Broadly speaking, you probably agree with the large majority of the views commonly attributed to whichever group you identify with - what are the exceptions? Something that if you mention without a caveat immediately makes people jump to conclusions or even attack you?
I think trans athletes should be able to compete only in their assigned gender at birth category, if the sport is gender-segregated.
I think sports governing bodies should be able to determine this for themselves and their particular sport. But that’s a little too pragmatic for a lot of folks.
But yeah, this gets you labeled an anti-trans bigot these days. Despite the fact practically speaking the particularities are involve really can’t be generalized. In some cases there will be a unfair advantage, in others, not.
Yeah, I got into a discussion on this topic and my suggestion is that sports split on other categories, not just gender. Boxing already does weight classes, which is good, more sports should do that. Can’t we have sports for people under 5’8"? I’m sure there’s lots of shortkings who’d love to compete seriously in a league where there height wasnt an detriment.
This approach seemed to offend both sides of the trans sports debate.
I don’t think that those are the same position.
Let’s update our understanding and use other more meaningful categories that better reflect people’s lived experiences is a good idea. Let’s confine our understanding and hold people in rigid categories that often do not match their lived experiences is not.
John Oliver also has a good segment on this topic, if you’re interested.
Also, one could listen to someone such as Erin in the morning to understand the context of the anti-trans sports campaign.
Some of what Erin describes here is that much of the current anti-trans efforts are being funded and pushed by many of the same religious fundamentalist groups that previously pushed “defense of marriage” campaigns and and legislation against gay people.
The market research that these groups have used since losing that debate have shown them that religious arguments against inclusion are generally unpopular. So now they’ve made a very deliberate, and rather successful, effort to repackage their agenda through the sports topic instead.
Yes, but the thing you’re missing is how much of USA culture is tied up in sports. Including college admissions through popular team sports. This topic hits a lot broader because it’s about sports, and shitloads of money.
Hence nobody cares if there are trans people in niche sports with no money. For example, I mountain bike. Nobody cares, because mountain biking is increidbly niche and there zero money in and and there are like 13 NCAA mountain biking teams in the country… and if you win a competitive mtb race you win like $100.
But if it’s Basketball… we’re talking billions of dollars.
I come from a family of many female athletes. They aren’t anti trans or anti-religion But they are anti-trans women in women’s sports. They believe in a separate trans/non-gender category, but that’s not a solution trans-advocates want. They want trans women to be in women’s sports, and not men’s sports. (and of course, nobody cares about trans men)
Transgender ladies who are on oestrogen and testosterone blockers aren’t any stronger or faster than cis ladies.
Gender affirming surgery for trans women often includes bone shaving in various locations because your skeleton does not substantially change in response to your hormones. Hormone treatment does not affect your skeleton.
Also, in the same way that it is easier for people who have lost weight to put that weight back on because they already have those extra fat cells, people who lose muscle mass will have an easier time gaining muscle back because they already have those extra muscle cells.
Gender-affirming care massively reduces the difference, but transwomen are still likely to be faster than AFAB women:
But what season you’re born in also influences your strength and fitness:
So maybe it’s not fair for all those poor summer babies to compete against unfairly blessed autumn athletes?
There’s enough biological diversity that fairness is basically an illusion anyway. I don’t care enough about sports to have a strong opinion. I think it’s fine to say giving up competitive sports is a cost of gender transition. I might think it’s also fine to let trans athletes compete except I would hate it if the women’s league became the trans league or if poor young kids felt pressure to transition in order to compete at a higher level and get life-changing scholarships or even a professional career.
Is that a legitimate fear? Maybe not. At the end of the day, I rarely watch sports. I would support letting them compete and seeing if it is a problem before passing laws to fix issues that don’t actually exist.
Yeah, I agree. This is a take I rarely see. And it’s just… a choice lots of kids make regardless of their gender identity for lots of social or physical reasons. I’ve known people who had accidents, then pulled out of it for fear of permanent physical harm. Lots of people also would love to play, but physically are unable to due to a too much/too little body mass for that sport. You can’t be a football offensive lineman if you weigh 120lbs and are 5’2". My nephew spent years training for baseball and was very good, but he physically wasn’t large enough to be competitive, so he had to give it up.
The notion that one MUST be able to play competitive sports is so… bizarre to me. If they can compete, great. But if they are wiping the floor with their peers because of their physical advantages… they should probably be playing as a man w/ men. And that’s not unprecedented. We had a few larger/stronger women play with boys when I was growing up and everyone was cool with it.