Transgender Athlete - Who Isn't Undergoing Hormone Treatment - Wins Connecticut Girls’ 100m And 200m State Titles

Dhdjbd wrote:

a test for gender? wrote:

You are joking, right?

Not joking at all. There are areas of the brain that are different in men and women and heterosexuals and homosexuals: this is pretty well established. Neuroscientists who have studied the brains of transsexuals have also discovered that these regions of their brains more closely resemble that of the gender with which they identify than their gender of birth.

There was ONE study that thought that MAYBE there were brain similarities between transsexuals and the sex they identified as. Since then, there have been numerous other studies, carried out in the hopes of recreating the same results, and using more reliable testing methods, that were unable to prove anything.

This is not science that should even remotely be considered "well-established" at this point.

The great irony here is that SJWs (I'm not saying you, specifically) have long claimed that gender differences between men and women are 100% caused by the environment that boys and girls are raised in, respectively. Are boys testing better in math and science? Must be sexism! I guess male and female brains only exist when it's convenient to the left's narrative.

For the record, I certainly believe that there are differences between the brains of men and women, but the jury is still out on the brains of transsexuals.

Oh you "researched" have you? Did you set up a randomized double blind longitudinal study with a statistically significant cohort? No, you probably read some stuff on the internet. You claim that "transgenderism" is an inborn condition. What about those transgender people who decide to change back to their birth gender? Where they born again?

Whether or not "transgenderism" is inborn, the issue is the unfairness done to the biological females who are competing in the protected female division of the sport. This is an ethical issue. Inborn tendencies have nothing to do with it. Many could claim that pedophilia and various other predatory anti-social personality traits are also inborn. Are the actions of these people no longer wrong because "they were born that way"?

Try to use some critical thinking for a change. So that you can wrestle with the ethical issues actually at work here, and spend less time doing whatever it is that you refer to as "researching."

If you run in to this university professor at the zoo, making sweet, sweet love to one of the other hippos, don't refer to the act as "beastiality." To do so would dehumanize (how ironic) the courageous professor and show you to be an intolerant, transphobic, Hitler-loving, bigot.

So Stupid wrote:

You can't say you are a feminist if you are that reasonable. That's no different than what all us men think.

__________

Lots of feminists are reasonable. They just don't get as much attention as radical feminists, in part because people seek out examples to support their stereotypes.

Title 9, whether you like that or not was passed in a different decade. Like it or oppose it, either way, it' s being undermined because when it was being passed in the 70s, no one considered gender "fluidity" or any other variation we are hearing of now. When they said "women;s sports" back then 45 yr ago, they mean FEMALES. (Actual biological females, which was interchangeable with "women".) In no way should title 9 be expanded to include men who say they are girls because that wasn't the Title 9 intent when it was passed. Men being women would have been considered cheating when title 9 was made into policy, and anyone would have looked at you crazy if you told them "some day men are going to claim to be one of the girls."

This social justice stuff is threatening title 9. If you hate title 9 I guess youre pleased

Canuck Runner08 wrote:

It's different than the Semenya scenario because this athlete is both genotypically and phenotypically male whereas Semenya is an intersex athlete.

Ethically, it's the same dilemma.

I get it, I really do. She is not choosing to be female to compete and win against other women. Deep down she identifies as a woman and wants to be treated as one. That's her right and that right should be protected. A lot of these comments are sickening.

With that being said, protecting her right to compete as a woman infringes on the rights of women as whole to compete in a protected class of sport. There is no perfect solution, but I feel we need to protect that right and, as a result, athletes like Semenya and this freshman should not be able to compete with women.

He, the high school sprinter, is not a she.

Why such anger and hostility? First of all, I agree with you that she should not be competing in the girls division. That's how I started my post. I was simply calling out people on this thread who were going on angry bigoted rants against a 15 year old rather than discussing "the ethical issues" as you stated. I also never claimed that I was an expert on transgender related issues, I just stated that most people in the field of psychology and psychiatry do not believe transgenderism to be a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association not only supports non-discrimination against transgender individuals, but has helped create standards of care guidelines to assist in helping transgender individuals physically transition.http://www.apa.org/about/policy/chapter-12b.aspx#transgender

As far as your question of whether I have "set up a randomized double blind longitudinal study with a statistically significant cohort?" The answer is no, but I'm really proud of the fact that you know what a randomized double blind longitudinal study with a statistically significant cohort is. You must be really proud of how intelligent you are.

As far as research in the field of neuroscience is concerned, most studies do in fact show biological underpinnings to transsexual identity. Most of these studies have shown clear brain difference between transsexuals and those of their born sex in specific sexually differentiated regions of the brain.

Here is one such article titled "Transsexualism as an Intersex Condition"

Here is another such article titled "Identical Reared apart Twins Concordant for Transsexuality"

(14)00019-9/abstract

Here is another such article titled "White matter microstructure in female to male transsexuals before cross-sex hormonal treatment. A diffusion tensor imaging study " htttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395610001585

And here is a fourth titled "Sexual differentiation of the human brain: Relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders"

All of the studies that I have linked to were published after 2011 and the research presented supports the idea that transgenderism is inborn.

Wow, you can cut and past! Good job!

The subtext of my post was to think for yourself. I'm sorry if it came across as angry and hostile. While I was contradicting your statements, and using some sarcasm to do so. I'm not angry. I don't hate you. I'm just using sarcasm to make a polemic point.

You think there is a lot of anger and hatred posted on this message board, because you are incapable of seeing the basic "appeal to reality" arguments that people are making. Some post are unnecessarily insulting. You probably think mine are...but people are just making polemic arguments.

I don't give 2 cents about all the studies you pasted into your last post. They are all written from people with presuppositions and the inevitable agenda that goes along with them. Namely, materialistic reductionism. Make a valid argument to support your opinion. Appealing to the supposed authority of this or that study is completely worthless. For example, here is my argument...and I don't need to read more than the title of your pasted studies to make it; it doesn't matter if researchers find an anatomic difference in the brain of transgender people, I can find a much larger anatomic difference to the contrary...and I didn't even need and MRI machine to do it.

Look around...think for yourself.

Just a Coach wrote:

http://www.trbimg.com/img-58e682a2/turbine/hc-andraya-yearwood-20170406

This is "her". If you don't believe me, do your own search for Andraya Yearwood.

So does (s)he squat to pee or what?

That's the bottom line.

RachaelDoezol wrote:

So does (s)he squat to pee or what?

That's the bottom line.

The simple fact is, humans are not exclusively, 100%, sexually binary.

Deal with that while you are going home devastated.

bcvbvc wrote:

He, the high school sprinter, is not a she.

I am not transgender. Neither am I homosexual.

I can't know exactly how either feels. I don't know what it feels like to identify as a woman. I also don't know what it feels like to feel desire for a man.

Could transgender individuals be choosing to identify as the opposite gender for attention or some other form of secondary gain? Sure, I suppose anything is possible. It is also possible that homosexual men choose to have sex with other men because they think it looks cool. Again, anything is "possible", however unlikely. I haven't lived that experience so I can't say for sure.

However, it seems much more likely to me that transgender individuals truly identify and feel happier in a different skin. It doesn't hurt me at all to take that viewpoint and, more importantly, it doesn't hurt others and spread hate. Therefore, it seems like the better default opinion on the matter since transgender individuals are not infringing on the rights of others by identifying as a different gender.

Unfortunately, biological males competing in women's sport does infringe on the right of biological women to compete in a protected class of sport. There is no "win-win" solution here but it seems reasonable to have some regulations to protect the rights of women in this scenario.

celery wrote:

...I don't give 2 cents about all the studies you pasted into your last post. ...

Look around...think for yourself.

This idiocy is what is wrong with the religious right in the US--they spout this childish nonsense like this above.

Ignore science, believe what feels right to you, they chant, as they keep their blinders on and self-righteously ignore all studies and science.

"We have women's sports because biological females aren't on average nearly as strong/fast, etc as biological males. To allow someone who is biologically male to compete in women's sports simply because they identify as a woman is absurd"

It's absurd to be so willfully stupid about why "we have women's sports." In a long US history of gender and opportunity, gender and power, gender and participation, gender and earning potential, there are many reasons we have women's sports. In that long history, the push to include women in sports could be seen to have a tremendously positive effect on women's access to power, women's access to other programs associated with sports, women's participation in other public or physical activities previously denied them, women's ability to be seen as winners or achievers with earning potential equivalent to men's.

Including transgender athletes in sports is part of this history of sport. And while it offends your sense of what sport is, many of us weigh some eye-popping times in High School track against other very positive outcomes.

Idiot.

The solution is simple, bigots need to get an education. Perhaps one that allows them insight beyond their Ivy League myopia.

----------------------------------------

Tell your idiot partner about rude rhetoric. He wrote "This is a joke. Are people stupid?"

Calling a young person insane is something a bigot would do, not something a rude person would do.

The way this situation "speaks for itself" depends on a person's point of view. People who are afraid, angry, small-minded, territorial, stuck in a worldview from the 1950's, will see it as insanity.

"At the same time, the kid is a state champion so scrutiny is going to come with this."

How many other HS state champions are the banner quote on your front page?

dystopia wrote:

Tell your idiot partner about rude rhetoric. He wrote "This is a joke. Are people stupid?"

Calling a young person insane is something a bigot would do, not something a rude person would do.

The way this situation "speaks for itself" depends on a person's point of view. People who are afraid, angry, small-minded, territorial, stuck in a worldview from the 1950's, will see it as insanity.

"At the same time, the kid is a state champion so scrutiny is going to come with this."

How many other HS state champions are the banner quote on your front page?

Would you feel comfortable if I claimed to be female and went into the girl's locker room and watch your daughter strip naked? Because this is exactly what is happening here. The boy is just faking everything because he is not good enough to compete.

Bigot.

someotherunner wrote:

celery wrote:

...I don't give 2 cents about all the studies you pasted into your last post. ...

Look around...think for yourself.

This idiocy is what is wrong with the religious right in the US--they spout this childish nonsense like this above.

Ignore science, believe what feels right to you, they chant, as they keep their blinders on and self-righteously ignore all studies and science.

I don't care about wasting my time reading the studies because their titles state their conclusions. Namely, brains of different people are different. Wow! ground breaking! We are talking about ethical and social issues here. Brain anatomy does not inform the conversation. Those who think it does have fallen subject to the false supposition of materialistic reductionism.

The studies at their core are about anatomy, are they not? And yet we are told that when it comes to gender identity, we are supposed to ignore anatomy. Which is it? What reality are we supposed to accept as truth? The reality of the physical, or the reality of the ethical/social/rational thinking people that we all are.? If you think science is anywhere near bridging the gap between the physical and the personal (or if such a gap can even be bridged), you are hopelessly ignorant of the details of both the physical universal, and the personal rational reality in which we all abide.

"How am I shaming her? Why isn't she proud of her picture being in the paper announcing her accomplishment? Most kids are dying for an article to be written about them and I've had a number of distance runners tell me it was a real honor to get first noticed by LRC when the young."

You are shaming her because you know that your site facilitates insults, racist dog-whistles, and, often, misogynistic rants, and you are pushing this story on the front page of the site.

You also tagged the story as:

1) absurd; and

2) insanity

Do you think most kids are "dying for an article" like that?

Why hide behind some weird (and comically undeserved) veil of journalistic public service? Just write about how much this story makes you uncomfortable in a feature article. Or issue a heartfelt retraction along the lines of "boy, I have some issues and I think I had better work them out before posting stuff like this"?

I think you should be more honest about your motives.

Bull crap. This boy is a boy and a scammer. He has no right winning girl races. Get your SJW mind out of the sewer and smell the sewage.

someotherunner wrote:

celery wrote:

...I don't give 2 cents about all the studies you pasted into your last post. ...

Look around...think for yourself.

This idiocy is what is wrong with the religious right in the US--they spout this childish nonsense like this above.

Ignore science, believe what feels right to you, they chant, as they keep their blinders on and self-righteously ignore all studies and science.

You've got it completely backwards.

While I'll admit that social conservatives are pretty stupid for their denial of evolution, the left denies biology at its most basic - namely that if you believe that you are something, then you truly are and anyone who says otherwise is a bigot.

It's tough to beat that level of stupidity, and it's one of the reasons why former liberals, such as myself, Dave Rubin, Tim Poole.. etc, who stand behind free speech and science over feelings, are switching over to the conservative side.

Even if transgenderism proves to be brain-related... so what!? Believing that you are something when the facts say otherwise is a very clear sign of mental illness. Transgenderism is not the norm and it causes the person emotional suffering. These two conditions together should meet the criteria for mental illness. I reserve sympathy for those who are afflicted with transgenderism, but the current culture of treating sufferers as heroic and inspirational is just bat-sh*t crazy. We don't treat those who identify as amputees as inspiring when they wish to have their limbs amputated, so why would we treat transgenders as such when they want to have the perfectly healthy genitals that they were born with removed?