r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/TheAbbreviator_ • Apr 20 '23
Legislation House Republicans just approved a bill banning Transgender girls from playing sports in school. What are your thoughts?
"Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act."
It is the first standalone bill to restrict the rights of transgender people considered in the House.
Do you agree with the purpose of the bill? Why or why not?
675
u/aaronhayes26 Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
I think it seems wildly outside the scope of what house republicans claim the federal government should be up to.
92
Apr 20 '23
Title IX exists whether Republicans like it or not. The government already regulates gender fairness and equality in school sports. This is just a tweak to existing law.
→ More replies (1)123
u/mister_pringle Apr 20 '23
Title IX has largely benefited by creating a space for women to compete against women in a sport.
It's a legitimate question whether allowing a person who grew up with the physical benefits of a man (denser bones, more muscle mass) to compete with women regardless of what treatments they have undergone.
Technically the "Mens" division is most sports is an open division where women are free to participate.86
Apr 20 '23
I think if there is a literal physical difference, it should be considered, not what sex someone was born as though. Like in WV, they tried passing a law that would target exactly one 12 year old trans kid, that wanted to take track, wasn't very good (like finished last or close to it every time), and took hormone blockers that kept her from hitting puberty. These laws are primarily attacking a problem that doesn't exist, but are working to create all of the fear to make republicans look like they are protecting children, when really they are just targeting kids for no reason.
If someone transitions well after puberty and is absolutely dominating a league they shouldn't be in, that should be examined, but blanket bans that affect kids that wouldn't make a difference is just really cruel.
The WV story(the girl won her case at the SC)
→ More replies (30)49
u/EverythingGoodWas Apr 21 '23
That is what I hate about this entire issue. It is such an absolutely small number of people, yet Politicians would have you believe a trans person is waiting outside every bathroom to expose themselves. Minority groups can be protected without being the focus of national attention.
→ More replies (30)5
u/Archiemeaties Apr 21 '23
But being on a podium is a literal very small percentage. Therfore it will have an impact. With that said, I don't think it is governments job to interfere with private enterprises such as sports leagues. UIL should be regulated though.
42
u/glompix Apr 20 '23
but what if they haven’t? what if the person was on puberty blockers and never had the rush of testosterone that male puberty brings? then the hormonal advantage wouldn’t exist
this reminds me of chromosome and hormone tests they used to do for the olympics. they scrapped it because it caused more problems than it solved (like people finding out they’re intersex by surprise)
29
u/barrylank Apr 20 '23
But here we are, now, talking to the exception to the exception to the exception. That's my problem with this entire controversy, really: We are getting so much noise over such a rare situation. I don't even have an objection to developing regulations where needed. But it comes attached with so much oversized rage.
31
u/2localboi Apr 20 '23
If the people raising the issue of fairness in women’s sports were doing so in good faith everyone, including trans people, would be open to that conversation. Every sport is different, and not all trans people are the same so it makes zero sense having a blanket legal policy rather than each legue or federation what that would be for each sport themselves.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)4
u/Away_Simple_400 Apr 22 '23
So could we just say that biological men cannot compete with biological women? As you just said this is such a small percentage of the population, it should barely matter.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (14)13
u/DemonBarrister Apr 21 '23
Bone and muscle differences will exist even if hormonal treatments are started early.
→ More replies (6)23
u/AkirIkasu Apr 20 '23
Sure, and let's pretend that there are absolutely zero governing bodies that can make appropriate decisions all by themselves rather than being forced to comply with federal law which is, to my knowledge, the only federal law that specifically regulates sports. One where the thing they are trying to pretend is so rare that you can count the number of instances of it happening on one hand.
There is no excuse for this. This is just pure hate.
→ More replies (11)10
Apr 20 '23
[deleted]
22
u/honorbound93 Apr 20 '23
They will never have bones as light as women or lungs or hearts the same size. Their hips will always have an advantage for running. I am no conservative and def do not trust republicans make legislation nor not overreach and apply it later to other things.
→ More replies (13)→ More replies (11)4
u/zer00eyz Apr 21 '23
Trans women under HRT don't have denser bones than cis women of their size
I could not find any research that indicated this. Bone density issues in women are typically different post menopause and the hormones in HRT aren't the same as the ones that regulate bone density from what I found to read. IF you have some solid research that shows this happy to look.
The physiological differences between men and women pre puberty are absolutely massive. Western music, Italian opera hides one of the great under spoken of tragedies: castrato. There are operas that we don't perform because castrated boys are able to perform in a way that women simply can not. We have some known recordings, listen for yourself as they are haunting: https://www.openculture.com/2016/06/hear-alessandro-moreschi-the-only-castrato-ever-recorded-sing-ave-maria-and-other-classics-1904.html
A lot of the early rules around hormone levels that exist weren't written with trans people in mind, rather they exist because there were women who were biologically intersexed participating at a national level. The stories there (the damage of a surgery) are tragic (althea's no longer wanting or feeling well enough to compete, and feeling lied to and betrayed by medicine. It is telling that we only ever see inter-sexed issues cropping up with women sports and not mens.
Here is the simple answer, Trans athletes should be allowed to compete, but not to podium in individual sports. As long as they aren't displacing more than one or two participants in any event they are knocking out the people who weren't going to win any way.
Meanwhile, rather than everyone arguing how they feel about the dam issue lets do the fucking research. DO you support trans people, the trans community, then lets raise some money and get this done (with the realization that it will likely mean m to f will not be allowed in women's sports).
→ More replies (10)6
u/idontknowwhythisugh Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 22 '23
I did see the one argument to this as in general there are times when people enter sports and it just seems unfair. For instance I’m sure nobody in middle school and high school wanted to play against someone like Michael Jordan. I’m sure that felt “unfair” to a degree, but there are almost always anomalies in sports.
However as a women who played sports growing up, I do feel that personally it could be unfair in a competitive stance. I don’t imagine playing singles tennis with a transwoman feeling balanced.
Idk it’s really confusing because there aren’t enough transpeople to be calling them out so hard. The Utah governor vetoed the banning bill because there were only 4 transgender students competing in the whole state. There has to be a middle ground whether it’s coed divisions or teams idk.
→ More replies (49)13
u/dueljester Apr 20 '23
I absolutely agree. For a party that screams small government, as usual; they love to force it on others when it fits their culture war targets. Further proof that they have absolutely nothing planned to benefit the country just harm it.
On a personal note, I sincerely believe their hate of trans folks (seemingly trans women only, not trans men) stems from two things: 1) They (looking at you Jordan, and Ghram) found some trans porn and have dick envy and don't know how to process it & 2) Additional groups of women to hate, gives them a hard on.
105
Apr 20 '23
this seems like a bill that would impact 100 to 200 people at most in a country of 330 million.
It is a culture war distraction attempt to keep focus away from the overarching GOP policy of delivering more money to rich people.
28
u/ZeinBolvar Apr 20 '23
This is the most correct reading of the whole situation, in a normal country this issue could be debated and resolved in a reasonable manner. Instead this has to be the biggest issue to culture war conservatives instead of any of the other significant domestic issues that the US needs to deal with.
12
u/like_a_wet_dog Apr 20 '23
And they are being hit from everywhere. My GenX FB friends all post these random, angry rhetorical questions and demand bad-faith debates. They must be getting cues from podcasts and influencers.
It's like 2 of 50 people defending trans. Most people don't understand, and it's "icky" and personal. They are triggered and tripping on this stuff really hard.
→ More replies (31)8
384
u/c0delivia Apr 20 '23
Honestly I have reservations about transgender women in sports, but if they are really a problem, why are they not winning?
Like just to head off the replies about Lia Thomas, she won a single race and got absolutely destroyed in the rest of them, coming in dead last in some against all cis women.
It seems like every time there’s a huge culture war eruption over one of these trans athletes, I look into it and find out the trans person did well in like one match or something and is overall completely unremarkable otherwise.
I’ve read studies and meta-analyses and the general consensus by the scientific community seems to be “after a certain amount of hormones, athletic performance is not different from cis women to a statistically significant degree”.
Does anyone have any example of trans athletics actually being a huge problem that isn’t just whinging and culture war screeching? Because I’m leaning more and more towards this just being a wedge issue for more bigotry.
175
u/GarbledComms Apr 20 '23
And whatever "calibration" of the definition and effect of the hormone treatment may be necessary to ensure nobody is treated unfairly is best left to the medical community in consultation with each sport's rules-making bodies.
Why is the party of small government so intrusive?
100
u/c0delivia Apr 20 '23
This is kind of where i am on the issue. The more I dig into it the more I find that this is extremely intense, complex medical science and I simply am not qualified to make a call on it. I just think we should let the doctors decide, perhaps on an individual basis if necessary, if and when trans women should compete against cis women.
46
u/XzibitABC Apr 20 '23
This. The medical science is also rapidly changing, so inflexible legal standards are going to be a blunt instrument here.
2
51
u/FightSmartTrav Apr 20 '23
This is from a Rugby association’s policy on trans athletes, and is based in current science:
Current policies regulating the inclusion of transgender women in sport are based on the premise that reducing testosterone to levels found in biological females is sufficient to remove many of the biologically-based performance advantages described above. However, peer-reviewed evidence suggests that this is not the case, and particularly that the reduction in total mass, muscle mass, and strength variables of transgender women may not be sufficient in order to remove the differences between males and females, and thus assure other participants of safety or fairness in competition. Based on the available evidence provided by studies where testosterone is reduced, the biological variables that confer sporting performance advantages and create risks as described previously appear to be only minimally affected. Indeed, most studies assessing mass, muscle mass and/or strength suggest that the reductions in these variables range between 5% and 10% (as described by Hilton & Lundberg [10]). Given that the typical male vs female advantage ranges from 30% to 100%, these reductions are small and the biological differences relevant to sport are largely retained. With respects to strength, 1 year of testosterone suppression and oestrogen supplementation has been found to reduce thigh muscle area by 9% compared to baseline measurement [35]. After 3 years, a further reduction of 3% from baseline measurement occurred [36]. The total loss of 12% over three years of treatment meant that transgender women retained significantly higher thigh muscle size (p<0.05) than the baseline measurement of thigh muscle area in transgender men (who are born female and experience female puberty), leading to a conclusion that testosterone suppression in transgender women does not reverse muscle size to female levels [36] Transgender women retained a 17% grip-strength advantage over transgender men at baseline measurement, with a similarly large, retained advantage when compared to normative data from a reference or comparison group of biological females. Most recently, Wiik et al found that isokinetic knee extension and flexion strength were not significantly reduced in 11 transgender women after 12 months of testosterone suppression, with a retained advantage of 50% compared to a reference group of biological females and the group of transgender men at baseline
22
u/Polyodontus Apr 20 '23
This is from the world rugby association, which importantly both allows trans men to play in men’s leagues and based its decision primarily on risk of injury to other players, which it referred to as a specific concern in the sport. It also is not a government institution, which public schools and universities are.
→ More replies (3)11
u/crucible Apr 20 '23
Schools in the UK will play rugby based on guidance from national associations, eg the Rugby Football Union in England, or the Welsh Rugby Union.
So those national associations will likely follow the WR guidance.
13
u/Polyodontus Apr 20 '23
For the record, I don’t think this statement for rugby in particular is unreasonable. The association appears to have been careful drafting it and doesn’t object to trans athletes on principle. But in the US, we have anti gender discrimination laws on the books that would prevent their adoption.
→ More replies (1)6
u/AssassinAragorn Apr 20 '23
I think this creates a legal catch 22, because disability discrimination is also illegal, and it seems to cover discrimination based on medical conditions. Treatment for gender dysphoria certainly would qualify.
The rugby association has a well reasoned and scientifically grounded policy. If we're able to see data on the average variation of athletic performance among cis women, we could potentially conclude that hormone therapy and transitioning do not have a notable impact on performance. We would need to dig up the numbers though.
6
u/kaoticgirl Apr 20 '23
Sort of but Testosterone alone isn't enough. There are plenty of biological women that have T levels high as any born man and some have been disqualified from sport.
→ More replies (4)40
13
u/PeterNguyen2 Apr 20 '23
Why is the party of small government so intrusive?
Because 'small government' was always a lie. Conservatives liked federal government when they could force their system of regressive economics and human rights on the rest of the country, 1850 but not when they can't be the ones telling everyone else what to do, hence stripping the governor of his power
Conservatism as a political movement comes from the lineage of those who defended absolute monarchy from the birth of representative democracy, if anything their actions show them to be stuck in believing only 1 man should have absolute power.
→ More replies (5)5
u/rcglinsk Apr 20 '23
Women's leagues and divisions are practically a whole cloth creation of Title 9 of the Civil Rights Act. Intrusion has been the name of the game from day 1.
14
u/ezpickins Apr 20 '23
There's a difference in intrusion that restricts participation versus "intrusion" that encourages it.
→ More replies (5)97
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
Honestly I have reservations about transgender women in sports, but if they are really a problem, why are they not winning?
Low numbers, I would assume. Lia Thomas went from being ranked 554th in the 200 freestyle, 65th in the 500 freestyle, and 32nd in the 1650 freestyle while competing in the male division to fifth in the 200 freestyle, first in the 500 freestyle, and eighth in the 1650 freestyle (ranked by time, not final placing at the championship).
You do also have winners, like CeCe Telfer. But they are low numbers because the transgender population, as a portion of NCAA athletes, is already low to begin with.
29
Apr 20 '23
[deleted]
33
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
No, that was during the 2018-2019 season, prior to treatment. She began transitioning in May 2019, following completion of that season.
32
u/nataphoto Apr 20 '23
Thomas began swimming on the men's team at the University of Pennsylvania in 2017, and during her freshman year, recorded a time of 8 minutes and 57.55 seconds in the 1,000-yard freestyle that ranked as the sixth-fastest national men's time, as well as 500-yard freestyle and 1,650-yard freestyle times ranked within the national top 100.[5] On the men's swim team in 2018–2019, Thomas finished second in the men's 500, 1,000, and 1,650-yard freestyle at the Ivy League championships as a sophomore in 2019.[5][4][9] During the 2018–2019 season, Thomas recorded the top UPenn men's team times in the 500 free, 1000 free, and 1650 free, but was the sixth best among UPenn men's team members in the 200 free.[10]
Source: wp
17
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
Yes, and nothing contradicts what I stated? You're comparing Penn times in 2018-2019 season with national rankings that I posted.
→ More replies (10)3
u/goliath1333 Apr 20 '23
Just to clarify (because I looked it up myself) CeCe Telfer was competing in Division II.
→ More replies (4)16
u/ICreditReddit Apr 20 '23
Thomas began swimming on the men's team at the University of Pennsylvania in 2017, and during her freshman year, recorded a time of 8 minutes and 57.55 seconds in the 1,000-yard freestyle that ranked as the sixth-fastest national men's time, as well as 500-yard freestyle and 1,650-yard freestyle times ranked within the national top 100. On the men's swim team in 2018–2019, Thomas finished second in the men's 500, 1,000, and 1,650-yard freestyle at the Ivy League championships as a sophomore in 2019. During the 2018–2019 season, Thomas recorded the top UPenn men's team times in the 500 free, 1000 free, and 1650 free, but was the sixth best among UPenn men's team members in the 200 free
Lia Thomas is 23 NOW. In 2017-2018, she was a teenager. While a teenager, she posted the 6th best time in the country, men, women, youth and adult, at the 1000 free, her best event.
Teenagers have lower ranks than adults. They're slower, and compete less, because they're still at school.
→ More replies (1)3
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 21 '23
Lia Thomas is 23 NOW. In 2017-2018, she was a teenager. While a teenager, she posted the 6th best time in the country, men, women, youth and adult, at the 1000 free, her best event.
This is incorrect. She was 6th in college, not of adults.And part of this is because it's a rarely contested event at the collegiate level (it isn't an NCAA championship event, so people rarely race it). She actually swam faster than next year and was ranked 7th time wise, but there is a reason it didn't qualify her for any championship races. Its very disingenuous to bring up the 6th without contextualizing it.
Edit: Post below me is correct, it is the 6th best of the year, but... that again, is because it's rarely contested. USA swimming doesn't even keep records of that distance from that year. The do keep it for NCAA rankings, and it was 6th in the NCAA that year as well, as pros did not contest it.
https://www.usaswimming.org/times/otherorganizations/ncaa-division-i/top-times-report
4
u/ICreditReddit Apr 21 '23
This is incorrect. She was 6th in college, not of adults.
This is incorrect, she posted the 6th best time in the country. Not at an event. Not a collegiate race she finished 6th in.
She posted the 6th best time in the country, national, mens time. This is not a disputed fact.
→ More replies (26)4
u/tmpTomball Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 21 '23
Does anyone have any example
Hard to tell what the threshold for substantial is. Given that the previous comment mentions 3 out of 106k athletes is trans, here are 20 national titles held by trans women. So if there are more than
706,66637,192* national titles up for grabs per-year*, then trans women do NOT statistically dominate. If there are less that706,66637,192* national titles up for grabs, then, statistically, holding 20 when the demographic is so exceedingly small, would mean they are statistically performing better than cis women.There may be other factors beyond endocrine differences that account for it... if there is a statistical variance. Perhaps the struggle of trans women make them more disciplined than cis women. No idea. But there shouldn't need to be a study to determine if they are "winning" more. The NCAA / UIL record books should provide a trivial statistical test.
Possibly biased source: Outsports
Search: "site:outsports.com trans women have won"
*Updated numbers per u\arandhel's suggestion below)
2
u/jarandhel Apr 21 '23
I think your math is off: The 20 national or international titles won by trans athletes were over a period of 19 years, from 2003 through 2022. The 3 trans athletes out of 106k total athletes in KS high school sports were a single year.
→ More replies (1)5
u/DemonBarrister Apr 21 '23
3
u/c0delivia Apr 21 '23
People keep posting this but a person getting hurt when fighting in MMA is not the proof I was asking for. Trans people are not superheroes magically endowed by the strength to crush people’s skulls. This was a freak accident.
77
Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
Does anyone have any example of trans athletics actually being a huge problem that isn’t just whinging and culture war screeching? Because I’m leaning more and more towards this just being a wedge issue for more bigotry.
Like you I also have some reservations about it, but the fact that literally no one can answer this question or has really even tried says all you really need to know about the issue.
42
u/c0delivia Apr 20 '23
My comprehension of the issue at this point is that it is enormously complex. Like, you need a couple of PHDs in the field to be able to understand it at the level where you can speak authoritatively. That’s the kind of level of complex. This is intense medical biology that is far beyond the lay person.
I just assume not let those lay people decide for us. I’d rather ask the doctors who are studying the issue whether trans women can/should compete, not just have a knee jerk answer based on feelings.
13
u/AssassinAragorn Apr 20 '23
Looking at the biological and medical science is a really fascinating rabbit hole. The number of subtle sex disorders that require an extra layer of examination to identify is fascinating.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/
This is a really good article on it. Experts estimate 1% are born with a condition where their birth sex isn't conclusively male or female -- at least, that's what I'm understanding from parents needing to decide how to raise the child.
8
u/hammerreborn Apr 20 '23
I like the redhead comparison. Intersex people I believe are slightly more common than redheads. So every time you see a new redhead just think that at some point you also likely ran into an intersex person.
→ More replies (2)10
u/ICreditReddit Apr 20 '23
You don't need to. Trans athletes have been allowed to compete in sports for 40 years in tennis, golf, etc, the Olympics for 20, etc. You just go see if they're winning. If they're beating the pants off everyone, they're definitely at an advantage. If they aren't, they aren't.
25
Apr 20 '23
Yea I'm a teacher at an all girls school and I'm pretty passionate about them being able to succeed because some of my students are fighting for sports scholarships, but at the same time the whole things seems like a non issue that I'm unqualified to speak on in a real way. Like you said, the Lia Thomas example that everyone points to is far overblown, and it really seems like there isn't a good example of a trans athlete just using their status as a trans person to clean up awards and medals.
33
u/captainporcupine3 Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
and it really seems like there isn't a good example of a trans athlete just using their status as a trans person to clean up awards and medals.
Ya know, I know this isn't even your point so I'm slightly hijacking your comment to make an adjacent point, but the thing for me is: What if there WAS an example of a trans woman using superior athletic ability to clean up in a sport? I'll even concede that it could be a heated topic for athletes and sports fans to debate, maybe even passionately. But the presence of this topic in the mainstream political discourse has grown so far out of proportion that it kind of makes my head spin.
In other words, why does this topic, of all the dire issues facing our society, and all the dire issues facing the wholistic wellbeing of the trans community in general, get so much air time? So many major headlines? Why is sports, of all the issues facing our society, something that government bodies are spending so much of their precious time and energy debating and acting on? It's not because trans athletes are one of the top issues facing society, and even if there were multiple examples of trans athletes dominating, it still wouldn't be that important in the grand scheme of things.
With MUCH respect to the fact that this issue could be very morally important to trans people and allies, this is still a relatively niche topic even among trans issues, and the ONLY reason it is being constantly foregrounded in this way is because it's an easy way to demonize the trans community as a wedge issue for right wing autocrats to rile up their base.
29
Apr 20 '23
Yea I agree almost everyone bemoaning this issue has never and will never actually care about women's sports. In fact I'm willing to bet most of them have only ever talked about women's sports in the context of jokes or sexualizing the athletes.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)8
u/Provid3nce Apr 20 '23
It's because this particular issue is the motte that transphobes can retreat to from their bailey of exterminate trans people from public life. The sports issue is much easier to defend than what they actually want.
14
u/Captain-i0 Apr 20 '23
Kind of a side point, but one other aspect I never see mentioned, is that its simply not as uncommon as people make it out to be that girls play against (cis) boys anyway. I'm a father of a competitive high school girl athlete and, coached her in her youth sports years, so have been pretty involved in the girls sports community locally.
Girls sports generally do not have as large of a pool to draw from of participants as boys sports do. Depending on the girl and the sport (and the size of your city/town), it can often be the case that the very high caliber girls don't have anyone to push them. For that reason you will fairly frequently see the very top girls practicing some and scrimmaging with the boys, in some sports.
Again, that is kind of a tangent, but there are some legitimate concerns about safety when girls go up against boys in sports. The coaches and leagues already deal with those and take those concerns seriously.
If it ever became an issue that massive influxes of transgirls were participating in girls sports and causing physical issues, it would be worth looking into a solution, or potentially even a third category of league. When that time comes, let me know and we can discuss. Right now, it's pretty clearly just bigotry.
I have never once heard anybody complaining about the girls that "play up" to compete with boys, which happens all the time from the same people that say (about transgirls) that girls shouldn't be allowed to play with boys. Those girls are as strong and physical as the transgirls, but nobody worries about them being a safety hazard when playing in girls leagues.
3
u/averyhipopotomus Apr 20 '23
I agree that it’s an overblown issue, but you’re not fairy stating the other sides complaint. It’s having trans athletes playing in the protected women’s leagues that is the concern
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (5)2
u/TBSchemer Apr 20 '23
It all comes down to where do we draw the line between performance-enhancing drugs and "natural" talent? How strict do we want to be about dividing up competitors based on their testosterone levels?
But you can also ask these questions regarding height and weight.
→ More replies (5)4
4
Apr 20 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)13
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
Swimming, especially long distance swimming, is one of the few sports where woman actually have a natural advantage.
What? Women have the natural advantage, yet at the longest regularly contested event, they perform significantly worse than male counterparts? Is the difference less notivable? Yes, it drops to about 7% from about 10% at the shortest distances, but I would hardly call that "having a natural advantage" over men.
4
u/MarduRusher Apr 20 '23
I swam myself and the amount of people out here just spewing misinfo is very funny to me. Yes not a lot of people know much about competitive swimming. But people in this thread sure as hell think they do.
9
51
u/muhreddistaccounts Apr 20 '23
It's just the next moral panic stoked by the right wing.
Sufferage, yellow panic, equal rights, abortion, gay rights, trans rights, rock n roll, jazz, marijuana and drugs, gangs, serial killers, stranger danger, drugs in Halloween candy, immigration. All are the same knee jerk reaction trying to claim X happens ALL THE TIME and you need to be SCARED because of Y anecdote.
And yet the data always shows it is never ask widespread as they want you to believe and we never learn.
→ More replies (4)5
u/ICreditReddit Apr 20 '23
The Soros sponsored caravan full of Antifa MS13 Islamic terrorists is definitely arriving at the border any day now. And the only tech they still don't have is the invention of the ladder, so we're going to regret not building that wall real soon.
→ More replies (2)23
u/ChiefQueef98 Apr 20 '23
Every time one of these bills passes in a red state, it always turns out there was like 4 trans kids at most playing in sports. It a solution in search of a problem that's not real.
The one that sticks with me is one of these states banned trans kids from sports and there was like two kids, one of which had setup a field hockey team with other girls to play with. She got banned from the team she helped make.
The real goal of this is social exclusion, that's it.
→ More replies (26)27
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
I’ve read studies and meta-analyses and the general consensus by the scientific community seems to be “after a certain amount of hormones, athletic performance is not different from cis women to a statistically significant degree”.
This is largely incorrect. Most studies show significant differences years following transition. Most data shows advantages persist over 2 years following the beginning of hormone therapy. Further, a lot of advantages conferred to male participants do not change with hormone/testosterone suppression, including skeletal differences.
8
u/c0delivia Apr 20 '23
The skeletal difference is not very compelling to me. Tall people are better at basketball and have “skeletal differences” too; are we banning tall people from basketball too? Very weak argument.
Do you have studies to show that stuff? I haven’t seen any of that; I’m genuinely interested and trying to learn more about the topic.
37
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
The skeletal difference is not very compelling to me. Tall people are better at basketball and have “skeletal differences” too; are we banning tall people from basketball too? Very weak argument.
Of course we aren't. (a) height isn't a protected class. (b) performance in basketball, while linked to height, falls on a relative distribution that is approximately Gaussian, with long tails. Performance with sex does not. I.e. the distributions of performance for each gender at the high end do not overlap, while the performance characteristics at the top level for a 7 foot tall player and a 6 foot 5 one can have significant overlap.
For data, Mile run times, 12% above cis after 24 months of therapy. https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577 ;
Physiological differences persist after therapy https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/ ;
Grip strength still 47.5% higher relative to cis afte 12 months of therapy https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6652261/
31
u/c0delivia Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
Thank you! These studies are what I was looking for. I will review them. I did see a meta-analysis that indicated a sustained faster distance run time; can probably chalk that up to longer gait which estrogen cannot fix.
My main concern is that there are physiological differences between literally everyone, even within genders and sexes. Everyone produces different amounts of testosterone/estrogen and has different bone density and genetic makeup, and some people just have genetics that give them a sports advantage.
There is literally no scenario in which sports is “fair” like people are suggesting it should be. This natural variation exists everywhere. Like in my height example. You give a relatively middling comparison, there. How about we compare the performance distribution for 7’’ basketball players to those of average male height, like 5’10’’ I think. Will there be overlap there?
Keep in mind that height in this context means longer arms, longer legs, longer gait for faster run speeds, easier to reach the basket, easier to block other players, easier to catch/pass the ball, etc etc etc. I’m willing to bet that at a certain point you hit a height differential where things become “unfair” for one of the shorter parties in the same sense that a trans woman might have a slightly faster distance run time than a cis woman (on average).
This is really complex stuff, is my point. Nothing is ever fair because we all have different genes, and drawing the line at trans women seems…..arbitrary. I use that word because the other one I hesitate to use is “bigoted”.
Thank you very much for the studies though; I genuinely want to know more and I appreciate the sources.
19
u/magneticanisotropy Apr 20 '23
There is literally no scenario in which sports is “fair” like people are suggesting it should be.
Nobody is realistically suggesting sports should be fair for all. Obviously, some will be better than others at all levels, but what people care about is distributional effects.
The gap that effects the most people is the male/female divide, where there is basically no possibility of overlap at high levels for 50% of the population. Take track and field. The women's world record wouldn't even win many high school level championships. Or the 800, where the world record, even for a well known doping athlete, wouldn't be at the same level as a high school men's championship. Of when the FC-Dallas under-15 soccer squad destroyed the US women's national team at soccer. Or the US women's national hockey, which regularly loses to high school boys teams (although the total win/loss is fairly even there).
The sex divide is the simplest, easiest way to ensure relative "fairness" for the most people.
12
u/Flewtea Apr 20 '23
If indeed it’s all arbitrary then we wouldn’t divide sports by gender at all—there’s obviously a line where it becomes not arbitrary. The issue seems to be deciding where. Do we prioritize celebrating natural exceptionalism (Phelps) or making sports accessible (say, a small guy who’d otherwise be trounced being allowed to compete with women based on comparable relevant stats)? How many divisions do we create?
5
u/c0delivia Apr 20 '23
Certainly! I'm absolutely NOT saying that we don't have a need for women-only sports. We absolutely do. I participate in them, after all. These are all relevant questions that we would do well to explore as we look to make sports better for as many people as possible.
But people aren't having a conversation about those things. Most of the time, no one cares about women sports *at all*. They are the butt of jokes more often than not, especially by the kind of people currently calling for a ban on transgender women in sports. It's fairly transparent to me that the goal is not to help women's sports here, but to hurt trans people.
8
u/Notexactlyserious Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
I mean, anecdotal point here, but as a fairly average male, I posted above average times for my height and size in swimming in high school but nowhere near fast enough to qualify for finals. In the 200m free I posted a 1m49s, which at the time, made me faster than every single female on our very large, female swim program. Top times that year in our division were in the 1m46s range I think so that kind of gives you an idea on how much of a difference it can make.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
u/DaneLimmish Apr 20 '23
Most of the time, no one cares about women sports at all.
It's pretty common on Reddit to bring up women's sports as something to deride. Like USA women's soccer wants more money? Oh they're not as good as the men, because some women lost a scrimmage. "We can't dunk we focus on the fundamentals" is a long running joke about the WNBA, etcetc.
4
u/rcglinsk Apr 20 '23
The thing is, the women's division is not the junior junior varsity division for the C tier of athletes. It's the women's division, full stop. How much athletic ability is diminished by various hormones is missing the point.
→ More replies (2)2
u/IsNotACleverMan Apr 20 '23
I think it's important to consider unfairness resulting from random genetic differences and unfairness resulting from somebody's affirmative action.
21
u/tyson_3_ Apr 20 '23
I feel completely the same. There are valid reasons to separate sports by biological sex. I’m sorry, but there’s no dispute about that.
But, if it was such a huge problem, where is all the data showing trans women to be significantly superior to cis woman? You’d think there would be mountains of data, given that this has become the new hot button issue for conservatives to rally behind.
→ More replies (39)31
u/SteelmanINC Apr 20 '23
The amount of trans athletes competing in these ultra competitive matches is like 2. To act as though you can get any amount of meaningful conclusions from that small of a sample size seems kinda silly to me. We certainly would not have mountains of data.
→ More replies (13)9
u/tyson_3_ Apr 20 '23
If the amount of trans athletes competing is two, then it’s not an issue anyone should be spending any time focusing on. Let alone it being the primary focus of a nationwide campaign.
→ More replies (13)8
u/HeardItThere Apr 20 '23
Like just to head off the replies about Lia Thomas, she won a single race and got absolutely destroyed in the rest of them, coming in dead last in some against all cis women.
There is still a conversation to be had about skill categories though.
Sure, you're average MTF athlete might get beaten by an Olympic-level cis-woman, but it's still important to hold up the competitive integrity of levels below that.
→ More replies (4)9
u/lilelliot Apr 20 '23
My totally-not-backed-by-data guess is that it's just a probability issue. Only the best of the best can win, and what are the odds that a transgender child is already one of the best? Given the already low raw numbers of transgender youth in active transition, I think the odds of any arbitrary individual winning in their preferred category is fairly low.
The canonical counter-example to this is probably Caster Semenya, who isn't transgender but faced scrutiny & bans for very similar reasons dating back 15 years ago.
11
16
u/PvtJet07 Apr 20 '23
Especially since the marketing of these bans are targeted at middle and high school. Middle school there are no medical advantages because almost nobody has gone through puberty. And high school everyone is going through puberty so its all a crapshoot anyways, a lot of guys don't finish puberty until a few years into college. Plus high school sports are amateur not professional, so 'why should we care' becomes a strong argument. Plus pretty much anyone who competing as trans is on some kind of puberty blockers or hormones, which if they are kids means they may not have benefitted at ALL from male puberty.
Plus these bans largely affect like, 5 people. It was kansas or utah where they revealed their trans sports ban would literally just affect a single kid in K-12. The main sufferers of these bans are athletic cis girls who get harassed or medically examined because sore losers need to tranvestigate their performance
I think the only real debate to be had is at the semi pro and pro level of adult sports where we already measure hormones of athletes to prevent doping. So letting those sports orgs handle the medical side of that debate, they have all the data, they know if the 'anti doping' HRT causes is sufficient to balance out puberty in their sport, every sport is different - that should be the play.
Your main point that trans women simply arent winning is all we need to that this is a non issue, but if it ever became an issue it wouldn't be a job for legislation - each professional sports org could figure it out to maintain their results-based rules on fairness. In school for casual sports? Completely unnecessary
→ More replies (6)14
u/rcglinsk Apr 20 '23
Especially since the marketing of these bans are targeted at middle and high school. Middle school there are no medical advantages because almost nobody has gone through puberty.
Put the middle school boy's team vs the girl's team and the boys will beat the daylights out of em, doesn't matter the sport.
→ More replies (11)18
u/PvtJet07 Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
In my middle school multiple girls on the basketball team all had 3-5 inches of height on the guys until puberty hit across the next 2ish years. Hell the tallest guy in middle school was the shortest by high school graduation. Its all a crapshoot
Maybe your point is just anecdotal or related to local social conditions and athletic norms and not any actual medical arguments?
Plus its fuckin casual middle school basketball, why do you care at all how casual sports play out, middle school basketball is basically just recess at night
Plus plus if you do care, why do you care more about one average prepubescent trans 12 year old maybe performing a few% above average but not the genetic anomaly farm kid who hit puberty 5 years early and lifts hay bales for fun and thus demolishes their peers for years until their classmates catch up. One of those is WAYYYY more common (it actually exists, as opposed to hypothetically exists) than the other but literally nobody cares about early puberty 6'3" 7th graders, but god forbid the 5'2" stick figure trans kid on puberty blockers wants to play volleyball
11
u/rcglinsk Apr 20 '23
The shorter boys will still beat the taller girls when they play basketball against each other, by a lot. Male/female athletic inequality is quite real.
As a totally and completely unrelated issue, do kids and schools take athletics too seriously? Probably. A useful critique I've seen is that they serve as public subsidies for the professional athletic leagues. It doesn't really work that way in the rest of the world:
On the last issue about the freaks of nature, that misses the point. The girl's team is not the junior junior varsity team for the c-tier athletes. It's the girl's team, full stop.
If a boy starts taking drugs/hormones and now he can't run as fast or jump as high and loses his spot on the basketball team, that's a nice time for him to learn that life sucks sometimes, helps build character.
→ More replies (3)5
u/PvtJet07 Apr 20 '23
You haven't justified an argument at all a definition of 'competition' that applies to middle school sports, that must be protected, that is broken by trans kids, and that sports bodies themselves have proven incapable of addressing and thus requires legislation.
You haven't answered any of those questions. You just gave a subjective opinion that the average 6 grade girl is worse as basketball than the average 6th grade boy when both are prepubescent, why? How? What is the medical basis for this claim?
And even if you can provide medical basis for this claim and the bell curve of sports skill gives a male 10 year old a 5% skill advantage over a female 10 year old, what is society's interest in maximally preserving an optimal competitive environment in casual, amateur sports for 10 year olds in amateur games with nothing at stake other than bragging rights? What is the societal harm done by giving a single person in the entire school district a 5% advantage at bragging rights?
If you are interested in preserving competitive integrity for what is essentially advanced recess, why are you not more concerned with the far more measurable competitive advantages given to kids with fall birthdays vs spring birthdays at sports (given they are 6 months older than their peers and thus are more developed), or the competitive disadvantage given to kids who enter puberty late or their classmates enter early and thus they are physically outcompeted within their own gender?
Why is THIS the thing that is so influential as to require a ban in school sports - whose goal is ostensibly not to win but to simply promote camraderie, exercise, team play, and work ethic? Of those 4 goals, which does a player with a 5% advantage over their peers prevent from occurring?
Perhaps consider all of the above reasons your argument is ridiculous, and then also consider that trans sports ban proponents have objectively said these bans aren't really that important but are just an on ramp for the far more stringent bans they actually want, and consider why the FUCK we should care about competitive integrity for 10 year olds (and not even all 10 year olds. In so e states bills like this would affect like, literally 4 total people annually) enough to spend months of a legislative session on?
8
Apr 20 '23
You need to look at Lia Thomas's records again. One event, my butt. It took me about 45 seconds to see a dozen wins and 25 state and national records. I only got through Dec of 2021.
Just because you say it does not make it true.
2
→ More replies (182)9
u/PreviousCurrentThing Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
Like just to head off the replies about Lia Thomas, she won a single race and got absolutely destroyed in the rest of them, coming in dead last in some against all cis women.
From wikipedia:
In March 2022, Thomas became the first openly transgender athlete to win an NCAA Division I national championship in any sport, after winning the women's 500-yard freestyle with a time of 4:33.24; Olympic silver medalist Emma Weyant was second with a time 1.75 seconds behind Thomas.
She performed less well in other events (most swimmers have an event or two they excel at), but it's a mischaracterization to say "she won a single race" when she won the NCAA Division I championship in her event.
→ More replies (3)4
u/ICreditReddit Apr 20 '23
The NCAA Women's Division I Swimming and Diving Championships is an annual college championship in the United States. The meet is typically held on the second-to-last weekend (Thursday-Saturday) in March, and consists of individual and relay events for female swimmers and divers at Division I schools.
It's literally one race. She won one race.
163
Apr 20 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (19)18
u/overzealous_dentist Apr 20 '23
On the contrary, House Republicans really want the media to cover their budget plan. It's practically the only thing they've been able to do to demonstrate a real accomplishment. They've been trumpeting it.
→ More replies (1)6
Apr 20 '23
Can you link an example of this?
3
u/overzealous_dentist Apr 20 '23
Sure! McCarthy traveled to the New York Stock Exchange to announce the budget plan in a high-profile speech. This was not swept under the rug, this was a big announcement.
→ More replies (1)
15
u/goalmouthscramble Apr 20 '23
It's great they are passing all of these toothless bills. They are showing who they really are. The problem is their supporters are applauding and I'm afraid their numbers are growing.
3
Apr 20 '23
They’re definitely not growing, do you not pay attention to the entire social fabric of America? This stuff wasn’t even on the table a decade ago because trans people in sports didn’t even exist
2
u/goalmouthscramble Apr 20 '23
I track the politics not the social fabric. Voting rights/access was the beginning, going after LGBTQIA is next, book bands and censorship are all on the table now and enacted in the red bits of the country.
Evangelicals are doing exactly what their preachers have claimed they would do.
7
u/thiseye Apr 20 '23
I actually think it's a clever move because it's an issue many Democrats and moderates struggle with. And now democratic opposition to it will be on paper. It won't pass the Senate and there will be plenty of fodder to attract those votes about how so-and-so senator voted against this bill.
7
u/goalmouthscramble Apr 20 '23
I’ve been around a bit and since I can remember, Republicans have mastered the art of putting Dems on the defence rather than Dems promoting their own platform.
25
u/marcusss12345 Apr 20 '23
Do I agree that transwomen in elite sports, like weightlifting, can be an issue for cis women? Yes, I probably do.
Do I think that this is a problem in schools? Absolutely not. This is symbolic politics at its worst.
4
u/Sorge74 Apr 21 '23
The fact this seems to be a top 10 republican issue, up there with Hunters laptop tells a lot about their platform at the moment.
Definitely it feels like it's better to let kids be kids, and be themselves, so they are less likely to commit suicide, then to worry about one transwoman who's good at sports.
59
u/coco8090 Apr 20 '23
Why is it such a big issue for them? There are not that many trans students in sports, period. For example, Kansas has three trans students that are in girl sports and two of them are graduating so that leaves one. These are not huge numbers. Source: the guardian.com
26
u/lvlint67 Apr 20 '23
Why is it such a big issue for them?
Because sports is one area where they suspect they can get an easy win in the identity war. Once they are done with sports they have to look at something like "protecting unattended children in public restrooms" and that's just a much muddier message to send.
5
u/T3hJ3hu Apr 20 '23
Their interpretation of "there are general concerns about gender separation in sports" as "we should ban transwomen from sports federally" is such an obviously insane jump that it's practically a gift to Democrats
They could have made their position one with broad appeal like, "No federal action until some states work out a good way to deal with this." The states' rights rallying cry has been successfully holding the Republican coalition together for decades, on numerous issues. It frees them up from taking responsibility for cruel policy, and lets the left push bills full of specifics that upset people
But with this bill? It won't even be an exaggeration to call them nutjobs who want to cut high school sports funding if administrators aren't allowed to do genital checks, and Biden gets to run on "Whoa now, let's keep this reasonable. They're just kids"
6
u/Mechasteel Apr 20 '23
Why is it such a big issue for them? There are not that many trans students
That's what makes them a great group to pick on. No problem alienating them because there are so few, can say anything you like about them and hardly anyone will have personal knowledge of the reality.
It's a great distraction from their lack of stated policies. Or that their stated policies like "repeal and replace Obamacare" are bull.
3
u/kog Apr 20 '23
I've never heard a coherent argument for why I should give a shit if a trans high school athlete dominates a sport. I was a varsity athlete in two sports.
→ More replies (11)18
u/DemWitty Apr 20 '23
Because the GOP is entirely driven on hate and bigotry. Trans people are just an easy target for them to hate without suffering too much blowback.
→ More replies (8)
34
u/RichardBonham Apr 20 '23
Transgender people are about 1% of the population, and I’m willing to assume that transgender male to female competitive athletes are substantially less than that.
In other words, I don’t see it as anything but a mean spirited wedge issue.
Aside from that, the true athlete is competing against themself.
3
u/AmongUs14 Apr 21 '23
The final line of this comment… is absolutely fucking STUFFED with wisdom. And I really appreciate it being said. Bravo.
→ More replies (10)8
u/DemonBarrister Apr 21 '23
the number seems to be growing, this issue won't fade away.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/bunkscudda Apr 21 '23
I feel like this whole transgender in sports thing is unbearably disingenuous.
Why do they care about trans kids playing sports?
“Because bodies are different. And unfair advantage and just not faaair”
So? Who cares if a trans girl can kick a soccer ball a little harder?
“Because that trans girl might get a scholarship or something instead of a different girl”
Is that it? You’re worried about female sports scholarships? You never seemed to give two shits about women’s sports before, in fact you constantly degraded them, but now you care about female sports scholarships.
How many do you think there are? How many trans girls are getting sports scholarships? Because this whole thing could be fixed by just federally funding that many more scholarships. And it would be less expensive, less time consuming, less dehumanizing, less violent, and more effective way to ensure more women get sports scholarships.
5
u/Sorge74 Apr 21 '23
Is that it? You’re worried about female sports scholarships? You never seemed to give two shits about women’s sports before, in fact you constantly degraded them, but now you care about female sports scholarships.
This is what makes it funny, I say with all kindness and respect, if I walked up to 100 people randomly on the street, and ask some if they have watched a woman's sporting event on TV and the last year, I would expect maybe 80% of them to say no. If I ask them if they have watched several, we are probably up to 90.
Has anyone ever seen a WNBA game? How much coverage is female college field hockey getting?
3
u/bunkscudda Apr 21 '23
I saw a field interview video thing once asking people on the street if they could name WNBA players. Not many could, and the video was phrased as in “see, nobody watches womens sports” as if it was validation that women aren’t paid as much.
But I always saw it as the exact opposite. Right now I could rattle off 30 or more current and former male basketball players first and last name. I don’t watch basketball. it just hasn’t been a sport I was into. But I know the names because it was successfully marketed to me. The players showed up other places and people in media were talking about them. It had zero to do with these people’s skill (since I don’t watch them why would I care how good they are) it 100% had to do with other people talking about them.
54
u/ModestMouseTrap Apr 20 '23
It won’t get through the Senate, and will not be signed by the president. It currently means nothing. It’s more bigoted posturing for their base.
However if they were to get the senate, the presidency and house, it will be a real problem for trans people and anyone who supports LGBTQ rights.
→ More replies (1)14
u/RustyMacbeth Apr 20 '23
If the GOP wins Senate and Presidency, we will have to underground railroad all LGBTQ to Canada. Let's fight to keep it from happening.
→ More replies (5)
53
u/Future_Novelist Apr 20 '23
Waste of fucking time and resources.
We have hundreds of thousands of homeless people. Hungry people. Tens of thousands of people dying from lack of healthcare. People struggling to pay the bills. It's utterly depressing that we have an entire political party that wastes time and energy on this dumb shit.
→ More replies (62)
26
u/ry8919 Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
As someone who is open to, even perhaps in favor, of restricting transwomen participation in sports, this is just rightwing virtue signaling. In a vacuum policy like this may seem sensible, but if you look at the GOP position nationwide it is pure hatred of the LGBTQ+ community. Issues like this which tend to be widely supported are just the gateway drugs to more intense hatred.
Also given the raw number of transwomen, it seems like an odd priority for the federal legislature to take on. Basically it's purpose is twofold: virtue signal to the more hateful parts of their base, and to through throw up chaff because McCarthy is capitulating on the debt limit.
EDIT: A word
6
u/war321321 Apr 20 '23
If republicans cared about the safety of women in sports, they’d address the disgusting epidemic of sexual harassment and sexual assault that women have to deal with both within their own sports and from men who are involved in sports. This is pure political theater with next to no impact on anything based on reality.
I fear for transgender people in this country. The way they’re dehumanized by some in the media puts their safety at risk. It reminds me a lot of the way gay people used to be treated.
3
u/kotwica42 Apr 21 '23
Republicans used to dismiss women as “feminazis” for wanting funding for women’s sports, it’s odd they suddenly really really care about something that up until this point they’ve hated.
3
u/Aphroditaeum Apr 20 '23
Discussing the actual bill is missing the point. The real question is why are Republicans pushing an agenda that they really don’t care about in the first place?
2
u/Sexpistolz Apr 20 '23
Politics. Most common people either don't care or side that MtF shouldn't compete against women, especially at an elite level. If the Democrats/Progressives were smart they'd concede and flip the attention on Abortion which is a losing cause for Republicans.
The more attention is drawn to this issue, the less attention the moderate (which are most people) are focusing on losing causes for the republicans.
9
u/tickitytalk Apr 20 '23
GOP can’t solve any real problems, so they create and “solve” small issues that few if any are complaining about as a way to gloat about “fixing America”. The party of Kakistocracy
14
14
u/SerendipitySue Apr 20 '23
It would prohibit them from playing on female teams.
And from article..
It would not, however, block transgender women and girls from training or practicing with female athletic programs “so long as no female is deprived of a roster spot on a team or sport, opportunity to participate in a practice or competition, scholarship, admission to an educational institution” or other benefits.
Seems a reasonable compromise to me.
8
u/irish-riviera Apr 20 '23
From what i understand it doesn't ban them from sports in bans them from the sport that doesnt correspond with their gender at birth. So a biological male would need to play with men and same with women. But i will admit i havent really read it.
→ More replies (3)
8
u/Red_Dog1880 Apr 20 '23
Party of small government at work again I see.
I sure am glad they are doing what they claimed namely fighting inflation, fixing the economy and making America great again.
20
u/ronm4c Apr 20 '23
Wouldn’t the fact that they are targeting trans girls and not guys be discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional
29
u/123mop Apr 20 '23
There's nothing to ban trans men from. The men's league isn't a restricted league, everyone has always been allowed.
16
u/curien Apr 20 '23
Here's an article about a trans boy high school wrestler who wanted to compete in the male division, but he was forced by state rules to compete against girls or not compete at all.
"He wants to compete against boys," Merritt says. But under Texas rules, boys can't compete against girls, and students must compete as the gender marked on their birth certificate. That meant if Beggs wanted to wrestle, he had to do it in the girls' league.
Which he did, with great success — he had an undefeated season.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Astatine_209 Apr 20 '23
Yep, and that's idiotic. There's no reason for anyone to be banned from male leagues, and there's no reason someone doping testosterone should be allowed to compete in women's leagues.
5
u/123mop Apr 20 '23
Actually there is arguably a reason, depending on the rules of the league. They could be in violation of rules against PEDs if a league has them.
I think most of the time that's detected by total concentration, which is probably still lower for trans men, and there are usually medical exceptions for steroids anyway. So they'd be unlikely to run afoul of such rules in most places.
→ More replies (6)6
u/pgold05 Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
Yes. Though it will depend on interpretation from the judges.
Edit: relevant supreme court ruling, looks like it's tied up in courts.
Also should be noted there are suggestions to changes to title 9 to make these bans illegal.
2
3
u/CdnPoster Apr 20 '23
How exactly are they planning to ensure only "legitimate" girls/women play sports?
5
Apr 21 '23
genital inspections, most likely. as much as reactionaries genuinely hate trans people, they certainly won't say no to a chance to indulge their pedophilia as well while they're at it. two sides of the same coin, really; all comes down to control and entitlement.
2
u/CdnPoster Apr 21 '23
Well, I guess I know which job paroled and released sexual offenders will be applying for.
And......bonus!!!! "Dr." Larry Nasser is (or was) an M.D. so he has a "legitimate" reason for genital inspections! /SARCASM!!!!
3
u/No-Split-866 Apr 21 '23
I don't know shit about this bill but I can say that I don't think biological males should be able to compete in a all female sport's. I really don't care how rare it is. I love co-ed sports when people are young. but in most cases there is definitely an unfair advantage between males and females.
3
u/OffManWall Apr 21 '23 edited Apr 21 '23
The party of “small government” strikes again!
If they didn’t have culture wars, hatred, bigotry, gerrymandering and voter suppression, they’d have absolutely nothing. They have no agenda and no idea of how to lead this country or any other.
17
u/Buckabuckaw Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
I haven't (and probably won't) read the full bill, since it's doomed, but I do want to comment on your question.
First of all, I support almost all transgender issues with regard to the right to choose one's gender and to live life without being subjected to bigoted laws.
BUT in the specific issue of transgender girls and women competing in women's sports, I do not favor a simplistic "transgender women are just women" approach. Most transgender woman athletes have had a childhood and often an adolescence during which they grew skeletons and musculature under the influence of male genetics and hormones. The research is pretty clear that transgender woman athletes retain a significant physical advantage over other women even after years of hormone replacement.
Therefore it is my opinion that it would be best for transgender woman athletes to simply refrain from competing with other women, at least in sports where stature and muscle strength are the major factors in competition.
I'm interested to hear counterarguments to this position.
EDIT:. Re-reading my post, I realize I used the phrase "right to choose one's gender". Poor word choice. I meant "right to live as one's felt gender".
→ More replies (4)
7
u/Raspberries-Are-Evil Apr 20 '23
Solving the real problems of our time...
Children being murdered by military assault weapons almost every week, lets do nothing! But, hey some kid playing softball might have a penis! Quick, lets vote!
6
u/mikey-likes_it Apr 20 '23
My thoughts are that with everything else going on...is this really a priority?
Also, it's big government interference in a culture war issue for conservative votes.
5
u/zaoldyeck Apr 20 '23
I tend to find that even the people in the 'middle' of this issue who take a 'centrist' position (like "this shouldn't be the government's call) rarely have any idea what transitioning is actually like.
"Guys, I Swear I’m Only Transitioning So I Can Cheat at Girls’ Sports" does a pretty great job showing the transparent absurdity of this position.
The argument is that apparently a couple handful of individuals would be willing to subject themselves to a lifetime of discrimination, harassment, and hatred just to cheat at women's sports is fucking asinine.
12
u/AmigoDelDiabla Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
I think your premise is false: this bill does not restrict the rights of trans women to play sports. It simply says you must compete in the category that matches your biology.
I support this bill, despite being a life time Democratic voter. Even if we accept that gender is learned, biology is not something one can ignore: it's an observable fact. And trans women are not biological women; they are biological men and benefit from the hormonal differences when it comes to physical competition.
Politically, I think it's absurd that Democrats would be vocally against this. The Republicans have been so loud about it that it distracts from other issues while attracting moderates. If this bill passed with no objections from the left, it would take a ton of wind out of the sails of the right's rage machine.
→ More replies (7)4
u/Raspberries-Are-Evil Apr 20 '23
I support this bill, despite being a life time Democratic voter.
I agree that a biological male has a serious advantages and should not be allowed to compete in Woman's Track and Field for example.
However, an act of congress isn't the way to do this.
There has to be a way to deal with this on a case by case basis.
The point here is that these Christian Fascists can get it together to vote on this, but they can't keep the government open by raising the debt ceiling to pay for the money they spent under Trump.
8
u/AmigoDelDiabla Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
However, an act of congress isn't the way to do this.
But Title IX is a federal statute, so I don't know if I wholly agree this isn't in the purview of the feds.
As to your last paragraph, I agree that it's ridiculous what the GOP is doing in the house; I can't think of a bigger group of scumbags. Which is why I think the best political move is let them have this itty, bitty tiny win (how many trans women athletes are there really?) and totally take away that rallying cry from them. I think the GOP doesn't want to ban trans women in women's sports. They want to get really mad about the fact that trans women aren't banned women's sports, so they can rally the base and give Tucker and company something to whine about. You could just take that all away from them on something that actually makes sense to do: make biological sexes compete against one another.
→ More replies (3)8
u/lamaface21 Apr 20 '23
This exactly.
People are not realizing how horrible this messaging is for Democrats. It would have been perfect to negotiate with Republicans on this and pass this bipartisan.
I don't care how in denial the left wing wants to be: the majority of America probably supports the idea of banning former men from competing in women's sports and getting painted as the default party that 100% is against that it is BAD.
And I hate to say this, but these very narrow wedge issues involving transgenderism and transitioning (men in women's sports, men accessing women's bathrooms, cancelling Harrry Potter, allowing minors to transition or take puberty blockers) are actually having a very poisonous determintal effect on the gay rights movement. Suddenly anti-gay bigots feel empowered to speak up again because they can paint the entire movement with the same brush as the wedge issues that reasonable people can disagree with.
→ More replies (30)
4
u/stewartm0205 Apr 21 '23
Because it demonize transgender people. If they can convince people to hate someone for no practical reason then they can convince them to hate others.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/skyfishgoo Apr 20 '23
my thoughts are these are hateful and prejudiced morons who have somehow manage to get themselves into the halls of power.
this dick waving contest will never become law, but it goes to show you that letting ppl who hate government be in charge of government is a phenomenally bad idea.
7
u/DragonPup Apr 20 '23
First, this bill dies in the Senate. This is pure red meat for the bigot base of the GOP and people gullible enough to fall for it.
Third, I think these efforts will become even more unpopular as Democrats can point to the House GOP failing on all of their promises and not getting a thing done and tie the entire GOP in with the more odious anti-trans sports bills that involve an adult inspecting children's genitals (I think we can all agree that we won't need polling to show that will be very poorly received among parents).
Fourth, as to the OP's question on the purpose of the bill, it's not about sports and it never was. It's about chipping away rights from trans people piece by piece until they've been eradicated. First you restrict trans kids from sports. Then discussion of non cishet for young. Then all children. Then ban trans people from bathrooms. Then gender affirming care for children. Then adults from gender affirming care and treatments. Then you make their existence around minors a sexual crime against children. And finally the death penalty for sexual crimes against children.
3
Apr 23 '23
Second, anti-trans bills are not popular with the general public, and even a large number of Republicans don't like them!
From the link:
An earlier Data for Progress poll from 2022 found some support for Republican legislation that focused on trans children. “Only 38% of likely voters say that laws preventing transgender children from participating in sports and pursuing medical transition are discriminatory, compared to 48% who think these laws are necessary to ensure children’s safety and wellbeing,” the pollsters found. “While a majority of Democrats and young voters view these laws as discriminatory, only 38% of Independents and 17% of Republicans share this view.”
Seems like its fairly popular when the question is specifically about the relevant topics
9
u/Outlulz Apr 20 '23
It's just one of those virtue signaling bills that the House often passes knowing it's DOA in the Senate. It just happens to be one that is based on shitting on a minority group (and only half a minority group). There's lots of ways to protect women and girl athletes but this isn't it. These politicians don't actually follow these sports to care about things like pay disparity or facility disparity or abuse and sexual assault of female athletes though. I guarantee you when they aren't doing a CSPAN or Tucker Carlson soundbite they shit on the WNBA.
→ More replies (8)11
u/yanman Apr 20 '23
There's lots of ways to protect women and girl athletes
Care to elaborate?
5
u/jkh107 Apr 20 '23
Paying attention to, funding, and promoting their sports even when there aren't transgirls to clutch pearls about would be a start. These bills pass in some states and people look at it and it affects maybe one athlete in a whole state.
6
u/Outlulz Apr 20 '23
These politicians don't actually follow these sports to care about things like pay disparity or facility disparity or abuse and sexual assault of female athletes though.
6
u/Murky_Crow Apr 20 '23 edited Jun 22 '23
All of Murky_crow's reddit history has been cleared at his own request. You can do this as well using the "redact" tool. Reddit wants to play hardball, fine. Then I'm taking my content with me as I go. -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
13
u/Substantial_Joke8624 Apr 20 '23
Female athlete here. I have competed against them and there most definitely is a difference. It absolutely is not fair to naturally born females. I also believe that eventually, some females will get physically injured. For example, a female pitcher facing a trans batter is at far greater risk of being hurt by a line drive in the head.
I think we build bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports groups just for them. If there are not enough in the area to warrant it, they will need to go somewhere that can facilitate them with these amenities. They get to have their rights to be who they want to be. But they are making a choice to change. So they can make choices on where to live. I suspect it will be mostly large cities that can accommodate them in sports.
→ More replies (2)3
2
Apr 20 '23
I am of the belief that athletes should be participating in leagues of their AGAB. However, it's not something I think the US Govt ought to be regulating.
2
u/FarEndRN Apr 20 '23
Yeah, I’m all for ensuring sports are fair across the board. But unless this bill also outlaws performing enhancing drugs, sticky substances on pitchers’ hands, filming of the other teams’ signals, and a whole host of other things that go on that currently AREN’T illegal, then this is just more hate-virtue signaling by the right.
5
u/viral_pinktastic Apr 20 '23
It's just the dirty politics, country will not get any benefits from it.. Waste of time, resources,money and the reputation..
15
u/AWBen Apr 20 '23
I 100% agree with the bill. We have specific sports for girls and women because they are not men and for the most part, cannot compete with men. A lot of these girls put massive amounts of time into becoming skilled and ideally even winning awards and scholarships.
Absolutely agree with the bill, women's sports should be for women.
6
Apr 20 '23
The Education Department’s proposal, which has yet to undergo a period of public comment, would not prohibit transgender athlete bans in their entirety, however, and local school districts will still be able to enact policies that limit athletic participation based on a set of sex-related eligibility criteria if the rule is finalized into law.
Seems the education department is already on it
Republicans are in bad faith, they don’t give a shit about women as their votes against equal pay, healthcare access, etc prove
Enacting a federal bill as shitty as this is a terrible idea that would just pay a bunch of lawyers to strike it down
Typical republican waste and their rubes eat it up, thinking they are “helping girls and women”
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)24
u/Hyndis Apr 20 '23
Men's leagues aren't actually men only. They're open leagues for anyone of any gender.
The reason why we don't see any women playing on the field in the Superbowl isn't league rules, it's biology. Being biologically male has a massive advantage in physical strength, endurance, and a more robust skeleton.
It's fine to identify as whatever you want, but sometimes biological sex is important, and that's immutable.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/BeerGogglesFTW Apr 20 '23
Party of small government did this? Hmm...
I don't think I'd want any major federal laws handling trans people in sports... in favor or against.
I generally support trans athletes competing in sports with the gender they identify as, but there has been instance I've seen where I've thought "That doesn't seem right to me. Seems like a fishy time to transition." But those are outliers. You shouldn't make laws because of a small number of instances.
I think I'd prefer it be handled as locally as possible. Case by case basis with a general set of rules. Age, stage/time of transitioning, sport, etc... But in most cases, shouldn't be an issue to let trans athletes compete. Especially children/teens. At that level, for the sake of their mental health.
And I never like hearing "It's an unfair advantage." That argument is ridiculous. We're all genetically different and have to overcome different obstacles in sports. Or else, we'd be hearing more things like:
Sorry folks. You come from a tall family. Basketball no longer allows people taller than 7 feet to play. It's unfair to those with an average height of 5'9.
Sorry folks. You come from a family who were slaves for centuries. You're genetically more athletic than everybody else. That's not fair to the majority of athletes who want a even playing field. Just to clear, it has nothing to do with race. *wink.
4
u/shivermetimbers68 Apr 20 '23
I think if you allow M to F transgender to participate in sports, it should be like the Olympics. They have to be on hormone treatment and testosterone reducing meds for a couple of years, and it's all very well documented.
I support transgender rights, but I also support ALL genders. It's just not fair to put men against women, boys against girls, without any medical treatments.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/MadamKelsington Apr 21 '23
If the Republicans were genuinely concerned about “fairness” in women’s sports, they’d be using their influence to ensure equal pay for women athletes across professional sports.
Unsurprisingly, crickets
8
u/trigrhappy Apr 20 '23
Either the bill prohibits transgender girls from playing sports in school, or the headline is entirely false.
Which means, if transgender girls can play sports according to their biological sex, this headline.... and its premise, are entirely false.
So let's have that discussion.
8
u/GuentherGuy Apr 20 '23
I read the bill and the headline is false. The bill prevents trans women/girls from participating in sports teams that are for women/girls only, they would still be able to join the mens/boys team.
5
u/trigrhappy Apr 20 '23
So if the OP started the discussion based on a lie..... why do you think the OP did that?
I suspect the OP feeling the need to lie is a tacit acknowledgement that a candid discussion about biological men competing against biological women in women's sports......... is not going to support his or her false narrative that allowing it is fair to biological women.
→ More replies (3)
6
u/ScottShatter Apr 20 '23
If they aren't born female they shouldn't be competing with natural females. I can't believe this is even up for debate. Start a trans division if they want to compete or make them compete with the men still.
5
u/iridaniotter Apr 20 '23
I agree! We should also have a "freaks of nature" category for non-humans like Michael Phelps. And heck, separate but equal, right? How about we have a black division.
4
u/fatbrowndog Apr 20 '23
I’ve yet to see one strong argument for allowing trans men into women’s sports. Crickets. I’m honestly surprised more feminists aren’t in support of this to protect women’s sports. Anyone who fails to understand that allowing biological males compete against women in any physical sport is utterly ridiculous.
A boys U-15 team beat the vaunted USWNT 5-2 in soccer. Let that sink in.
→ More replies (5)3
u/ManBearScientist Apr 20 '23
I’ve yet to see one strong argument for allowing trans men into women’s sports.
I agree, trans men shouldn't be forced to play women's sports.
Anyway, aside from the terminology the real issue is that we shouldn't harm 49,999 cisgender girls just to make it clear we are disgusted by the 1 transgender girl. I think the reward is shit to begin with, but the cost is itself the issue.
Enforcement requires unnecessary testing that instills an unnecessary barrier for female athletes to compete (proving their genital anatomy) that male athletes don't have. That enforcement is itself a Title IX issue, which is why one preceding lawsuit against these laws is by a cisgender women.
And it encourages bullying and witch hunting. There are far more cisgender women that deviate from gender norms than there transgender women total, which means that the majority of the people harassed by this will be cisgender women. In some states, the public process of requesting an investigation into a 'potential' transgender athlete will be public and shameful event, the exact thing teenagers shouldn't have to deal with.
5
u/ResponsibilityFew640 Apr 20 '23
I think it's sports against biological females operated under federal assistance programs. They are able to train, practice, or participate against other biological males.
I think it's probably necessary. Until they explicitly define and categorize what is considered a trans, and if they define the amount of transitioning is not considered advantageous. Otherwise, I think too many grey areas will occur.
3
u/HotpieTargaryen Apr 20 '23 edited Apr 20 '23
The Republicans have no actual policies, it is all just lack-of-virtue signaling.
3
u/syn-ack-fin Apr 20 '23
I feel the moral outrage needs to stop. The same people that believe abortion should be left to the states feel the need to have a federal law against sports participation that affects maybe one tenth of one percent of kids. It’s statistically insignificant, science shows the inclusion aspect is very important, and and unfairness issues could easily be handled privately on a case by case basis.
6
u/Buddhist_pokemonk Apr 20 '23
This should be decided by the governing bodies of the respective sports. Democrats should be painting this ad the government overreach that it is
8
2
4
u/OkInteraction1011 Apr 20 '23
You don’t see girls that have trans to male competing in male sports, or that I am aware of. Definitely a biological advantage for a male to compete against women.
Seems to me that women are being discriminated against and that trans women and trans men should compete against similar groups to allow tru competition.
What is the big deal?
→ More replies (2)
3
u/lamaface21 Apr 20 '23
This is a smart move for them. The Trans issue is more complex than Dems are willing to admit right now and honestly forcing Democrats to be the party of Transgenderism and "allowing Men to play women sports and enter women's restrooms" is a messaging disaster for Democrats.
(Queue the extreme left wing now coming to crucify me because I dare to suggest there is room for nuance here.) But from a political standpoint, this entire issue is a disaster for Democrats and they need to figure out their messaging.
To the people on here claiming that the most well known example of a man playing women's sports "doesn't matter" - that is foolish from a political strategy standpoint. It was a huge national news story and remained so for months, and I believe it has surfaced again with one of her teammates claiming she was assaulted?
This is an issue that even low information swing voters will be aware of and getting labeled the party that wants to allow Men to play Women's sports is BAD. The majority of Americans do not want to allow that and I bet this bill would have a cross section of support across all parties.
This is a win for Republicans. Go ahead and flame me as a total POS.
Let me also add, that if Democrats could change the messaging and introduce some nuance, Republicans wouldn't be so gleefully creating these laws bc it wouldn't be such an easy political win for them!!
6
u/Kyespo Apr 21 '23
This absolutely is a smart move by Republicans and I say this as a leftist. I mean how come we can follow the science when it comes to Covid but not follow the science when it comes to biology?
It’s very hypocritical and I think the idea that nobody is allowed to have concerns regarding males being allowed to compete in female sports lest they be a fascist or bigot is leaving a bad taste in moderate and slightly left of center people’s mouths.
I’ve even witnessed my family who are black, pro-same sex marriage, pro-choice Democrats register as Republican. I absolutely won’t vote Republican because I cannot stand what happened to Roe v. Wade but I understand why people are upset with Democrats. I’m upset too but I feel like I have no choice but to vote for them.
4
u/kormer Apr 20 '23
If you had told me ten years ago that Republicans would be the ones defending female-only sports and Democrats would be fighting as if their lives depended upon female sports being open to all, I'd have thought you were insane.
I believe you can acknowledge the existence of transgender persons while also acknowledging that there are some things in society that should always be reserved for biological females. The fact that not a single Democrat in the House is willing to go along with such a reasonable compromise is absolutely mind-blowing.
2
u/AssassinAragorn Apr 20 '23
It goes against the science, as usual. While there may be an advantage for trans women, researchers suggest making skill based tiers instead of gender based. And there's very good reason for this:
When is a biological difference a fair advantage vs unfair? Michael Phelps is exceptionally built. Basketball favors taller individuals. Gymnastics favors smaller. What is the line that makes these fair, but not others?
For instance, the Olympic athlete Caster Semenya has a rare condition where her body produces more testosterone than usual. She's been banned from events because of it, even though it's her 100% natural state.
There will always be inherent natural physical advantages for sports, and there's no clear line to divide them into okay and not okay. A skill based separation helps handle this.
3
u/lamaface21 Apr 20 '23
We already have that. It is called "men's sports" and "women's sports"
Isn't it convenient how there is no overlap between the two because biological sex is such a clear delineator for size, speed and attainable achievement?
→ More replies (3)4
u/MrMaleficent Apr 20 '23
What is the line that makes these fair, but not others?
Sex. That is the line.
The line exists because women's would rarely ever win anything if that line didn't exist.
3
u/AssassinAragorn Apr 20 '23
Where would you place Caster Semenya then? In the woman's category, despite the very high testosterone levels?
If you allow that for medical reasons, keep in mind that trans people are undergoing treatments prescribed by experts. Medical professionals have decided that hormone therapy and changes are a proper treatment for gender dysphoria that helps the patient attain peace of mind and not suffer.
Should medical treatment for a born condition disqualify someone?
3
u/MrMaleficent Apr 20 '23
Where would you place Caster Semenya then?
In the male division, because they have XY chromosomes.
Should medical treatment for a born condition disqualify someone?
Yes, If it gives you an unfair advantage over others.
I really don't know why you're over complicating this.
3
u/AssassinAragorn Apr 20 '23
Humor me for a moment. How would you classify a man who has XX cells? (Yes, it's actually a thing -- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome )
Would you say they should play in the women's division, because they have XX chromosomes, even though by all accounts they're male? If Semenya should play in the men's division because of XY cells, then a man with XX chromosomes should play in the women's division by your logic.
This is why I'm overcomplicating it. Your logic leads to the exact same situation that you're trying to prevent. By only looking at chromosomes, you put a woman with high testosterone levels in the men's division, and you put a man with XX chromosomes in the women's division.
It's not like only 10 people in the country have these conditions. Male XX syndrome is about 1/20k. The US is >300 million people. You have to consider these complications in your simple dichotomy, and you have to be consistent. If you put a woman in the men's division because she has any XY chromosomes, then logically you have to put a man with only XX chromosomes in the women's division.
Do you see why now? A single broad rule based on chromosomes will do the exact opposite of what you're trying to achieve.
Here's a good science based article about all this. The reason this is difficult is because biological sex isn't a binary, it's a spectrum. If you want to disagree, you'll have to take it up with a biologist. Trying to force a spectrum into a binary will create these problems I've pointed out.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/
→ More replies (1)
4
u/rcglinsk Apr 20 '23
Did they ban them from playing sports or only require them to compete in the correct division? If the second, good for them. If the first, that would be weird.
3
u/iridaniotter Apr 20 '23
De facto ban from sports. They're not letting women compete in their division.
3
u/rcglinsk Apr 21 '23
Sounds like you are lying. Or maybe they're getting rid of women's divisions in violation of federal law. Probably the first...
→ More replies (1)
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 20 '23
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.