Gender Studies I

[MissThundercat]

Also, I hear "unfair advantage." Can you provide examples of trans women consistently outperforming cis athletes in competition? Can you provide examples of trans women consistently injuring cis women in competition?

 

[LynahFan]

Score one for the good guys and gals:

https://dailymontanan.com/2023/06/2...lds-state-in-contempt-liable-for-entire-suit/

Suck it, derps.

 

[RaceBoarder]

I'm going to have to assume the financial aspect of all of this isn't your main concern. Personally, I'd say anything provided by MissT trumps financial concerns.

No. But it's the door that is opened. Why have women's sports at all? Women can compete with the men, but men can't compete against women. Why is a one-way street permitted here? As UNO pointed out, Women's and/or Age divisions are designed to keep level playing fields. If you want to delete one, why keep the others?

Also, I hear "unfair advantage." Can you provide examples of trans women consistently outperforming cis athletes in competition? Can you provide examples of trans women consistently injuring cis women in competition?

Sure.

Female times/distances at the high school level are 10-20% slower/shorter than their male counterparts. Are you flat out ignoring the biological differences of a 15-18 year old person who hasn't undergone any HRT or a transition process that is required at the NCAA/Olympic level?

And just because YOU weren't an elite athlete doesn't mean that your personal experience can be applied to people who are elite athletes.

And just to acknowledge you, no, there aren't 100's of examples. But it's a likely scenario if an athletic person who is biologically male accepts themselves as a woman during their HS years.

 

[psych]

No. But it's the door that is opened. Why have women's sports at all? Women can compete with the men, but men can't compete against women. Why is a one-way street permitted here? As UNO pointed out, Women's and/or Age divisions are designed to keep level playing fields. If you want to delete one, why keep the others?



Sure.

Female times/distances at the high school level are 10-20% slower/shorter than their male counterparts. Are you flat out ignoring the biological differences of a 15-18 year old person who hasn't undergone any HRT or a transition process that is required at the NCAA/Olympic level?

And just because YOU weren't an elite athlete doesn't mean that your personal experience can be applied to people who are elite athletes.

And just to acknowledge you, no, there aren't 100's of examples. But it's a likely scenario if an athletic person who is biologically male accepts themselves as a woman during their HS years.

I guess I see the insidious, persistent emotional distress on what I can only guess is a daily basis for trans individuals as trumping potentially billions of dollars of savings for schools nationwide. “Thanks to you, and you alone in this school, Julie, we eliminated women’s sports and saved $300,000!” “Now, I know you didn’t want that to happen, for a bevy of reasons, but more importantly than everything you’re about to say, is that the school saved $300,000!”
Safety is the best argument I’ve seen, and even that seems flimsy to me, especially due to the rarity of this particular safety argument being an issue in the real-world. Crude math: 26.2 million kids 12-17 living in the U.S. (high-school age)/330,000,000 U.S. population = 7.94% population high-school aged x 1.4 million (self-identified) trans people living in the U.S. = 111,511.51 high-school trans children. We’ll make up the person’s mind and make it 111,512/20,469 public/private high-schools = 5.4 trans kids per school. Out of the average of 1,280 kids in a high school, 5 trans kids are among them. Chances they are all trans female and all play sports, especially ones that involve safety, like hockey, boxing, or rugby? Seems like we’re trying to legislate something that is likely as rare as voter fraud.

 

[Swansong]

Can we, at least in here, step back a moment and not assume bad faith when posters that we know and generally respect ask questions?

Ericredaxe and raceboarder aren't frothing anti trans assholes. Yes, they are asking the same questions that said frothing assholes are asking. But can we just, in here at least, not assume bad faith? I definitely get MissT's agitation when she's likely bombarded by said frothing assholes, but something about safe spaces here?

Also, Ericredaxe and RB - like I said a few pages ago - you (and I, and all of us) need to understand why people like MissT respond rather negatively to these questions.


Let's discuss. Without snark. Without bad faith.

 

[Kepler]

Personally, I am not assuming bad faith. But this issue has been out there long enough they are responsible for the fact that the language they use is also used by cynical phobes who want to sea lion and take the p-ss out of both activists and victims.

There is no neutral position in a situation where people are being grievously harmed, and affecting one signals you are either clueless or up to no good.

 

[psych]

Can we, at least in here, step back a moment and not assume bad faith when posters that we know and generally respect ask questions?

Ericredaxe and raceboarder aren't frothing anti trans *******s. Yes, they are asking the same questions that said frothing *******s are asking. But can we just, in here at least, not assume bad faith? I definitely get MissT's agitation when she's likely bombarded by said frothing *******s, but something about safe spaces here?

Also, Ericredaxe and RB - like I said a few pages ago - you (and I, and all of us) need to understand why people like MissT respond rather negatively to these questions.


Let's discuss. Without snark. Without bad faith.

Plenty of stuff I post here that people disagree with, and vice versa. I don’t think unofan or Raceboarder are terrible people- hell, maybe they are, but this is a message board, and I simply don’t care either way. I just disagree with them on this particular topic.

 

[unofan]

ETA: put another way, everyone is entitled to participate in voting, but nobody is entitled to have their candidate win. I know you’re a good dude, but this is analogous to what southern Dems were worried about in the 1870’s, “But….if you let black people participate in the vote, my preferred candidates have a lower chance of winning!” Yep, they sure do - and the problem is…..what, exactly?

Except the better analogy to voting is "we created this majority-minority district to ensure that particular minority gets representation, but now we're modifying it in a way that negatively affects them and could eventually remove their ability to be represented again. Sorry."

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Yep... That's totally what happened there Kep.

You're over 50 so you must be Senior 'Splainin then since it's an issue with HS sports...

Nah, old men telling preteen girls that their feelings/thoughts don’t matter, they can be inconvenienced and no one cares is a great way to have rational conversation! Women get shit on all the time, it’s nothing new. But I’d kill to see what happens if men’s or boys sports dare be inconvenienced.

 

[unofan]

You acknowledged (correctly, so far as I can tell) that nobody is transitioning for competitive reasons, but now you use a LeBron hypothetical to argue for actual exclusion of sincerely transitioned athletes? I don’t see how that adds up.

When it comes to safety, that should be up to the individual athletes to decide - you have to sign a waiver for every sports league, from the NFL down to preschool hopscotch. If you look across the mat and feel that you do not have the physical skills to safely compete against a particular opponent in a particular sport, then you should forfeit that match and live to fight another day.

We're taking hypothetical here, and you brought up the 6'6" basketball player earlier, but whatever. Then let's go back to Caitlin Jenner. Say she transitions 50 years ago, and we'll set aside that track actually has testosterone standards for female athletes such that even a handful of cis-women aren't allowed to compete. Would it have been fair to let her compete in the heptathlon in her prime prior to any HRT or other medical steps along the way?

 

[psych]

Except the better analogy to voting is "we created this majority-minority district to ensure that particular minority gets representation, but now we're modifying it in a way that negatively affects them and could eventually remove their ability to be represented again. Sorry."

So, you’re saying that trans females aren’t actually female, and therefore they don’t viably represent females everywhere if they win?
Again, how often is this happening, this being trans women competing in women’s sports that makes it inherently more dangerous for the females at birth competition? And is it worth legislating such a minuscule issue? Lia Thomas and Caitlyn Jenner are the only examples I ever see used in these conversations. No doubt there are more, but the fact we remember Lia and Caitlyn is because they’re rare stories, not the norm.

 

[unofan]

Also, I hear "unfair advantage." Can you provide examples of trans women consistently outperforming cis athletes in competition? Can you provide examples of trans women consistently injuring cis women in competition?

Since you used to run marathons before you got injured and before your transition, just go look at some of your old times and where you placed and then compare that to where that same time would've put you in the women's division in the same race. Even if you wouldn't win, bet you jump up about 10% in the standings. Might've even meant you had a Boston qualifier time.

 

[MissThundercat]

I did some research of my own today to see if I could develop a better understanding of this issue.

The estimated percentage of trans athletes nationwide is 0.44. That's 0.0044.

Parents in Connecticut confessed they didn't care about the trans athletes who weren't winning, just the ones who were (Miller and Yearwood).

The state lawmakers who sponsored acts such as "Save Women's Sports" could only cite Connecticut for a reason why, could not establish a pattern of dominance in their state, could not estimate how many trans athletes were in their state, or simply echoed statements written by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is classified as an anti-LGBTQ hate group. The ADF is responsible for several pieces of anti-trans pieces of legislation and has helped spread "trans panic."

When trans HS student athletes compose ~0.0044 of the student athlete population, blanket bans and restrictions aren't really necessary and look like a "solution in search of a problem." I feel the same way about increased restrictions and testing on trans athletes at the NCAA and Olympic levels, which also make up a microscopic portion of those athletes.

I also don't believe in setting any policies based on "what if," only "what is." Without an established clear pattern of dominance in competition by trans athletes, policies set on restricting them from playing is basically hiding behind a wall from an enemy that doesn't really exist.

And while I don't believe RB, uno, or Eric are bad people, I simply disagree with their opinions.

 

[unofan]

So, you’re saying that trans females aren’t actually female, and therefore they don’t viably represent females everywhere if they win?

I'm saying trans females who are pre-HRT have all the physical advantages of men and asking cis-women to be thrilled that they may now have to compete against them is myopic. Especially when they're in a division that has historically excluded athletes with y chromosomes (or perhaps more specifically, the testosterone that comes with that chromosome) out of competitive fairness.

Again, how often is this happening, this being trans women competing in women’s sports that makes it inherently more dangerous for the females at birth competition? And is it worth legislating such a minuscule issue?

Rarely, and no, though I'm not the right person to ask since it will never directly affect me as a male. But since we're talking about it, I'm giving my opinion.

 

[MissThundercat]

Since you used to run marathons before you got injured and before your transition, just go look at some of your old times and where you placed and then compare that to where that same time would've put you in the women's division in the same race. Even if you wouldn't win, bet you jump up about 10% in the standings. Might've even meant you had a Boston qualifier time.

Personal best: 4:46:28.

Not a BQ. That would be a BQ if I was age 70-74, or an 80 year old man.

Marathons are like mullets: business up front, party in the back. While transitioning would have moved me slightly up in the back, it still would be the back.

 

[dxmnkd316]

So, you’re saying that trans females aren’t actually female, and therefore they don’t viably represent females everywhere if they win?
Again, how often is this happening, this being trans women competing in women’s sports that makes it inherently more dangerous for the females at birth competition? And is it worth legislating such a minuscule issue? Lia Thomas and Caitlyn Jenner are the only examples I ever see used in these conversations. No doubt there are more, but the fact we remember Lia and Caitlyn is because they’re rare stories, not the norm.

They're rare because they're elite athletes and trans. That's lightning striking twice simultaneously from two different storms. I don't think rarity is the issue here.

The one example that keeps coming back for me is Oscar pistorius. I don't think he should have been able to compete at the Olympics. Full stop. He may not have won or come close, but at some point the mechanics become too advantageous. What then? In both cases we're talking about elite athletes who had something about their bodies changed.

I still think it should be up to every sport to self-govern, not legislatures. The governing bodies understand their sports beat and if they decide there is a compelling reason to not allow trans women to compete in the women's leagues, I guess I'm not going to raise a stink. For the most part. There will always be sports run by chuds and I say, there are plenty of other sports more welcoming.

For amateurs, I say it's 100% a safety issue that can be decided case-by-case. There have been instances where kids are too big to play at certain levels and I have no problem having those kids move up a class in a sort of modified way similar to wrestling.

 

[dxmnkd316]

I did some research of my own today to see if I could develop a better understanding of this issue.

The estimated percentage of trans athletes nationwide is 0.44. That's 0.0044.

Parents in Connecticut confessed they didn't care about the trans athletes who weren't winning, just the ones who were (Miller and Yearwood).

The state lawmakers who sponsored acts such as "Save Women's Sports" could only cite Connecticut for a reason why, could not establish a pattern of dominance in their state, could not estimate how many trans athletes were in their state, or simply echoed statements written by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is classified as an anti-LGBTQ hate group. The ADF is responsible for several pieces of anti-trans pieces of legislation and has helped spread "trans panic."

When trans HS student athletes compose ~0.0044 of the student athlete population, blanket bans and restrictions aren't really necessary and look like a "solution in search of a problem." I feel the same way about increased restrictions and testing on trans athletes at the NCAA and Olympic levels, which also make up a microscopic portion of those athletes.

I also don't believe in setting any policies based on "what if," only "what is." Without an established clear pattern of dominance in competition by trans athletes, policies set on restricting them from playing is basically hiding behind a wall from an enemy that doesn't really exist.

And while I don't believe RB, uno, or Eric are bad people, I simply disagree with their opinions.

I don't find the rarity argument compelling. If a million people run in a race, the winner is a single person. Rarity is the entire foundation of competitive sport.

For amateurs, whatever. Every now and then our soccer team gets crushed by like eight goals (or worse) in our 35+ league. These teams usually have D1 caliber women playing and guys who are all like 35.0001 years old compared to our team average of around 42-45. We suck it up, act like adults, and realize it ain't the World Cup.

Women in our league are allowed to play as young as 30 as long as they didn't actually play D1. If a 32yo trans woman wanted to play in the league, I think the vast vast vast vast majority of the players would be fine with it and drown out the knuckledraggers.

So my point is that league classification matters. Amateurs can suck it up while anything above that can decide for themselves.

 

[unofan]

For amateurs, whatever. Every now and then our soccer team gets crushed by like eight goals (or worse) in our 35+ league. These teams usually have D1 caliber women playing and guys who are all like 35.0001 years old compared to our team average of around 42-45. We suck it up, act like adults, and realize it ain't the World Cup.

But you still grumble about it in the locker room afterward over beer, and you wonder how the league commissioner's team always winds up with the new young gun in the league every year...

Plus there is the rare ringer that everyone else agrees does need to be booted, especially if he's sandbagging and playing three levels too low. Because that will lead to issues either on or off the field. Think that's happened about 2 or 3 times in the 20 years I've been playing in beer leagues.

 

[dxmnkd316]

But you still grumble about it in the locker room afterward over beer, and you wonder how the league commissioner's team always winds up with the new young gun in the league every year...

Plus there is the rare ringer that everyone else agrees does need to be booted, especially if he's sandbagging and playing three levels too low. Because that will lead to issues either on or off the field. Think that's happened about 2 or 3 times in the 20 years I've been playing in beer leagues.

That's probably a fair assessment. I once played against a guy who was invited to try out for a couple MLS teams while he was in our league*. Even him playing at 25% was... insane. I didn't try to make saves against him, I tried to survive.

Anyways. Yeah, there has been or or two of them in our 35+ league and we gripe. But at the end of the day when the beer can is empty, we pretty much just roll our eyes and wonder what he gets out of shooting fish in a barrel.


* this was an open co-rec indoor league, not the 35+ corec.

 

[psych]

I don't find the rarity argument compelling. If a million people run in a race, the winner is a single person. Rarity is the entire foundation of competitive sport.

For amateurs, whatever. Every now and then our soccer team gets crushed by like eight goals (or worse) in our 35+ league. These teams usually have D1 caliber women playing and guys who are all like 35.0001 years old compared to our team average of around 42-45. We suck it up, act like adults, and realize it ain't the World Cup.

Women in our league are allowed to play as young as 30 as long as they didn't actually play D1. If a 32yo trans woman wanted to play in the league, I think the vast vast vast vast majority of the players would be fine with it and drown out the knuckledraggers.

So my point is that league classification matters. Amateurs can suck it up while anything above that can decide for themselves.

In your hypothetical scenario of 1,000,000 racers, only 2,121 of them would be trans females. My crude math yesterday placed around five trans students in each U.S. high school, both public and private. My entire point was that this event (trans females beating cis females in sports) almost never happens, because trans females are rare, trans female athletes are rarer, and elite trans female athletes are the rarest. It's something that shouldn't even be noticed as it so rarely occurs, along the same lines of trans females pretending to be female so they can enter public restrooms and prey on cis females. As rare as voter fraud, IMO. I have to say I haven't seen a single post about trans males and their competitive edge/safety concerns against cis males. It makes me think most of the disagreement lies in the competitiveness factor, more so than the safety factor, of trans athletes competing in sports.
That all said, my main argument is that trans people have gone through enough in life, why put up another exclusionary barrier? They attempt suicide at astronomical rates compared to the rest of us, due in no small part to the ridiculous amount of stress they experience on a daily basis. The competitiveness/safety factors are far outweighed by the inclusion and acceptance of one of the most marginalized groups in our country.