of life in which the vast majority of opportunties to participate, make teams and compete go solely to males, and nearly all the chances to win events, gain glory, get scholarships, have careers and so on go solely to males too.
As to your claim that I am "the one who is try to set up male vs female sports as advantaged vs. disadvantaged" - that's hogwash.
I'm not responsible for creating, nor am I imagining, the myriad physical differences between human males and females that give one sex a clear advantage over the other in nearly all sports.
I'm also not imagining things when I point out that nearly all sports and types of sports competition were invented by men originally for the express purpose of giving boys and men a chance to try, hone and show off the particualar kinds of physical feats that human male bodies are naturally best at and most suited to performing.
We have two categories though. I see no reason to go to one. The current system works just as well when you have people competing according to their gender identities. A female 5:00 1600m runner is probably still going to be a 5:00 1600m runner. Maybe they finish a few spots back than they would have, but it’s not the earth-shattering result you’re making it out to be.
I’m not saying you are inventing the male advantage argument, but I am saying that you are framing your stance on transgender athletes on male physical advantages, and I think that’s a moot point.
Lastly, you honestly think that men invented the sport of running because men are better at running than women?
So to be clear the female competitors of these trans identifying males are actually not stoked to compete against the TiM's this weekend. They don't think it's fair. They think something should be done about it. They aren't old enough yet to become lightning rods, the way Riley has bravely chosen to do.
If you are grown, stand with Riley and speak up. Don't let this farce continues. It matters to women to girls to participants and fans of the sport.
That's one athlete's Mom. Let's not make it out to be the whole field. I'm not saying they are or aren't stoked but one Mom's comment shouldn't represent everyone in the meet.
In CA there will never be a ban unless a dramatic change occurs with the state’s politics,
The change would be driven by a Title IX lawsuit (Federal law) that affirms that when Title IX was signed into law, it intended to protect opportunities based on sex (not gender) and that relative to sports that means chromosomes.
I think it is fair to assume that in the early 1970s, lawmakers did not pass a law that said, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance,” to create a world in which XY humans beat up an XX humans in sports.
I also think it is fair to assume that today's Supreme Court would know this.
Clearly it is XX humans who are being denied the "benefits of" sports participation when XY humans are allowed into their competitions.
Do you have a link for this? Why didn’t it happen for the Connecticut sprinters or Lia Thomas? Will 2 transgender 1600m runners at the CIF state meet trigger a case that goes all the way to the Supreme Court? Who will be suing who?
So to be clear the female competitors of these trans identifying males are actually not stoked to compete against the TiM's this weekend. They don't think it's fair. They think something should be done about it. They aren't old enough yet to become lightning rods, the way Riley has bravely chosen to do.
If you are grown, stand with Riley and speak up. Don't let this farce continues. It matters to women to girls to participants and fans of the sport.
That's one athlete's Mom. Let's not make it out to be the whole field. I'm not saying they are or aren't stoked but one Mom's comment shouldn't represent everyone in the meet.
I’m not sure how many of you regularly interact with these young women HS athletes from CA, but I’d bet it’s more likely they would walk off the line in protest if Athena was banned than they would walk off in protest that she’s allowed to compete. I can’t prove it, but I think a lot of you would be surprised if you spoke to them privately, one on one with no fear of backlash one way or another. What’s for sure, there’s no uniformity of viewpoint across the field.
This post was edited 8 minutes after it was posted.
That's one athlete's Mom. Let's not make it out to be the whole field. I'm not saying they are or aren't stoked but one Mom's comment shouldn't represent everyone in the meet.
I’m not sure how many of you regularly interact with these young women HS athletes from CA, but I’d bet it’s more likely they would walk off the line in protest if Athena was banned then they would walk off in protest that she’s allowed to compete. I can’t prove it, but I think a lot of you would be surprised if you spoke to them privately, one on one with no fear of backlash one way or another. What’s for sure, there’s no uniformity of viewpoint across the field.
I coach one of them every day. She doesn't care. She is in the State meet and she is in the same race and she is there to compete against herself and her own times. She is not going to walk off in protest under any circumstances and give up what she has worked so hard for.
I’m not sure how many of you regularly interact with these young women HS athletes from CA, but I’d bet it’s more likely they would walk off the line in protest if Athena was banned then they would walk off in protest that she’s allowed to compete. I can’t prove it, but I think a lot of you would be surprised if you spoke to them privately, one on one with no fear of backlash one way or another. What’s for sure, there’s no uniformity of viewpoint across the field.
I coach one of them every day. She doesn't care. She is in the State meet and she is in the same race and she is there to compete against herself and her own times. She is not going to walk off in protest under any circumstances and give up what she has worked so hard for.
Yes, there’s a lot of outrage, but the athletes are not too outraged, are they? The LRC crowd then claims the athletes ARE outraged, but too scared to say. Is your athlete hiding her outrage? I got a lot of grief for mentioning my daughters earlier. Both run successfully in college. My younger daughter raced Athena all of the time, xc, Dublin Distance Fiesta, Class A meet, etc. She won occasionally, lost more often. Athena was faster and is slowing each year, btw. You know this I’m sure. It’s all in milesplit. Anyway, my daughter could not have cared less, and if pressed would say it’s no big deal and Athena should be allowed to compete as she wishes. Sounds like the athlete you coach has a similar point of view.
This is still a ridiculous topic no matter how smart you all are. It is educational in terms of collecting the opinions of those in charge and parents. A few key points.
Outside of science there is NO difference between gender and sex. Stop lying to yourselves. This is not a study where we need to categorize genomes and whatever other scientific terms people like to use to sound smart and smarter than others. Male and female, boys and girls, men and women. The human variances that come with being alive do not change the definition of these things.
We are talking about sports. There are boys competing against girls. Period. It is not fair. It is not about trans children, it is about the girls. Reading those of you more concerned about the fringe element over the well being of girls is mind blowing. Including the political mumbo jumbo from Governor Newsome. He has taken a spineless stance all in the name of votes, and some of you think he should be celebrated for it. It is evil.
It is fascinating to see the willingness of many to throw away our women, our girls in the name of boys that feel/believe/choose to be girls (pick whichever applies here). No matter how big your words, or how well stated your positions, it comes down to protecting our girls and their right to equal opportunities.
There is a lot of confusion here also. Trans issues are not singular. Semenya is a far cry from a boy who is on hormone blockers by choice. It is not the same topic nor issue we have to address. It is cruel and not fair to young ladies like Semenya.
The CIF quietly changed their rules to avoid public scrutiny and have thrown the onus on the kids, coaches and parents. They have changed the rules that force inclusion, and bans any opposition because it falls under bullying, that expands to the parents in the stands. So what we have is a stadium of whispers. A podium of children looking and acting uncomfortable, and another child left being awkward and isolated. This is the reality, and if you have ever been in the stadium when it goes down, you relate to this description. It is unfair, and careless on behalf of the adults in charge.
That's one athlete's Mom. Let's not make it out to be the whole field. I'm not saying they are or aren't stoked but one Mom's comment shouldn't represent everyone in the meet.
I’m not sure how many of you regularly interact with these young women HS athletes from CA, but I’d bet it’s more likely they would walk off the line in protest if Athena was banned than they would walk off in protest that she’s allowed to compete. I can’t prove it, but I think a lot of you would be surprised if you spoke to them privately, one on one with no fear of backlash one way or another. What’s for sure, there’s no uniformity of viewpoint across the field.
I, too, have met plenty of girls and young women who have been so shielded from male physical advantage and male aggression that they don't accurately understand sex differences or the danger presented by erasing females in law and culture. I know plenty of girls and women whose compassion and empathy are being harnessed to render them complicit in their own oppression. Emotional blackmail is incredibly effective," Do you really think your gold medal is more important than a trans girl's right to EXIST?" It's all so twisted and manipulative, like half the country has borderline personality disorder when it comes to sex/gender (and a handful of other things).
