Keeping Men out of Women's Sports

brianlux said:

lastexitlondon said:

Kids should be nowhere near this. 
The internet is solely to blame. Before we had that this wasn't an issue. 
It annoys me as a parent. Be what you want but don't start pushing it on kids. 

When I was a toddler, I had a doll.  My parents later told me I wanted a doll, so they gave me a doll.  You know, your basic everyday 1950s girl doll.  They didn't assume I wanted to be a girl instead of a boy, or consider that I should be gender neutral (I'm not even sure what that is, but it has to be mighty rare, right?), or worried that I would grow up to be gay, or gave it any thought along those lines at all.  I was a little boy with a doll.  BFD!  Did it mean anything?  No!  Did I turn out trans, gay, straight, bi, tri (try anything)?  Irrelevant!  I am what I am because my parents didn't make a big deal about this stuff when I was a kid.  I got to be a kid.  A child.  Lucky me!  Why, at that age, would anyone waste time thinking about anything beyond that as being relevant (unless it was something obvious like being a hermaphrodite- not a bad thing, but not common)?  It's not relevant to a child.  Just let kids be kids and then later, lots later, let them grow up to be what they are supposed to be.  And then accept that and love them.

OnWis97 said:

curmudgeoness said:

mickeyrat said:

some sports differ from others. i e. physicality vs skill etc. whats considered a contact sport vs non. Soccer IS a contact sport.

I think its a different question as it relates to school age kids competing vs young adult/adult. as well as prepubescent vs pubescent  age groups. 

not having kids I dont have skin in the game as it were. but I wonder if hormone level testing is appropriate/needed?

That happens in running -- the highest-profile case being that of Caster Semenya. Semenya is not trans, rather she is intersex, with typical male testosterone levels. From Wikipedia: <<In 2019, new World Athletics rules came into force preventing athletes like Semenya with certain disorders of sex development (DSDs) from participating in 400m, 800m, and 1500m events in the female classification, unless they take medication to suppress their testosterone levels.>> Sex-based differences give males the greatest advantage at shorter distances, hence the ban on Semenya and several other 800M runners.

Nikki Hiltz is a non-binary runner who will represent the US at the Olympics -- but Hiltz is biologically female, competing in women's events.

I believe that trans people should be accorded the same dignity and respect as everyone else, and they should be able to live their lives free of harassment. But nobody has a right to participate in high-level sports or go to the Olympics. Does it suck to want to compete in, say, D1 swimming while living your authentic life as a trans woman and be told you can't swim on the women's team? I'm sure it does, and I'm sympathetic to those feelings of frustration and disappointment. It also sucked when my child with special needs had few options for group activities because nobody wanted to deal with their issues.

I wonder, if we attempt to reinforce the concepts of sex vs. gender, would that help? Biological sex refers to the set of chromosomes you were born with -- XX, XY, or in some cases (such as Caster Semenya), XYY or XO. Gender is a social construct: Are you a man or a woman? Neither? Both? Unsure? You can exercise choice as to how you live your life and how you identify; transitioning to a gender that does not correspond to your biological sex doesn't change your chromosomal makeup.

So, if we referred to "males' swimming" and "females' swimming," would that help a little? Maybe?

A lot interesting points here. One of them is "sex vs. gender." I feel like it's kind of an unfortunate quirk of the English language that sex refers both to male/female and intercourse. People don't like to use the word (adults become six-year-olds scared to use a "dirty" word...) so they use "gender" in its place. "Gender reveals" should be "Sex reveals." It leads to inaccurate use of "gender" and does cause some confusion.

I hate this issue because it's often used as the gateway to all things anti-trans.  (General talk about the issues and then..."what about sports.") I also want everyone to be able to compete and we're not going to have a TransNBA alongside the WNBA and NBA. And we're not going to have a third gender sex in the Olympics. And while most people, regardless sex / gender, will never be able to compete at such high levels, youth and school sports are prevalent in the lives of most young people. And it's not fair in many sports for a genetic male to compete with genetic females. Sure, sometimes I miss the days when we'd say "life isn't always fair" but now we're talking about potential safety concerns, as well. So I begrudgingly understand the angle on this one. That all said, I hate the argumentative doors this opens and I fear a future where participants in girls sports have to be examined by the Dr. Nassers of the world to be "certified female."

curmudgeoness said:

I think it also would help to inject facts into the conversation. I'm currently a registered voter in a deep red state (we move a lot), where a big fuss is being made about trans athletes participating in school sports, instituting bathroom bans in government buildings, etc. If I recall correctly, someone looked into how many students would be affected by the ban on transgender athletes' participation in girls' school sports, and the answer was: four. A big to-do was being made about keeping "our girls" safe from the "trans threat," and this epidemic of wokeness actually consisted of four young trans people.

The rights of those four young people matter! But they don't constitute a threat or a wave or a trend. They are four people. There must be more humane ways to address the issue.

With regard to the "Larry Nasser" comment, I hear you, and, ick. I've heard some local noises about local crackpot politicians wanting gender (sex) confirmation to be part of the physical examinations required for participation in school sports.

That idea really doesn't sit well with me, at all. I am aware that elite athletes surrender a certain amount of bodily privacy when they reach a certain level (among the people first to approach a marathon winner at the finish line is the "chaperone" who will stay with them until they have produced a urine specimen under the chaperone's supervision; elite runners also can be randomly tested, which means that an official might show up at your door at any time with a sample bottle in hand). That's a crazy thing to do in youth club sports.

I suppose "please create thoughtful, common-sense rules that protect the rights and well-being of all people involved" is a big ask of our current political leaders, but it would be nice if they tried.

lastexitlondon said:

Kids should be nowhere near this. 
The internet is solely to blame. Before we had that this wasn't an issue. 
It annoys me as a parent. Be what you want but don't start pushing it on kids. 

curmudgeoness said:

I think it also would help to inject facts into the conversation. I'm currently a registered voter in a deep red state (we move a lot), where a big fuss is being made about trans athletes participating in school sports, instituting bathroom bans in government buildings, etc. If I recall correctly, someone looked into how many students would be affected by the ban on transgender athletes' participation in girls' school sports, and the answer was: four. A big to-do was being made about keeping "our girls" safe from the "trans threat," and this epidemic of wokeness actually consisted of four young trans people.

The rights of those four young people matter! But they don't constitute a threat or a wave or a trend. They are four people. There must be more humane ways to address the issue.

With regard to the "Larry Nasser" comment, I hear you, and, ick. I've heard some local noises about local crackpot politicians wanting gender (sex) confirmation to be part of the physical examinations required for participation in school sports.

That idea really doesn't sit well with me, at all. I am aware that elite athletes surrender a certain amount of bodily privacy when they reach a certain level (among the people first to approach a marathon winner at the finish line is the "chaperone" who will stay with them until they have produced a urine specimen under the chaperone's supervision; elite runners also can be randomly tested, which means that an official might show up at your door at any time with a sample bottle in hand). That's a crazy thing to do in youth club sports.

I suppose "please create thoughtful, common-sense rules that protect the rights and well-being of all people involved" is a big ask of our current political leaders, but it would be nice if they tried.

pjl44 said:

Parksy said:

lastexitlondon said:

Kids should be nowhere near this. 
The internet is solely to blame. Before we had that this wasn't an issue. 
It annoys me as a parent. Be what you want but don't start pushing it on kids. 

I actually disagree with this.. with respect. And this is just solely opinion.

I think information is very important for fostering any kind of understanding.  

I personally want my kid to understand the difference between sex and gender. I want her to know all of the facts on a scientific level. I want her to know the stats... I want her to know how and why trans people are amongst us as opposed to either her being ignorant to it or even worse being afraid of it. At what age should she be subjected to this.... . fantastic question... that I would generally leave to those who specialize in educating. 

That said... when it comes to the 'pushing it on kids' I do want politics out of the schools which seems easier said than done. I've seen zero evidence that this is being pushed on kids here in Canada at least... but kids having an understanding of why and how people are different to me is important so she will be accepting and understanding as opposed to fearful and hating. 

I think you hit on the crucial point where this is a topic best left to parents on how/if they want to educate their kids. Schools I see as a reactive approach - correction whenever you have kids making fun of someone, using slurs, etc. No tolerance for intolerance but also not part of the proactive curriculum.

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

curmudgeoness said:

I think it also would help to inject facts into the conversation. I'm currently a registered voter in a deep red state (we move a lot), where a big fuss is being made about trans athletes participating in school sports, instituting bathroom bans in government buildings, etc. If I recall correctly, someone looked into how many students would be affected by the ban on transgender athletes' participation in girls' school sports, and the answer was: four. A big to-do was being made about keeping "our girls" safe from the "trans threat," and this epidemic of wokeness actually consisted of four young trans people.

The rights of those four young people matter! But they don't constitute a threat or a wave or a trend. They are four people. There must be more humane ways to address the issue.

With regard to the "Larry Nasser" comment, I hear you, and, ick. I've heard some local noises about local crackpot politicians wanting gender (sex) confirmation to be part of the physical examinations required for participation in school sports.

That idea really doesn't sit well with me, at all. I am aware that elite athletes surrender a certain amount of bodily privacy when they reach a certain level (among the people first to approach a marathon winner at the finish line is the "chaperone" who will stay with them until they have produced a urine specimen under the chaperone's supervision; elite runners also can be randomly tested, which means that an official might show up at your door at any time with a sample bottle in hand). That's a crazy thing to do in youth club sports.

I suppose "please create thoughtful, common-sense rules that protect the rights and well-being of all people involved" is a big ask of our current political leaders, but it would be nice if they tried.

I mentioned this a few months ago about political ads here in Indiana. One guy even had a picture of a male to female trans athlete in their ad which seemed extremely inappropriate to me because this person isn't even from Indiana.

It's the same bullshit they did with the migrant caravans a few years back. They create these fake things to be outraged about to get the stupidest members of their base out to the polls.

Or you know, you could address it and not let it get to a position that can be exploited by others....it's not a fake issue.  It is a limited issue for sure, but it's not fake.  And it matters to a lot of people.  It's no different than taking PED if you aren't going to care about testosterone levels, etc.

So just stop the nonsense, then the idiots have nothing to shout from the rooftops that is low hanging fruit.

OnWis97 said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

curmudgeoness said:

I think it also would help to inject facts into the conversation. I'm currently a registered voter in a deep red state (we move a lot), where a big fuss is being made about trans athletes participating in school sports, instituting bathroom bans in government buildings, etc. If I recall correctly, someone looked into how many students would be affected by the ban on transgender athletes' participation in girls' school sports, and the answer was: four. A big to-do was being made about keeping "our girls" safe from the "trans threat," and this epidemic of wokeness actually consisted of four young trans people.

The rights of those four young people matter! But they don't constitute a threat or a wave or a trend. They are four people. There must be more humane ways to address the issue.

With regard to the "Larry Nasser" comment, I hear you, and, ick. I've heard some local noises about local crackpot politicians wanting gender (sex) confirmation to be part of the physical examinations required for participation in school sports.

That idea really doesn't sit well with me, at all. I am aware that elite athletes surrender a certain amount of bodily privacy when they reach a certain level (among the people first to approach a marathon winner at the finish line is the "chaperone" who will stay with them until they have produced a urine specimen under the chaperone's supervision; elite runners also can be randomly tested, which means that an official might show up at your door at any time with a sample bottle in hand). That's a crazy thing to do in youth club sports.

I suppose "please create thoughtful, common-sense rules that protect the rights and well-being of all people involved" is a big ask of our current political leaders, but it would be nice if they tried.

I mentioned this a few months ago about political ads here in Indiana. One guy even had a picture of a male to female trans athlete in their ad which seemed extremely inappropriate to me because this person isn't even from Indiana.

It's the same bullshit they did with the migrant caravans a few years back. They create these fake things to be outraged about to get the stupidest members of their base out to the polls.

Or you know, you could address it and not let it get to a position that can be exploited by others....it's not a fake issue.  It is a limited issue for sure, but it's not fake.  And it matters to a lot of people.  It's no different than taking PED if you aren't going to care about testosterone levels, etc.

So just stop the nonsense, then the idiots have nothing to shout from the rooftops that is low hanging fruit.

It's fake to suggest that it is a big issue that affects very many people. A delicate issue for sure...but so rare it shouldn't be featured in political ads.

It's working, politically...at least that's my admittedly anecdotal observation. It's really easy to take an anecdote that may or may not even be true (Parents and doctors mutating a ten-year-old girl because of "tomboy" behavior) and make people think it's a trend. Again, anecdotal but I've seen people claim to want universal healthcare but say they won't vote for Democrats because they think Dems will lead to "child mutilation."  It's bonkers.

Sports injects a relatable but ultimately confusing element to everything. As you say, it's probably not happening in big numbers. Either way, telling someone in high school that they're not eligible to participate in extracurricular activities reminds of some really ugly times; however, there are legitimate competitive concerns. Ultimately most people have those concerns and agree with bans. It's a really easy way not only to push people down the full anti-trans path...and maybe even the whole "anti-woke" path. Riley Gaines has become a conservative hero because she lost a college swim race to a trans competitor. I agree that it wasn't fair but I really do miss the pre-victim right's calls of "life's not always fair" and "get over it."

I'm wondering whether the "save women's sports" crowd will ultimately destroy it. There was the period of time where Katie Ledecky was being accused of being trans. It was totally baseless but, hey, I guess she's not conventionally attractive or something. The fervor around this issue has so many people thinking it's commonplace. My guess is most girls can go through four years of high school playing three sports and never run across a competitor born male. Does that mean such things should not be addressed? No. But we're also not about to be swept up by a pink and blue woke wave that will ban Christianity, hard work, conservative clothing, and pledging allegiance. 

Gern Blansten said:

OnWis97 said:

Gern Blansten said:

cincybearcat said:

Gern Blansten said:

curmudgeoness said:

I think it also would help to inject facts into the conversation. I'm currently a registered voter in a deep red state (we move a lot), where a big fuss is being made about trans athletes participating in school sports, instituting bathroom bans in government buildings, etc. If I recall correctly, someone looked into how many students would be affected by the ban on transgender athletes' participation in girls' school sports, and the answer was: four. A big to-do was being made about keeping "our girls" safe from the "trans threat," and this epidemic of wokeness actually consisted of four young trans people.

The rights of those four young people matter! But they don't constitute a threat or a wave or a trend. They are four people. There must be more humane ways to address the issue.

With regard to the "Larry Nasser" comment, I hear you, and, ick. I've heard some local noises about local crackpot politicians wanting gender (sex) confirmation to be part of the physical examinations required for participation in school sports.

That idea really doesn't sit well with me, at all. I am aware that elite athletes surrender a certain amount of bodily privacy when they reach a certain level (among the people first to approach a marathon winner at the finish line is the "chaperone" who will stay with them until they have produced a urine specimen under the chaperone's supervision; elite runners also can be randomly tested, which means that an official might show up at your door at any time with a sample bottle in hand). That's a crazy thing to do in youth club sports.

I suppose "please create thoughtful, common-sense rules that protect the rights and well-being of all people involved" is a big ask of our current political leaders, but it would be nice if they tried.

I mentioned this a few months ago about political ads here in Indiana. One guy even had a picture of a male to female trans athlete in their ad which seemed extremely inappropriate to me because this person isn't even from Indiana.

It's the same bullshit they did with the migrant caravans a few years back. They create these fake things to be outraged about to get the stupidest members of their base out to the polls.

Or you know, you could address it and not let it get to a position that can be exploited by others....it's not a fake issue.  It is a limited issue for sure, but it's not fake.  And it matters to a lot of people.  It's no different than taking PED if you aren't going to care about testosterone levels, etc.

So just stop the nonsense, then the idiots have nothing to shout from the rooftops that is low hanging fruit.

It's fake to suggest that it is a big issue that affects very many people. A delicate issue for sure...but so rare it shouldn't be featured in political ads.

It's working, politically...at least that's my admittedly anecdotal observation. It's really easy to take an anecdote that may or may not even be true (Parents and doctors mutating a ten-year-old girl because of "tomboy" behavior) and make people think it's a trend. Again, anecdotal but I've seen people claim to want universal healthcare but say they won't vote for Democrats because they think Dems will lead to "child mutilation."  It's bonkers.

Sports injects a relatable but ultimately confusing element to everything. As you say, it's probably not happening in big numbers. Either way, telling someone in high school that they're not eligible to participate in extracurricular activities reminds of some really ugly times; however, there are legitimate competitive concerns. Ultimately most people have those concerns and agree with bans. It's a really easy way not only to push people down the full anti-trans path...and maybe even the whole "anti-woke" path. Riley Gaines has become a conservative hero because she lost a college swim race to a trans competitor. I agree that it wasn't fair but I really do miss the pre-victim right's calls of "life's not always fair" and "get over it."

I'm wondering whether the "save women's sports" crowd will ultimately destroy it. There was the period of time where Katie Ledecky was being accused of being trans. It was totally baseless but, hey, I guess she's not conventionally attractive or something. The fervor around this issue has so many people thinking it's commonplace. My guess is most girls can go through four years of high school playing three sports and never run across a competitor born male. Does that mean such things should not be addressed? No. But we're also not about to be swept up by a pink and blue woke wave that will ban Christianity, hard work, conservative clothing, and pledging allegiance. 

Is it? Does it really convert anyone? The people who seem the most outraged were magats anyway.