# Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.



## dad4 (Aug 10, 2022)

Should sanctioning bodies allow male to female trans athletes to register on girls teams?

Please do not mention any specific child or team.  It is common enough to be an issue, but we can discuss the fairness questions without making life hard for some kid.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 10, 2022)

Even discussing it generally makes it hard on these children.  All they want is to lead a normal life, but haters seem to think what they are really doing is trying to find a way to get a hand up in life to ruin someone else's athletic dreams.  lol, yeah, that's the first thing on a 10-year old's mind: how can I ruin some one else's dreams of playing in college?


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 10, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Should sanctioning bodies allow male to female trans athletes to register on girls teams?


If this is the question that you're asking, then the question that I have in return is what is the objective of playing youth sports? Our local sanctioning bodies have laid out their objectives on their website for all of us to see:

- Based on US Club Soccer's Vision, Mission and Core Statement, they should not allow transgender girls to play on girls teams.
- Based on Cal South's About Us, Vision, Mission and Core Statement, they should allow transgender girls to play on girls teams.



Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Even discussing it generally makes it hard on these children.  All they want is to lead a normal life, but haters seem to think what they are really doing is trying to find a way to get a hand up in life to ruin someone else's athletic dreams.  lol, yeah, that's the first thing on a 10-year old's mind: how can I ruin some one else's dreams of playing in college?


Without discussion, there will never be acceptance. Without acceptance, transgender girls will never be able to lead the normal life that you're talking about. Not everyone who wants to talk about this or is unsure on their stance here is a transphobe as @GoldenGate will have you believe. Where we stand today, there will be vitriol on the sidelines of the opposition when playing against a transgender girl. There's a reason that this topic was brought up on that forum to begin with.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 10, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> If this is the question that you're asking, then the question that I have in return is what is the objective of playing youth sports? Our local sanctioning bodies have laid out their objectives on their website for all of us to see:
> 
> - Based on US Club Soccer's Vision, Mission and Core Statement, they should not allow transgender girls to play on girls teams.
> - Based on Cal South's About Us, Vision, Mission and Core Statement, they should allow transgender girls to play on girls teams.


Care to expand on how you came to that conclusion for US Club Soccer?   The words boy, girl, male, female, or gender are not used there.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 10, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Even discussing it generally makes it hard on these children.  All they want is to lead a normal life, but haters seem to think what they are really doing is trying to find a way to get a hand up in life to ruin someone else's athletic dreams.  lol, yeah, that's the first thing on a 10-year old's mind: how can I ruin some one else's dreams of playing in college?


If you want to have separate boys and girls leagues, you need some sort of rule for who is allowed into each league.

How do you pick that line?  Do you defer to the loudest advocate until someone like Lia Thomas makes you look like an absolute fool?  

That path ends poorly.  Swimming was a laughingstock for months because of it.  In the end, they had to switch their rules anyway.

You're better off putting all the Y chromosome athletes in the men's division.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 10, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Care to expand on how you came to that conclusion for US Club Soccer?   The words boy, girl, male, female, or gender are not used there.


Correct. Nowhere is gender or inclusivity discussed. Instead, US Club talks about promoting the best interests of players and the game, acting in a businesslike manner and being a loyal member of U.S. Soccer. In that case, they should follow the guidelines that NWSL, US Soccer's women's league, has put in place for transgender athletes.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 10, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Correct. Nowhere is gender or inclusivity discussed. Instead, US Club talks about promoting the best interests of players and the game, acting in a businesslike manner and being a loyal member of U.S. Soccer. In that case, they should follow the guidelines that NWSL, US Soccer's women's league, has put in place for transgender athletes.


It's in the interest of women's sports to keep the compeition fair and not make it a laughing stock within the professional sports community...and to try and stay away from the vagueness of gender vs the quantifiable ID of sex at birth.  There are outlyer medical conditions that contradict but those are few and far between.

It's a difficult and uncomfortable subject for some/many.  Coed teams up to certain ages aren't a big deal.  Puberty/hormones are the line in the sand and are so obvioss if you ever seen an elite U16/U17 girls team take on a U16/U17 boy's second team.  I've never seen a close game and the differences are glaringly obvious.  Size and strength matter and usually wins when bodies clash.


----------



## dk_b (Aug 10, 2022)

I have no problem with my daughters competing against athletes who are trans women or trans girls. I do not believe that there are adolescent boys or young adult men who will go through the process of living as a girl or woman just to catch a look at other girls/women in the locker room or for a competitive advantage. If someone identifies as a girl or woman and lives as a girl or a woman, I think she should compete in girls' or women's athletics.  The issue involves a relatively small number of trans athletes so a policy of inclusion seems the most reasonable to me.

I don't have a high degree of confidence that this is a forum conducive to reasonable discussion of this topic.

(FWIW, I am a parent of one D1 woman soccer player and two HS girl soccer players (my first child is a boy (well, now a man) and is not really relevant to this discussion))


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 10, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Correct. Nowhere is gender or inclusivity discussed. Instead, US Club talks about promoting the best interests of players and the game, acting in a businesslike manner and being a loyal member of U.S. Soccer. In that case, they should follow the guidelines that NWSL, US Soccer's women's league, has put in place for transgender athletes.


Doesn't that policy allow for transgender athletes to play, but with various guidelines?


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 10, 2022)

dk_b said:


> I don't have a high degree of confidence that this is a forum conducive to reasonable discussion of this topic.


Quote of the year.  Go dive into the off-topic to get an eye-opener.  I did, went and took a shower, and promise to never do so again.


----------



## espola (Aug 10, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Doesn't that policy allow for transgender athletes to play, but with various guidelines?


It looks like they need an established transition program and are subject to more or less continuous blood testing.


----------



## dk_b (Aug 10, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Quote of the year.  Go dive into the off-topic to get an eye-opener.  I did, went and took a shower, and promise to never do so again.


I am questioning why I'd comment on this thread at all b/c I know how I'm going to feel after. After being a pretty active commenter for a number of years, I took a very long break b/c how unreasonable so many threads got. I came back b/c of ACL tears and to help provide real world info re recruiting and playing at the D1 level (those are pretty solid threads). I know I will regret this dive into the boiling water.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 10, 2022)

espola said:


> It looks like they need an established transition program and are subject to more or less continuous blood testing.


This article sums up the NWSL's policy and raises some good questions and concerns. One of them is the testing procedures.

So far, I appreciate the discussion here.









						NWSL’s transgender player policy needs work
					

While the league is correct in addressing the need for such a policy, they haven’t come up with one that feels very inclusive.




					www.allforxi.com


----------



## crush (Aug 10, 2022)

dk_b said:


> I have no problem with my daughters competing against athletes who are trans women or trans girls. *I do not believe* that there are adolescent boys or *young adult men who will go through the process of living as a girl or woman just to catch a look at other girls/women in the locker room* or for a competitive advantage. If someone identifies as a girl or woman and lives as a girl or a woman, I think she should compete in girls' or women's athletics.  The issue involves a relatively small number of trans athletes so a policy of inclusion seems the most reasonable to me.
> 
> I don't have a high degree of confidence that this is a forum conducive to reasonable discussion of this topic.
> 
> (FWIW, I am a parent of one D1 woman soccer player and two HS girl soccer players (my first child is a boy (well, now a man) and is not really relevant to this discussion))


I know millions of reasons, but let's not go there tonight. Oh boy, this is a tough one and I took the bait. Crush believes under 11, go co-ed. 12 and above, we shall take each case by itself, male or female.  I empathies with everyone and I want to bring peace and harmony and FAIRNESS. The Lia one is a no for me because we need standard of rules of when Lia is offically I girl and Lia needs to get rid of something before I even listen but if Lia goes all the way and is making strides to be who she wants to be, the Pro's can interview and ask more Qs. I love you all and I want to help everyone through all this. I coached my dd U6 co-ed team and it was a gr8t joy. We lost every game but the kids had fun.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 10, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Correct. Nowhere is gender or inclusivity discussed. Instead, US Club talks about promoting the best interests of players and the game, acting in a businesslike manner and being a loyal member of U.S. Soccer. In that case, they should follow the guidelines that NWSL, US Soccer's women's league, has put in place for transgender athletes.


NWSL is dealing with adults.  It’s closer to reasonable for them to request a specific medical procedure (gonadectomy or androgen suppressants) as a condition of playing in their league.  And they do require it.

I wouldn’t want to out that kind of pressure on a kid.  You don’t want to say “we’ll let you play, but only if you push transition faster than you find comfortable”.


----------



## crush (Aug 10, 2022)

dad4 said:


> NWSL is dealing with adults.  It’s closer to reasonable for them to request a specific medical procedure (gonadectomy or androgen suppressants) as a condition of playing in their league.  And they do require it.
> 
> I wouldn’t want to out that kind of pressure on a kid.  You don’t want to say “we’ll let you play, but only if you push transition faster than you find comfortable”.


I know a dear friend whose dd became a yound man at 12 and then a man and is super happy. Hannah became Nick and looks and acts like a male 100%.  I have not met a ds who became a girl but I know their out their and all humans should be handled with love and care. However, we need some standards, some definitions and that is fair. I think all know what I mean. Case by case and treat each person with dignity and no judgment. Openness and transparency is key.  We can do this everyone.


----------



## VanMan (Aug 10, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Correct. Nowhere is gender or inclusivity discussed. Instead, US Club talks about promoting the best interests of players and the game, acting in a businesslike manner and being a loyal member of U.S. Soccer. In that case, they should follow the guidelines that NWSL, US Soccer's women's league, has put in place for transgender athletes.


I'm going to regret biting on this thread...

Let's say for discussion sake that we accept what you're suggesting.  What does the NWSL policy look like:



The hard line in the sand here is the max testosterone level of 10nmol/L and the declaration that the athlete identifies as female.  

You're saying you're good with this?


----------



## Happened again (Aug 10, 2022)

VanMan said:


> I'm going to regret biting on this thread...
> 
> Let's say for discussion sake that we accept what you're suggesting.  What does the NWSL policy look like:
> 
> ...


It's a great question and one that is argued over and over.  Human biology is entirely too complicated to leave it up to one marker to determine fairness in sports.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 10, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Should sanctioning bodies allow male to female trans athletes to register on girls teams?
> 
> Please do not mention any specific child or team.  It is common enough to be an issue, but we can discuss the fairness questions without making life hard for some kid.


the rules should increase in severity (outright ban, certain time post surgery, certain time post hormone treatment) based on the level. An eight year old in ayso Rec who cares. An Olympic athlete is a very different story.  Higher scrutiny for solo over team sports.


----------



## Carlsbad7 (Aug 10, 2022)

VanMan said:


> I'm going to regret biting on this thread...
> 
> Let's say for discussion sake that we accept what you're suggesting.  What does the NWSL policy look like:
> 
> ...


It's not worth arguing this one.

You're trying to apply logic to a topic that's 100% emotional.

No matter what you say those on the other side will press against it.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 10, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Doesn't that policy allow for transgender athletes to play, but with various guidelines?


Yes, it does. I'm not a medical expert but I don't think that allowing children to fuck with their testosterone level sounds healthy thus I think US Club soccer should say no.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 10, 2022)

VanMan said:


> I'm going to regret biting on this thread...
> 
> Let's say for discussion sake that we accept what you're suggesting.  What does the NWSL policy look like:
> 
> ...


Not at all which is why I think that US Club soccer given what they have stated in their mission statement should not allow the player to be sanctioned.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 10, 2022)

Happened again said:


> It's in the interest of women's sports to keep the compeition fair and not make it a laughing stock within the professional sports community...and to try and stay away from the vagueness of gender vs the quantifiable ID of sex at birth.  There are outlyer medical conditions that contradict but those are few and far between.
> 
> It's a difficult and uncomfortable subject for some/many.  Coed teams up to certain ages aren't a big deal.  Puberty/hormones are the line in the sand and are so obvioss if you ever seen an elite U16/U17 girls team take on a U16/U17 boy's second team.  I've never seen a close game and the differences are glaringly obvious.  Size and strength matter and usually wins when bodies clash.


So at what age do you tell the transgender girl that she is too biologically superior and needs to go play with boys? What if her genetic makeup is inferior and she is not even a good athlete?


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 10, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Should sanctioning bodies allow male to female trans athletes to register on girls teams?
> 
> Please do not mention any specific child or team.  It is common enough to be an issue, but we can discuss the fairness questions without making life hard for some kid.


We form competitive groups in children's sports to eliminate the strongly correlated advantages of age and sex (Y chromosome definition). In soccer, and many other sports, no other variables come close to differentiating performance. No one is denied participation. As our resident "pay-to-play" advocate GG states, there is a level for everyone. In recreational sports we'd be better served by making an evaluation of skill level and partitioning accordingly regardless of the Y chromosome and age.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 10, 2022)

kickingandscreaming said:


> We form competitive groups in children's sports to eliminate the strongly correlated advantages of age and sex (Y chromosome definition). In soccer, and many other sports, no other variables come close to differentiating performance. No one is denied participation. As our resident "pay-to-play" advocate GG states, there is a level for everyone. In recreational sports we'd be better served by making an evaluation of skill level and partitioning accordingly regardless of the Y chromosome and age.


even with respect to age there’s a huge difference between a January and December birthday, especially at certain ages such as 11 for the girls and 13 for the boys. We have deliberately chosen to shaft the December borns (and as a kid with an august birthday who was formerly the oldest and now is bottom middling I take the situation personally)

everything is trade offs. If we cared about age bands we’d at least divide the years in half if not quarters but then some teams wouldn’t have sufficient numbers to roster and commutes would be longer to find appropriate teams. We could do development age bands but the issue there it is it would be subject to cheating. 

so there are other factors being considered than just age.

the trade off on a hard ban on Y chromosomes is how far you willing to go?  If We really care only about that we’d allow opposing teams to challenge the genetic composition of anyone playing on opposite girls team including anyone who is otherwise biologically female but Carries a genetic anomaly.  If we want to take it even further to cover glandular disorders and steroids, we’d allow challenges forcing girls to testosterone test.


----------



## VanMan (Aug 10, 2022)

Carlsbad7 said:


> It's not worth arguing this one.
> 
> You're trying to apply logic to a topic that's 100% emotional.
> 
> No matter what you say those on the other side will press against it.


Just trying to understand where this guy is coming from.  I see both sides and honestly haven't fully formed an opinion. 

Considering the numbers...  less than 2% identifies as trans, about half are MTF, about half of those will medically transition, about 7-8% of kids in the US play soccer... my guess is that the demographic of MTF transitioners that want to play youth soccer is so infinitesimally small that we will spend more time arguing about it in a year than MTF kids will spend on the field.

Seems kind of like a tempest in teapot to me.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 10, 2022)

crush said:


> I know a dear friend whose dd became a yound man at 12 and then a man and is super happy. Hannah became Nick and looks and acts like a male 100%.  I have not met a ds who became a girl but I know their out their and all humans should be handled with love and care. However, we need some standards, some definitions and that is fair. I think all know what I mean. Case by case and treat each person with dignity and no judgment. Openness and transparency is key.  We can do this everyone.


really hoping you didn’t use their real names here. Outing a child or adult for that matter is one of the worst things you can do, unless they were already100% public about the transition


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 10, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> even with respect to age there’s a huge difference between a January and December birthday, especially at certain ages such as 11 for the girls and 13 for the boys. We have deliberately chosen to shaft the December borns (and as a kid with an august birthday who was formerly the oldest and now is bottom middling I take the situation personally)
> 
> everything is trade offs. If we cared about age bands we’d at least divide the years in half if not quarters but then some teams wouldn’t have sufficient numbers to roster and commutes would be longer to find appropriate teams. We could do development age bands but the issue there it is it would be subject to cheating.
> 
> ...


Yes, it's a trade-off. At some point, I believe Canada decided to split youth hockey into 6-month age intervals to reduce the advantage. I don't disagree with anything you said, but again, what is a better predictor of athletic performance in children than their age and Y chromosome (primarily after puberty)? To your point though, I believe with children, the biological presentation should be the determining factor and not a chromosome or testosterone test.

Do any of the trans females performing at a high level in women's sports such as Lia Thomas have any of these anomalies you speak of, or are they otherwise typical biological males who identify as female?


----------



## crush (Aug 11, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> really hoping you didn’t use their real names here. Outing a child or adult for that matter is one of the worst things you can do, unless they were already100% public about the transition


Over 15 years ago and 100% public. Thanks for judging me for the worst things I could ever do.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

kickingandscreaming said:


> Yes, it's a trade-off. At some point, I believe Canada decided to split youth hockey into 6-month age intervals to reduce the advantage. I don't disagree with anything you said, but again, what is a better predictor of athletic performance in children than their age and Y chromosome (primarily after puberty)? To your point though, I believe with children, the biological presentation should be the determining factor and not a chromosome or testosterone test.
> 
> Do any of the trans females performing at a high level in women's sports such as Lia Thomas have any of these anomalies you speak of, or are they otherwise typical biological males who identify as female?


My only point is we are somewhat arbitrarily assigning winners and losers based on values other than “fairness” because fairness is an illusory concept. Go too far one way and you have the South Park situation. Go too far another way and mtf have no where to compete because they are too weakened to compete with the people who present as male

if the test is the Y chromosome you are allowing an arbitrary advantage of intersex and xxy chromosome people to stand. Testosterone you are allow the arbitrary advantage of girls with a hormone imbalance (or who cheat and take steroids) to stand. a tiny fraction of people but we are assigning winners and losers based on something other than an illusory concept of “fairness”— we don’t want to force all girls to test just to screen out this tiny set of people. Even “born that way” isn’t a totally rational distinction because there is a tiny subset of people born intersex and assigned a gender and an argument that trans People aren’t so much making the choice but a condition that is born that way

I’m just saying we are picking winners and losers and the justifications are illusory (based on concepts like morality and fairness) and we can choose to totally shaft mtf trans the same we we choose to shaft December birthdays.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> So at what age do you tell the transgender girl that she is too biologically superior and needs to go play with boys? What if her genetic makeup is inferior and she is not even a good athlete?


Great question and a complicated one.  Hard to have that type of discussion on a board such as this- it's an emotional topic.  What you have described above is very ambigous. 

Biologically/medically speaking, puberty is a good place to start.  To keep it simple, 12 is a good marker for boys.  If you are/been the parent of a 12 year old boy, you are familiar with the physicaly transformation that occurs from one season to the next.  Boys go through puberty later than girls.  One year the girls are bigger, the next that advantage is completely erased.  It's why, generally speaking, girls teams will scrimmage against boys teams 2 years younger.  Boys quickly close the gap when they hit HS.  Clubs that use younger boys as a training tool for older girls usually transition to 3 years younger when girls are U17.  

The eye test is easy to administer. Again, emotionally charged...we as a society are trending towards the emotionally charged discussions VS a scientific and pragmatic ones.  An athletic, high leve U15 boy has no business on the same competitive field as an athletic, high level U15 girl - it's not even close.  We can carry this over into hormone treatment.....but..... *what are we doing having discussions about hormone treatments for teens who's brains aren't 100% developed and can barely make decisions on what shoes to wear for school* <--------This is type of statement is where the societal and cultural clash occurs... 

 You will never ( I should probably not say never) be able to apply NCAA, IOC, etc guidelines to youth sports...and should you?  Are parents OK treating pre-pubescent children and to what end?


----------



## Happened again (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> Just trying to understand where this guy is coming from.  I see both sides and honestly haven't fully formed an opinion.
> 
> Considering the numbers...  less than 2% identifies as trans, about half are MTF, about half of those will medically transition, about 7-8% of kids in the US play soccer... my guess is that the demographic of MTF transitioners that want to play youth soccer is so infinitesimally small that we will spend more time arguing about it in a year than MTF kids will spend on the field.
> 
> Seems kind of like a tempest in teapot to me.


Yep, it's really more of a ideological discussion, unless you are that parent who has a kid who's involved on either  side of the argument.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

Happened again said:


> Great question and a complicated one.  Hard to have that type of discussion on a board such as this- it's an emotional topic.  What you have described above is very ambigous.
> 
> Biologically/medically speaking, puberty is a good place to start.  To keep it simple, 12 is a good marker for boys.  If you are/been the parent of a 12 year old boy, you are familiar with the physicaly transformation that occurs from one season to the next.  Boys go through puberty later than girls.  One year the girls are bigger, the next that advantage is completely erased.  It's why, generally speaking, girls teams will scrimmage against boys teams 2 years younger.  Boys quickly close the gap when they hit HS.  Clubs that use younger boys as a training tool for older girls usually transition to 3 years younger when girls are U17.
> 
> ...


Theres a lot to unpack here in this thoughtful statement. The eye test is helpful in a South Park situation. It’s less helpful in the situation jabroni described which is someone born xy but genetically inferior in athletics to other xy and if you look at the person they are closer to girl than boy.  In such cases the eye test isn’t a useful limiting principle because it’s in the eye of the beholder

there’s been a lot of inconsistency and debate surrounding age of consent.  A lot of data shows kids don’t really start to fully mature til their mid 20s. We don’t allow them to drink until 21 and there’s a push to restrict gun ownership to 21. But there as also a push to allow vaccine and abortion consent at age 12, and if they can consent to that why not hormones?  They can drive (and negligently kill someone with a vehicle) at age 16. Die in war at 18

the age at which this should happen is also fraught. It is true there are some trans cases that are very obvious: it’s been obvious since they were very small that something was different…waiting in such cases will definitively impact the quality of life of such a person by forcing them to wait to transition. It is also true that these things have life altering implications that can’t be undone and there are people that have gone through it that later regret it or say they have some other psychological condition that was missed. At a minimum the standard for psychological screening before anything permanent is done needs to be much much higher than it is when it comes to minor and the ideology needs to be removed from it as much as possible.


----------



## Carlsbad7 (Aug 11, 2022)

What bothers me about all trans players is that every time they play on a team another player player is denied a chance to play that sport.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

Carlsbad7 said:


> What bothers me about all trans players is that every time they play on a team another player player is denied a chance to play that sport.


This is a fallacy except at the highest levels where there is only one level (Uswnt, a pro team)  

for everyone else (including college teams) those Behind are pushed back a space. The person behind them gets less playtime. The person who sits most of time on the bench gets bumped down a level. There’s plenty of room on flight 3 teams so the notion we’ll run out space is not realistic unless there’s a sudden rush of mtf into soccer beyond what we have now.

I note the same thing happens if you have a girl that is xxy join the team, or who just happens to have more testosterone in her system, or who is cheating and takes steroids, or who just happens to be unusually taller. The starting assumption of your statement is they are taking the space of someone who “is a real girl”.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Correct. Nowhere is gender or inclusivity discussed. Instead, US Club talks about promoting the best interests of players and the game, acting in a businesslike manner and being a loyal member of U.S. Soccer. In that case, they should follow the guidelines that NWSL, US Soccer's women's league, has put in place for transgender athletes.


The NWSL policy requires a statement that they identify as female and testosterone levels under 0.10 nmol/L.  Virtually every 10 year old biological boy has testosterone levels about half that dumb shit.  Because allowing a 10 year old trans girl to play on a girls team is fully compliant with NWSL policies - which you claim should be the standard - does this mean you'll STFU now?  Or are you going to admit that you only wanted to rely on the NWSL policy because you're a freakin' transphobic moron who mistakenly believed it supported your transphobic beliefs?


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> Just trying to understand where this guy is coming from.  I see both sides and honestly haven't fully formed an opinion.


Honestly, I'm in the same boat. The question was if the sanctioning bodies should allow it and I can only go based off of what their vision statement says.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> The NWSL policy requires a statement that they identify as female and testosterone levels under 0.10 nmol/L.  Virtually every 10 year old biological boy has testosterone levels about half that dumb shit.  Because allowing a 10 year old trans girl to play on a girls team is fully compliant with NWSL policies - which you claim should be the standard - does this mean you'll STFU now?  Or are you going to admit that you only wanted to rely on the NWSL policy because you're a freakin' transphobic moron who mistakenly believed it supported your transphobic beliefs?


Who said anything about 10 year olds? And at what age do we tell the transgender girls that she isn't able to play with the girls anymore until she starts regularly testing? And when the transgender girl goes through puberty, do we have her start androgen-suppressing treatment? Do we wait until she is suspended for a year, as also stated in the policy, before we start doing that?


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> My only point is we are somewhat arbitrarily assigning winners and losers based on values other than “fairness” because fairness is an illusory concept. Go too far one way and you have the South Park situation. Go too far another way and mtf have no where to compete because they are too weakened to compete with the people who present as male
> 
> if the test is the Y chromosome you are allowing an arbitrary advantage of intersex and xxy chromosome people to stand. Testosterone you are allow the arbitrary advantage of girls with a hormone imbalance (or who cheat and take steroids) to stand. a tiny fraction of people but we are assigning winners and losers based on something other than an illusory concept of “fairness”— we don’t want to force all girls to test just to screen out this tiny set of people. Even “born that way” isn’t a totally rational distinction because there is a tiny subset of people born intersex and assigned a gender and an argument that trans People aren’t so much making the choice but a condition that is born that way
> 
> I’m just saying we are picking winners and losers and the justifications are illusory (based on concepts like morality and fairness) and we can choose to totally shaft mtf trans the same we we choose to shaft December birthdays.


All distinctions such as these will have "winners" and "losers". I don't call on morality or fairness - just distinctions that are the most meaningful in terms of competitive advantage. Is Lia Thomas one of those tiny fractions of people born biologically male but developed physically in a way that is typical for females? If not, I'd say we are shafting every female that has to compete against her.

If there is no competitive advantage to being an MTF trans in female sports, we should expect to see as many high-performing FTM trans playing male sports. I haven't heard of any but I haven't looked either. Also, if we do get to the point where it's generally accepted that "sex" isn't binary, we need to expand Title IX accordingly. For every MTF trans female sports scholarship, we need to give an FTM trans male sports scholarship.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Who said anything about 10 year olds? And at what age do we tell the transgender girls that she isn't able to play with the girls anymore until she starts regularly testing? And when the transgender girl goes through puberty, do we have her start androgen-suppressing treatment? Do we wait until she is suspended for a year, as also stated in the policy, before we start doing that?


At what age?  Swimming went with 12 years old.

It’s probably about right.  That’s also about the age when sprint times really start to diverge.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> So at what age do you tell the transgender girl that she is too biologically superior and needs to go play with boys? What if her genetic makeup is inferior and she is not even a good athlete?


Virtually every sports organization decided a long time ago what the answer is to your question.  Most decided that winning a kiddie sport is just not important compared to inclusion and doing one's party to create a tolerant and safe environment for all children, and that trans girls can  therefore play for as long as they're age eligible.  The NCAA has set their standard.  The NWSL has set it's standard.  The Olympics has set its standard.  Most HS organizations have set their standards.  Obviously club soccer organizations have set their standards.  And if/when they decide the standard doesn't appear to be appropriate or working, they change it to address that as the NCAA recently did with swimming, just as every organization does with respect to any issue from time to time.

Your problem is that you simply refuse to accept the very simple concept that winning and losing in youth sports is not important compared to inclusivity, taking action to protect trans children from the inevitable abuse and hostility that they face, and helping educate others to overcome their irrational transphobic fears, all of which you have proven quite clearly is very necessary.  And you refuse to accept the fact that pretty much every sports organization around already did this many years ago.  In reality, you just don't give a shit about the health, safety and welfare of trans children. 

Honestly, there is no point in having a real conversation with you until you are willing to admit and accept the reality that a trans girl is very likely to face terrible abuse and suffering if they are left with the bullshit Hobson's choice of having to play on a boys team or stop playing sports altogether when they're just 10 years old, and that you're perfectly ok with that.  It's clear that you can't even muster the ability to admit that transphobic children face terrible abuse from their male peers in sport, because that would require you to have sympathy for a group that you obviously hold in contempt but aren't willing to come out and say.  So instead, you make up bullshit excuses about how a 10 year old trans girl is a "safety issue", although that is a ridiculous, asinine position that was rightfully rejected by pretty much every youth soccer organization on the planet many years ago.  So then you pivot to "rules are rules" and point to a bunch of rules that actually say nothing to say about the issue and, in fact, which are completely contrary to their actual positions on transgender play given they all clearly allow it. So then, you point to an NWSL policy for professional adult athletes that you want to apply to freakin' children, because you mistakenly believe supports your hatred of trans children.  But, go figure, it turns out even that policy says the opposite of what you want because virtually all 10 year old boys fall far below the max testosterone standards set fort therein.  So then you claim trans children should not be allowed to play because it's not appropriate to "fuck with testosterone levels", which is also a bs argument because it isn't necessary given that at least pre-pubescent boys fall under the NWSL's limits, which you previously claimed was "gospel".  

So what is your next excuse?  I know you don't want to go down the road of admitting that you're worried that you and your child's fragile ego can't handle the possibility she isn't good enough to compete with a 10 year old trans girl.  I know you don't want to go down the road of admitting that your own fragile self esteem depends greatly on whether your 10 year old daughter wins a soccer trophy.  I know you don't want to just come out and say "god says trans children shouldn't play soccer".  I know you don't want to claim that you're worried that your daughter playing with a trans girl will educate her that trans people aren't bad and will cause her to question your transphobic views and/or your religion?  So what is it going to be this time?


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Who said anything about 10 year olds? And at what age do we tell the transgender girls that she isn't able to play with the girls anymore until she starts regularly testing? And when the transgender girl goes through puberty, do we have her start androgen-suppressing treatment? Do we wait until she is suspended for a year, as also stated in the policy, before we start doing that?


You did when you started questioning whether a 10 year old trans girl should be allowed to play, dumb shit.

But the answer depends on whether she is going to play professionally in the NWSL where the rule you are talking about applies, or kiddie soccer where winning and losing doesn't matter.  With respect to kiddie soccer, go ask the governing organizations, which say that testing and testosterone treatment is a really stupid invasion of privacy, so they can play without having to deal with that because inclusivity is far more important than propping up a transphobe's fragile self-esteem if their child loses a soccer game.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

kickingandscreaming said:


> All distinctions such as these will have "winners" and "losers". I don't call on morality or fairness - just distinctions that are the most meaningful in terms of competitive advantage. Is Lia Thomas one of those tiny fractions of people born biologically male but developed physically in a way that is typical for females? If not, I'd say we are shafting every female that has to compete against her.
> 
> If there is no competitive advantage to being an MTF trans in female sports, we should expect to see as many high-performing FTM trans playing male sports. I haven't heard of any but I haven't looked either. Also, if we do get to the point where it's generally accepted that "sex" isn't binary, we need to expand Title IX accordingly. For every MTF trans female sports scholarship, we need to give an FTM trans male sports scholarship.


If we really care about competitive advantage, we'd be screening for testosterone/steroids on both the boys and girls side, not to mention cracking down on the phony documents we all know float around southern California for playing sports.  The reason we don't do it of course is because parents would balk at regularly subjecting their kids to testing just to catch a handful of cheaters and would just go to another league that doesn't do it.  A good guide post is that if the matter isn't serious enough to steroid test, then it probably isn't either to use a heightened scrutiny standard against transgenders (that thumbnail would require heightened scrutiny for Lia Thomas).  Or we could go the way of the Ohio bill debated, but I think quite a few people might take umbrage if their goat daughter was forced to undergo a physical exam because the other side wanted to mess with her before the championship game.  We've all had the moment when the beast of a child walks on to the field and the other side says "there's no way they are age X".

What's even more complicated is the state of California has moved to loosen standards to change gender on a birth certificate.  The federal government is moving the same way as passports.  So if we really care about this issue, the paper won't be sufficient in any case.  BTW California has now even further complicated things because it allows people to now declare "nonbinary" on birth certificates, rendering them near worthless for determining what league to assign.  We can all say California shouldn't have done this, but that's the reality so what now?


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> The answer depends on whether she is going to play professionally in the NWSL where the rule you are talking about applies, or kiddie soccer where winning and losing doesn't matter.


I'm totally in agreement that if winning and losing doesn't matter and youth soccer isn't competitive and the only thing that matters is growth, inclusivity and acceptance then by all means - allow transgender players to be sanctioned with no requirement for testing or treatments. With this scenario, I'd also say to go full recreational: don't keep score, make sure there is equal playing time for everyone. There also isn't a need to separate players based off of their gender to begin with - allow full co-ed teams.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> I'm totally in agreement that if winning and losing doesn't matter and youth soccer isn't competitive and the only thing that matters is growth, inclusivity and acceptance then by all means - allow transgender players to be sanctioned with no requirement for testing or treatments. With this scenario, I'd also say to go full recreational: don't keep score, make sure there is equal playing time for everyone. There also isn't a need to separate players based off of their gender to begin with - allow full co-ed teams.


This begs the question of when "winning and losing" matter.  If they matter so much, why aren't we steroid testing?  The steroid basically is just artificial testosterone.  And what's the meaning behind "winning and losing"....a tournament, state cup, national championship?  At the Lia Thompson level it absolutely matters.   At the MLS Academy level...maybe you have an argument (part of the problem if the girls don't really have a true elite bracket).  At flight 2?  Probably not.  Then there's the argument that the obsession with winning and losing, given the way soccer is structured, is detrimental to US soccer development.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Theres a lot to unpack here in this thoughtful statement. The eye test is helpful in a South Park situation. It’s less helpful in the situation jabroni described which is someone born xy but genetically inferior in athletics to other xy and if you look at the person they are closer to girl than boy.  In such cases the eye test isn’t a useful limiting principle because it’s in the eye of the beholder
> 
> there’s been a lot of inconsistency and debate surrounding age of consent.  A lot of data shows kids don’t really start to fully mature til their mid 20s. We don’t allow them to drink until 21 and there’s a push to restrict gun ownership to 21. But there as also a push to allow vaccine and abortion consent at age 12, and if they can consent to that why not hormones?  They can drive (and negligently kill someone with a vehicle) at age 16. Die in war at 18
> 
> the age at which this should happen is also fraught. It is true there are some trans cases that are very obvious: it’s been obvious since they were very small that something was different…waiting in such cases will definitively impact the quality of life of such a person by forcing them to wait to transition. It is also true that these things have life altering implications that can’t be undone and there are people that have gone through it that later regret it or say they have some other psychological condition that was missed. At a minimum the standard for psychological screening before anything permanent is done needs to be much much higher than it is when it comes to minor and the ideology needs to be removed from it as much as possible.


again, very complicated and there are always statistical outliers.  I hate to generalize using statistical outliers.  What does genetically inferior mean?   XY is XY.  The eye of the beholder is important for high level youth sports.  At the lower levels of youth sports, most people/parents don't care, there isn't as much at stake.  Plenty of opening for argument there but the reality is a boy playing in a girls local league will not generate enough drama to move the needle. 

We could go round and round forever on this..it's a politcally charged topic, usually spearheaded by ideologues without much skin in the game.  

As far as not truly maturing until the mid 20s...yes....especially for boys.  It's why the NFL is very particular when college kids can declare.  19-20 year old boys dont' stack up well to 25 year old men.  Girls wrap things up sooner.  You'll never see MTF in an NBA/MLB/NFL/EPL/La Liga...etc... uniform.  Maybe I'll be proven wrong, but I doubt it..

Now gender?


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

Happened again said:


> again, very complicated and there are always statistical outliers.  I hate to generalize using statistical outliers.  What does genetically inferior mean?   XY is XY.  The eye of the beholder is important for high level youth sports.  At the lower levels of youth sports, most people/parents don't care, there isn't as much at stake.  Plenty of opening for argument there but the reality is a boy playing in a girls local league will not generate enough drama to move the needle.
> 
> We could go round and round forever on this..it's a politcally charged topic, usually spearheaded by ideologues without much skin in the game.
> 
> ...


I like it.  This is very thoughtful.   I guess my biggest point is that this is not a clear black and white issue...it's not as easy as saying ban all transgendered or let all transgendered compete whereever they choose even if it's the olympics.

It's an interesting point as well about FTM....when do we say they can't compete anymore with the girls?  Testosterone is a performing enhancing drug.   That line of reasoning leads to all transgendered get dumped in with the men (along with the nonbinary and the xxy) regardless of how they were born.  If you are going to testosterone test them, you have to do it for everyone else too (because otherwise you say we are o.k. with cheaters but not the transgendered).  It's also an acknowledgement once and for all that female sports are somehow "lesser", an artificial construct meant to protect them, and if so what really is the point?  Pretty existential right there. Mind blown.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> Virtually every sports organization decided a long time ago what the answer is to your question.  Most decided that winning a kiddie sport is just not important compared to inclusion and doing one's party to create a tolerant and safe environment for all children, and that trans girls can therefore play for as long as they're age eligible.  The NCAA has set their standard.  The NWSL has set it's standard.  The Olympics has set its standard.  Most HS organizations have set their standards.  Obviously club soccer organizations have set their standards.  And if/when they decide the standard doesn't appear to be appropriate or working, they change it to address that as the NCAA recently did with swimming, just as every organization does with respect to any issue from time to time.


I don't see that any of the youth soccer bodies that sanction Southern California have set any kind of standard. Show me if you have and I'll change my tune. If they did, it would be important to be transparent about it to avoid this kind of conflict. It's what I've been saying the entire time - that there needs to be discussion about this as a community to which you told me: 


GoldenGate said:


> And no, there is no need for discussion.





GoldenGate said:


> Your problem is that you simply refuse to accept the very simple concept that winning and losing in youth sports is not important compared to inclusivity, taking action to protect trans children from the inevitable abuse and hostility that they face, and helping educate others to overcome their irrational transphobic fears, all of which you have proven quite clearly is very necessary.  And you refuse to accept the fact that pretty much every sports organization around already did this many years ago.  In reality, you just don't give a shit about the health, safety and welfare of trans children.


Do I have irrational transphobic fears? I don't think that I do but you've been telling me otherwise. I have already and will continue to admit that I don't have a complete comprehension of transgenders athletes in sports, especially youth sports. It's not something that was even brought to my attention until recently. I'd like to think that I'm pretty accepting and willing to at least try to understand everyone's point of view. This is why I've been saying that it's important to have this discussion to begin with.


GoldenGate said:


> Honestly, there is no point in having a real conversation with you until you are willing to admit and accept the reality that a trans girl is very likely to face terrible abuse and suffering if they are left with the bullshit Hobson's choice of having to play on a boys team or stop playing sports altogether when they're just 10 years old, and that you're perfectly ok with that.


I have never once said that. Re-read my post that made you upset to begin with:


JabroniBeater805 said:


> I'm not going to generalize here and will discuss specifics even though identifying this player and team in this scenario makes me uncomfortable. This is a place for discussion and this won't be the last time we question "is this a boy or a girl?" playing against our daughters.
> 
> This conversation has happened on sidelines at multiple tournaments throughout the country regarding this same team. I've witnessed it first-hand not just with my kid's team but with others playing against the team in question. I have also heard that this concern has been brought to tournament officials and their response was that the player's eligibility isn't up to the tournament but is on the club's sanctioning body.





GoldenGate said:


> It's clear that you can't even muster the ability to admit that transphobic children face terrible abuse from their male peers in sport, because that would require you to have sympathy for a group that you obviously hold in contempt but aren't willing to come out and say.  So instead, you make up bullshit excuses about how a 10 year old trans girl is a "safety issue", although that is a ridiculous, asinine position that was rightfully rejected by pretty much every youth soccer organization on the planet many years ago.


I specified how a tournament dealt with a complaint that they had received about a specific player. I also specified that player safety was the concern that the party that complained had. That is enough for you to call me transphobic, a shit bag, call my 10 year old daughter a shit bag and then give more identifying details than I ever had about the player that you accused me of outing. I'm not the one that needs to admit anything. You've clearly been so triggered about the idea of having this conversation that you're full-on delusional and unable to comprehend anything that I've said. I've not once asked why or asked for you to admit what it is that's gotten you to this point but it doesn't matter - you're clearly irrationally upset. 


GoldenGate said:


> So then you pivot to "rules are rules" and point to a bunch of rules that actually say nothing to say about the issue and, in fact, which are completely contrary to their actual positions on transgender play given they all clearly allow it. So then, you point to an NWSL policy for professional adult athletes that you want to apply to freakin' children, because you mistakenly believe supports your hatred of trans children.  But, go figure, it turns out even that policy says the opposite of what you want because virtually all 10 year old boys fall far below the max testosterone standards set fort therein.  So then you claim trans children should not be allowed to play because it's not appropriate to "fuck with testosterone levels", which is also a bs argument because it isn't necessary given that at least pre-pubescent boys fall under the NWSL's limits, which you previously claimed was "gospel".


Further proof that you're beyond triggered and have zero ability to comprehend.


GoldenGate said:


> So what is your next excuse?  I know you don't want to go down the road of admitting that you're worried that you and your child's fragile ego can't handle the possibility she isn't good enough to compete with a 10 year old trans girl.  I know you don't want to go down the road of admitting that your own fragile self esteem depends greatly on whether your 10 year old daughter wins a soccer trophy.  I know you don't want to just come out and say "god says trans children shouldn't play soccer".  I know you don't want to claim that you're worried that your daughter playing with a trans girl will educate her that trans people aren't bad and will cause her to question your transphobic views and/or your religion?  So what is it going to be this time?


I hope you find happiness. It's not going to be in this thread.


----------



## VanMan (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> I'm totally in agreement that if winning and losing doesn't matter and youth soccer isn't competitive and the only thing that matters is growth, inclusivity and acceptance then by all means - allow transgender players to be sanctioned with no requirement for testing or treatments. With this scenario, I'd also say to go full recreational: don't keep score, make sure there is equal playing time for everyone. There also isn't a need to separate players based off of their gender to begin with - allow full co-ed teams.


So throw the whole system out because there's like a 0.001% chance there's an MTF trans kid on the other team.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> I'm totally in agreement that if winning and losing doesn't matter and youth soccer isn't competitive and the only thing that matters is growth, inclusivity and acceptance then by all means - allow transgender players to be sanctioned with no requirement for testing or treatments. With this scenario, I'd also say to go full recreational: don't keep score, make sure there is equal playing time for everyone. There also isn't a need to separate players based off of their gender to begin with - allow full co-ed teams.


you seriously think club records matter that much in the long run, don't you.  I get that a lot of parents live and die with their child's team records, but you all have a problem.  I think your testosterone levels may be too high, need to test you for something...

Add your desire to win "fairly" with your fairly obvious transphobia, and you get a special sort of something...


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> So throw the whole system out because there's like a 0.001% chance there's an MTF trans kid on the other team.


Either that or come up with some kind of trans eligibility guidelines.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> We can all say California shouldn't have done this, but that's the reality so what now?


Say what now?


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> you seriously think club records matter that much in the long run, don't you.  I get that a lot of parents live and die with their child's team records, but you all have a problem.  I think your testosterone levels may be too high, need to test you for something...
> 
> Add your desire to win "fairly" with your fairly obvious transphobia, and you get a special sort of something...


No, I don't think that club records matter at all - actually. Where did I say anything about winning fairly? Hell, where did I say anything about winning or competition at all?


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Say what now?


IIUC, in California you can choose "nonbinary" as your gender now.  In part because of California, the federal government is moving so your passport can be labeled with a gender of "X".  The primary way of assigning people to "girls" and "boys" and proper age tiers is birth certificates.   Where are we going to put the people with nonbinary?  You can't just say everyone who isn't an "f" goes boys league, because California has also loosened the terms for changing your gender on your birth certificate, not to mention you are conceeding a ftm can play with the girls for as long as they don't change their papers.

That leaves meh let's come up with some loose guidelines and trust people to adhere to them, let's do physical exams (in which case be prepared for your GOAT to be challenged to a physical exam before the championship game), let's do genetic/blood tests, or let's do testosterone tests (which also catch the steroid cheaters).  If you aren't already doing testosterone checks for cheaters, it's probably not a big deal enough to warrant anything more than "meh let's come up with some loose guidelines and trust people to adhere to them"


----------



## mlx (Aug 11, 2022)

Happened again said:


> It's in the interest of women's sports to keep the compeition fair and not make it a laughing stock within the professional sports community...and to try and stay away from the vagueness of gender vs the quantifiable ID of sex at birth.  There are outlyer medical conditions that contradict but those are few and far between.
> 
> It's a difficult and uncomfortable subject for some/many.  Coed teams up to certain ages aren't a big deal.  Puberty/hormones are the line in the sand and are so obvioss if you ever seen an elite U16/U17 girls team take on a U16/U17 boy's second team.  I've never seen a close game and the differences are glaringly obvious.  Size and strength matter and usually wins when bodies clash.


Everything has to have context. 

I can see how a few trans women winning world championship can be a problem and deserves its own conversation. 

On the other side, we should NOT get our panties in a bunch that a 10 year old trans girl is the most happy kid playing with her friends for the Brentwood Unicorns or whatever in socal.


----------



## VanMan (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> Either that or come up with some kind of trans eligibility guidelines.


US Soccer did this some time ago.

https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/bylaws

Policy 601-5, Section 6.  Numbered page 55, page 58 of the pdf file.

Many clubs and state associations cite the exact language in their Inclusion Policies.


----------



## JabroniBeater805 (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> US Soccer did this some time ago.
> 
> https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/bylaws
> 
> ...


The original question posed was should the sanctioning bodies sanction transgender players. If I had seen this previously (I hadn't) then I would have said absolutely. Easy enough.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> US Soccer did this some time ago.
> 
> https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/bylaws
> 
> ...


So simple, yet, perfect.  No need for testing a 14 year old kid.  

Professionals - WHOLE different game. (and your 17 year old ECNL player isn't professional, and their season record isn't going to impact their status in life when they are 30)


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

I would start watching NWSL if they allowed trans players without restriction.  I currently don't watch NWSL.

I don't care about some worse player getting pushed to the bench or off the first team.  A bad professional player's right to be on the team is always subservient to my need for a team to provide entertainment in exchange for ticket dollars.  The NWSL should do whatever makes it the most money.  This is consistent with my staunch republican belief that the government should stay out of it and the free market should decide.

Also maybe an unpopular belief but I find USWNT boring.  Don't need to see them beating Thailand 15-0 or whatever.  Do whatever it takes to make that less boring and I'll watch.

I don't watch design or fashion shows.  Boring.  I'll take Ru Paul's Drag Race any day, though.  Entertainment!


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> So throw the whole system out because there's like a 0.001% chance there's an MTF trans kid on the other team.


Roughly 2% of kids identify as trans.  Why would it be only 0.001% for athletes?


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Roughly 2% of kids identify as trans.  Why would it be only 0.001% for athletes?


Perhaps going on current observation.  It won't be one to one trying to change teams to the general population.  Some would prefer to stay with their current team.  Arguing about the exact percent isn't the point.  The main thing is people are complaining about something that we don't know is a significant problem.

Give it a try and see how it goes.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

JabroniBeater805 said:


> The original question posed was should the sanctioning bodies sanction transgender players. If I had seen this previously (I hadn't) then I would have said absolutely. Easy enough.
> 
> View attachment 14560


Sincerely held belief with no limits on testosterone?  This policy won’t last 10 years.

For U17 or U19, if you put five competent MTF athletes on the any ECNL team, they’d win nationals every time.  That is, until some other team finds six.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sincerely held belief with no limits on testosterone?  This policy won’t last 10 years.
> 
> For U17 or U19, if you put five competent MTF athletes on the any ECNL team, they’d win nationals every time.  That is, until some other team finds six.


Speculation. Fear. Panic.

I want to see how it plays out.

Try it.  You might like it.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sincerely held belief with no limits on testosterone?  This policy won’t last 10 years.
> 
> For U17 or U19, if you put five competent MTF athletes on the any ECNL team, they’d win nationals every time.  That is, until some other team finds six.


I’d have added must be living full time in their chosen gender but it’s just another velvet rope. In a team sport if you are really concerned about an mtf athlete you could limit the number on a team. Your bigger worry would actually be the ftm who still play on the girls team and have the birth certificate still to back it up. 

so what you advocating for in youth soccer?  Testosterone testing?  You’d be ok with steroid testing too?  A level cut off (the boys have the mls academias but the girls have no equivalent truly elite division)?


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> I’d have added must be living full time in their chosen gender but it’s just another velvet rope. In a team sport if you are really concerned about an mtf athlete you could limit the number on a team. Your bigger worry would actually be the ftm who still play on the girls team and have the birth certificate still to back it up.
> 
> so what you advocating for in youth soccer?  Testosterone testing?  You’d be ok with steroid testing too?  A level cut off (the boys have the mls academias but the girls have no equivalent truly elite division)?


The whole debate is premised on the idea that there is an 18 year old birth-male who is better than all the ECNL players, who is going to stop playing better competition on the boys side, leave the player's current boys team, and chase after a national trophy with a new ECNL girls team.

Give me a real life example, please.  Otherwise, I'm just seeing an imagined parade of horribles and fear and panic.  Chicken little over here.  Reality is this fear mongering is just stopping players that would be better off socially and maybe even physically on a girls team.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

Just one of many examples of making a specific rule only after it becomes an actual problem.  Sure it was unfair for a second, maybe (not from a physical perspective but because of the unique gear).  But enjoy it while it lasts and don't make an unnecessary rule until you actually see a problem.

Note that you didn't see dudes running to get foot removal before the rule, which is what Dad4 is saying would happen, effectively.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> The whole debate is premised on the idea that there is an 18 year old birth-male who is better than all the ECNL players, who is going to stop playing better competition on the boys side, leave the player's current boys team, and chase after a national trophy with a new ECNL girls team.
> 
> Give me a real life example, please.  Otherwise, I'm just seeing an imagined parade of horribles and fear and panic.  Chicken little over here.  Reality is this fear mongering is just stopping players that would be better off socially and maybe even physically on a girls team.


It’s also fear mongering with very real consequences for other players at least at the youth soccer level (since birth certificates aren’t a viable limit at least in California):
-physical exams for any girl that’s challenge
-drug testing for players (drug tests which aren’t free and need to be done somewhat frequently)
-genetic tests for players which could exclude certain rare people like xxy

fairness is an ephemeral concept.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> It’s also fear mongering with very real consequences for other players at least at the youth soccer level (since birth certificates aren’t a viable limit at least in California):
> -physical exams for any girl that’s challenge
> -drug testing for players (drug tests which aren’t free and need to be done somewhat frequently)
> -genetic tests for players which could exclude certain rare people like xxy
> ...


As a staunch republican, I am against having to submit my kids to these government intrusions, for the same reason I am against having to show proof of vaccination for Covid-19.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> The whole debate is premised on the idea that there is an 18 year old birth-male who is better than all the ECNL players, who is going to stop playing better competition on the boys side, leave the player's current boys team, and chase after a national trophy with a new ECNL girls team.
> 
> Give me a real life example, please.  Otherwise, I'm just seeing an imagined parade of horribles and fear and panic.  Chicken little over here.  Reality is this fear mongering is just stopping players that would be better off socially and maybe even physically on a girls team.


We should not go into real life examples.  Any real life example is a real person, and I have no intent to draw them into it.

Very high skill MTF athletes exist.  Lia Thomas is one.  But she is an adult who chose to grab the spotlight for herself.  I’m not going to out some kid.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> We should not go into real life examples.  Any real life example is a real person, and I have no intent to draw them into it.
> 
> Very high skill MTF athletes exist.  Lia Thomas is one.  But she is an adult who chose to grab the spotlight for herself.  I’m not going to out some kid.


Good for you (not intended sarcastically).  But as yourself say, Lia Thomas, an adult competing in an individual sport, is very different than some kid, playing a team sport in a league that doesn't care enough to screen for performance enhancing drugs.  Given that birth certificates aren't a viable screen in California, what would you propose we do about it to screen?


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> I’d have added must be living full time in their chosen gender but it’s just another velvet rope. In a team sport if you are really concerned about an mtf athlete you could limit the number on a team. Your bigger worry would actually be the ftm who still play on the girls team and have the birth certificate still to back it up.
> 
> so what you advocating for in youth soccer?  Testosterone testing?  You’d be ok with steroid testing too?  A level cut off (the boys have the mls academias but the girls have no equivalent truly elite division)?


The simplest rule is Y chromosomes in one division, everyone else in the other. 

So, XY, XXY, and 46XY would compete on the men’s side.   XX and XXX would compete on the women’s.  

To enforce the rule, go with birth identification, and do a cheek swab if there is a question about it.   

Testing for steroids?  It’s probably coming.  This site already has a thread asking which PED are you allowed to give your kid.  It won’t be too long before we have to test for it.


----------



## VanMan (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Roughly 2% of kids identify as trans.  Why would it be only 0.001% for athletes?


Certainly a touch of hyperbole on my part.

That being said, I'm guessing that the out MTF trans subpopulation participation rate in youth soccer is well below the population at large, for a whole host of reasons.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The simplest rule is Y chromosomes in one division, everyone else in the other.
> 
> So, XY, XXY, and 46XY would compete on the men’s side.   XX and XXX would compete on the women’s.
> 
> ...


Fine, but I point out again you can't do birth identification because that procedure has been compromised.  You'd have to test every player to register.  You also have the unresolved problem of FTM that even though they are taking performance enhancing testosterone, they'd play with the girls.  To fear monger, you could build a national championship team of FTM.


----------



## mlx (Aug 11, 2022)

VanMan said:


> Certainly a touch of hyperbole on my part.
> 
> That being said, I'm guessing that the out MTF trans subpopulation participation rate in youth soccer is well below the population at large, for a whole host of reasons.


Only 20% of the population plays any kind of sports. Only 7% of the population plays soccer. So, it wouldn't be 0.001%, but around 0.035% and your point still stands.


----------



## socalkdg (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> NWSL is dealing with adults.  It’s closer to reasonable for them to request a specific medical procedure (gonadectomy or androgen suppressants) as a condition of playing in their league.  And they do require it.
> 
> I wouldn’t want to out that kind of pressure on a kid.  You don’t want to say “we’ll let you play, but only if you push transition faster than you find comfortable”.


I hadn't thought of that, and makes some sense.   How does the NCAA rule on this for soccer?


----------



## VanMan (Aug 11, 2022)

socalkdg said:


> I hadn't thought of that, and makes some sense.   How does the NCAA rule on this for soccer?











						Transgender Student-Athlete Participation Policy
					

Transgender Student-Athlete Participation Policy




					www.ncaa.org


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

socalkdg said:


> I hadn't thought of that, and makes some sense.   How does the NCAA rule on this for soccer?



Because there's less of an issue with a now adult athlete (as opposed to a kid) taking testosterone blockers and hormones, and because they already have a system in place to test athletes for PED, it's geared to testosterone levels.  Individual sports make their own rules under this general guidance.  IIRC it used to be more severe (you have to have had the surgery).  It's called "sport by sport"









						Board of Governors updates transgender participation policy - NCAA.org
					

The NCAA Board of Governors on Wednesday voted in support of a sport-by-sport approach to transgender participation that preserves opportunity for transgender student-athletes




					www.ncaa.org
				




A good summary.  The changes, however, do generally allow a Lia Thomas to compete.  I could be wrong but I don't think they've ruled on soccer yet....maybe because of the west virginia lawsuit that's pending.









						Transgender athletes: Which states, sports federations have bans - Sports Illustrated
					

Looking at the different bans and policies around sports.




					www.si.com


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> We should not go into real life examples.  Any real life example is a real person, and I have no intent to draw them into it.
> 
> Very high skill MTF athletes exist.  Lia Thomas is one.  But she is an adult who chose to grab the spotlight for herself.  I’m not going to out some kid.


But have you seen or heard of such ECNL championship stealing kid?  Don't use naming as a cop-out.  No need to use names.  It either exists or it doesn't.  I don't want to debate your imaginary bear.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Fine, but I point out again you can't do birth identification because that procedure has been compromised.  You'd have to test every player to register.  You also have the unresolved problem of FTM that even though they are taking performance enhancing testosterone, they'd play with the girls.  To fear monger, you could build a national championship team of FTM.


Birth certificates have a field for “date signed”.   You only have to think about it when “date signed” is 10-15 years later than “birthdate.”.   

You seem to be trying very hard to create confusion where none exists.  We are talking about kids who were identified male at birth, identify as female, and just want to play.  They’re not going to lie on all your forms.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 11, 2022)

mlx said:


> Everything has to have context.
> 
> I can see how a few trans women winning world championship can be a problem and deserves its own conversation.
> 
> On the other side, we should NOT get our panties in a bunch that a 10 year old trans girl is the most happy kid playing with her friends for the Brentwood Unicorns or whatever in socal.


You are right, 10 year olds playing coed isn't a big deal.  Not uncommon for girl athletes to be dominant at that age.  My youngest dominated most boys in any sport until 14, then they caught up


----------



## Happened again (Aug 11, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> But have you seen or heard of such ECNL championship stealing kid?  Don't use naming as a cop-out.  No need to use names.  It either exists or it doesn't.  I don't want to debate your imaginary bear.


Examples are few and far between and will likley not be a trend.  I don't think it will ever effect anyone on a large scale.  There is a high performing letter league team with a goalie.  Very obvious when playing in the air, distribution, etc.. It really hasn' caused much of a  ruckus (and it likely shoudn't).  I'm certain it would cause a ruckus if that player moved to the field.  For now, all good.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> They’re not going to lie on all your forms.


Errrr....there is a very lucrative market for false papers in the United States.  A couple years back they even posted ads for them both here and on the soccer boards that kept having to be pulled down.


dad4 said:


> You seem to be trying very hard to create confusion where none exists.


I like this exercise.  But "What about the hairy hand?" is basically all we do in law school.  Takes me back.  Don't whine because you don't like the questions you get back and it makes it too complicated when you desire simplicity.  That's weak.  This isn't a simple issue.  It's a puzzle.

p.s. you always lash out when stuck



dad4 said:


> Birth certificates have a field for “date signed”.   You only have to think about it when “date signed” is 10-15 years later than “birthdate.”.


The same issue exists for lost papers or reissuing originals.  That doesn't solve it.  It doesn't catch your xxys (so if your test is y chromosomes you are now back to just targeting trans).  Doesn't solve you FTM problem.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> p.s. you always lash out when stuck


In fairness, lawyers don't recognize how annoying they are to regular people when they argue.  They all think its normal.  They think they are being nice and having a friendly conversation but the regular people they talk to feel like they just went through a deposition.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> In fairness, lawyers don't recognize how annoying they are to regular people when they argue.  They all think its normal.  They think they are being nice and having a friendly conversation but the regular people they talk to feel like they just went through a deposition.


I don't mind the banter, but I find the lack of attention to detail obnoxious.

She a giant pile of words, then expecting the other person to shoot down every subargument, no matter how ill-formed.

For me, once I've shown that the first tupperware has rotten fish, I don't need to smell the others.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> I don't mind the banter, but I find the lack of attention to detail obnoxious.
> 
> She a giant pile of words, then expecting the other person to shoot down every subargument, no matter how ill-formed.
> 
> For me, once I've shown that the first tupperware has rotten fish, I don't need to smell the others.





Woodwork said:


> In fairness, lawyers don't recognize how annoying they are to regular people when they argue.  They all think its normal.  They think they are being nice and having a friendly conversation but the regular people they talk to feel like they just went through a deposition.


See...lashes out.  Get what you are saying but he isn't the ordinary poster.  As with COVID, he doesn't like it when his pronouncements are challenged and beliefs are shaken.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> See...lashes out.  Get what you are saying but he isn't the ordinary poster.  As with COVID, he doesn't like it when his pronouncements are challenged and beliefs are shaken.


Sorry, but your "birth certificates are compromised" argument was 3 year old lutefisk.

You tossed it out there without bothering to think it through.  You didn't even bother looking at a birth certificate before you posted it.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sorry, but your "birth certificates are compromised" argument was 3 year old lutefisk.
> 
> You tossed it out there without bothering to think it through.  You didn't even bother looking at a birth certificate before you posted it.


Dude I’ve done pro bono gender change birth certificates almost a dozen times. The two things which change are the date issued down at the bottom (in purple for certified copies) and the gender. It is otherwise completely indistinguishable. I’m literally looking at one right now that I did. That date issued changed for duplicates and lost documents too (my sons was lost. Looking at it now too. It has the new date). 

your test was the Y chromosome. Your methodology was check the birthcert and if not test. It fails because other than the issuance date it is the same (anyone who loses there’s would have to test). It doesn’t catch the xxy people which means you are back to targeting people that may look trans. It doesn’t solve your ftm who are taking performance enhancing testosterone. Fail.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Dude I’ve done pro bono gender change birth certificates almost a dozen times. The two things which change are the date issued down at the bottom (in purple for certified copies) and the gender. It is otherwise completely indistinguishable. I’m literally looking at one right now that I did. That date issued changed for duplicates and lost documents too (my sons was lost. Looking at it now too. It has the new date).
> 
> your test was the Y chromosome. Your methodology was check the birthcert and if not test. It fails because other than the issuance date it is the same (anyone who loses there’s would have to test). It doesn’t catch the xxy people which means you are back to targeting people that may look trans. It doesn’t solve your ftm who are taking performance enhancing testosterone. Fail.


So, it is indistinguishable, except for the field which distinguishes it perfectly.

As arguments go, that's still a dead fish.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> So, it is indistinguishable, except for the field which distinguishes it perfectly.
> 
> As arguments go, that's still a dead fish.


Indistinguishable except for a field that doesn’t point to a gender change but can point to a whole slew of other reasons including simply a lost document, which puts the burden of finding it and ordering and administering the test on the hapless club and league registrars (“sorry your birth certificate burned in the fire…here’s a genetic test”), which despite you saying you care about the Y chromosome you target trans and give Xxys a pass (why is that I wonder) and which doesn’t solve your ftm problem.

you’d honestly just be better off saying genetic tests for everyone and that you don’t care about ftm. Instead you Build a system with no limiting principle and just gets you the result you wanted: dump just the trans people.   Fail.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Indistinguishable except for a field that doesn’t point to a gender change but can point to a whole slew of other reasons including simply a lost document, which puts the burden of finding it and ordering and administering the test on the hapless club and league registrars (“sorry your birth certificate burned in the fire…here’s a genetic test”), which despite you saying you care about the Y chromosome you target trans and give Xxys a pass (why is that I wonder) and which doesn’t solve your ftm problem.
> 
> you’d honestly just be better off saying genetic tests for everyone and that you don’t care about ftm. Instead you Build a system with no limiting principle and just gets you the result you wanted: dump just the trans people.   Fail.


You say I give a pass to XXY.

Think for a second.

Does an XXY individual have a Y chromosome?

It's not a hard question.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> You say I give a pass to XXY.
> 
> Think for a second.
> 
> ...


Duh doy. The birth certificate doesn’t list out a genetic composition. To catch it you’d have to test everyone. The system you laid out only tests people who have their birth certificates reissued.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Duh doy. The birth certificate doesn’t list out a genetic composition. To catch it you’d have to test everyone. The system you laid out only tests people who have their birth certificates reissued.


I don't have to care whether I find every single undiagnosed XXY trisomy athlete.

It is extremely rare, not particularly performance enhancing, and most present as male anyway.  I can ignore it.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> I don't have to care whether I find every single undiagnosed XXY trisomy athlete.
> 
> It is extremely rare, not particularly performance enhancing, and most present as male anyway.  I can ignore it.


So again:
A. You don’t really care about the Y chromosome.  It was pretextual
B. You built a system that produces the result you wanted to begin with: exclude the mtf trans. Rather than apply a principle and build from there.
C. You don’t care about one particularly small group but you do seem to care about a slightly larger but also uncommon group and when you take the other genetic abnormalities you yourself set out it closes that gap even more
D. You’ve also made normative judgements over what’s particularly performance enhancing. A male to female that wasn’t particularly athletic or have a high testosterone count might not be more performanced enhanced than say Jamie Lee Curtis.
E. You aren’t particularly concerned with the ftms for some reason which your system doesn’t address. 

you may as well just come out and say you don’t want mtf to play with your daughter because you don’t like them.  Wow.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> So again:
> A. You don’t really care about the Y chromosome.  It was pretextual
> B. You built a system that produces the result you wanted to begin with: exclude the mtf trans. Rather than apply a principle and build from there.
> C. You don’t care about one particularly small group but you do seem to care about a slightly larger but also uncommon group and when you take the other genetic abnormalities you yourself set out it closes that gap even more
> ...


Part of any discussion is that each person does a little internal editing and brings forward their most well reasoned ideas.

You seem to want to play "what if" with super long posts while the other person does all the heavy lifting of sorting out which ideas have merit.

Not interested.  You already gave us two rotten fish: one factually false claim about birth certificates, and one unnecessary diversion into an extremely rare trisomy condition.

That's enough for me.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Part of any discussion is that each person does a little internal editing and brings forward their most well reasoned ideas.
> 
> You seem to want to play "what if" with super long posts while the other person does all the heavy lifting of sorting out which ideas have merit.
> 
> ...


As I said that what if is the entire way they teach reasoning in law school. The theory is that is your proposition is strong enough to withstand the what if questions then you have a winner

yours has been weighed, measured and found wanting. It starts with the proposition mtf should be excluded, builds a system that produces that result, and spits out the answer you wanted. What’s worse if you’ve targeted the community because youve appointed registrars to hunt down anyone who has an anamoly in their birth certificates (even those that lost and replaced them or has some paternity issue such as a father that was added) and force just those people to test in an attempt to root out those you want to exclude. There’s some words for that: witch hunt.

you could have stuck to your Y chromosome test and tested everyone.  You could have done a testosterone test and caught the performing enhancing drugs. You could have had a physical test. You could have had a performance test. You could have had a test that trusted the documents issued by California. But you didn’t do that: you singled out mtf individuals because you wanted them excluded to begin with for some reason that doesn’t have to do with performance (or you’d test for performance enhancing drugs too). Wow.


----------



## espola (Aug 11, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> As I said that what if is the entire way they teach reasoning in law school. The theory is that is your proposition is strong enough to withstand the what if questions then you have a winner
> 
> yours has been weighed, measured and found wanting. It starts with the proposition mtf should be excluded, builds a system that produces that result, and spits out the answer you wanted. What’s worse if you’ve targeted the community because youve appointed registrars to hunt down anyone who has an anamoly in their birth certificates (even those that lost and replaced them or has some paternity issue such as a father that was added) and force just those people to test in an attempt to root out those you want to exclude. There’s some words for that: witch hunt.
> 
> you could have stuck to your Y chromosome test and tested everyone.  You could have done a testosterone test and caught the performing enhancing drugs. You could have had a physical test. You could have had a performance test. You could have had a test that trusted the documents issued by California. But you didn’t do that: you singled out mtf individuals because you wanted them excluded to begin with for some reason that doesn’t have to do with performance (or you’d test for performance enhancing drugs too). Wow.


That's reasoning?

Wow.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

espola said:


> That's reasoning?
> 
> Wow.


Meh take it up with the law schools. It’s why you never want to hire a lawyer if you are trying to innovate something. They’ll just tear it down and give you every reason not to do it


----------



## dad4 (Aug 11, 2022)

espola said:


> That's reasoning?
> 
> Wow.


There are some pretty reasonable posts before the recent nonsense.  Shame on me for helping Grace divert the whole thing.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 11, 2022)

dad4 said:


> There are some pretty reasonable posts before the recent nonsense.  Shame on me for helping Grace divert the whole thing.


I gave you my two propositions which are actually quite centrist:

1. sliding scale of scrutiny depending on the level, whether team or individual sport, and age
2. As a thumbnail if it ain’t important enough to test for performance enhancing drugs, it’s probably not important enough to warrant heightened scrutiny

you’re the one that trotted out the witch hunt proposal.  That more than anything is what you should be ashamed of.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 12, 2022)

Well, somebody got so bent that they just had to sent me a DM.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 12, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The simplest rule is Y chromosomes in one division, everyone else in the other.
> 
> So, XY, XXY, and 46XY would compete on the men’s side.   XX and XXX would compete on the women’s.
> 
> ...


The simplest rule is to let trans children play and for you to stop freaking out over a fake problem.  Regardless, a rule that involves DNA testing "suspected" trans children for 10 year old soccer tournaments is definitely not the simplest rule.  In fact, it is the most inappropriately complex rule possible. Presumably you want to be the one to pick out the suspected 10 year old trans girls for DNA testing?  I take it you have a good eye for that kind of thing?  If a simple rule is so important, why don't we just dispense with the DNA testing and you can conduct a personal inspection?

Were you planning to suspend the suspected trans children pending investigation while waiting on the results?  Is it at least ok if the team lets a trans girl play in some leagues, but just not the ones you deem important?


----------



## dad4 (Aug 12, 2022)

Sure, you could do a whole complicated testing system.

Or your reg form could have check boxes which accurately account for the range of how people see themselves.

We are talking about parents and kids, not master criminals.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 12, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sure, you could do a whole complicated testing system.
> 
> Or your reg form could have check boxes which accurately account for the range of how people see themselves.
> 
> We are talking about parents and kids, not master criminals.


o.k., let's give you the benefit of the doubt (something you didn't do for others very much during COVID debates) and say you've rethought your proposal but just can't bring yourself to say it.  No more witchhunt, don't care about the y chromosome, not going to do a complicated testing regime...out the window.  The new proposal is: clubs ask people to check a box...I doubt you are asking them "what gender do you see your child"....correct me if I'm wrong, please, but you are asking them "what sex was your child assigned at birth?"

It's a more streamlined elegant proposal, so let's weigh, measure and see if it's found wanting:

1. You've once again targeted MTF trans because you are singling them out with no express reason.  Presumably let's assume it's not that you don't like them, or don't want them to play with your child, but you think they have a performance advantage.  The issue here is you are neglecting the people who cheat (testosterone/steroids) and picking on the ones that just want to live their lives for a whole host of complicated reasons.  So let's fix it for you: presumably the form has a box that asks you to confirm no steroid/testosterone usage.  You also get rid of your FTM issue that way.   Good so far?
2. Your premise is based though on the fact that there isn't cheating in the system and that people wouldn't lie.  It's a false assumption.  We know there are fake birth forms floating around out there.  Let's fix it for you: yeah but we don't care enough to hunt down those people so we won't hunt down the trans.  Well the other issue is that unlike the cheater, the mtf have the revised birth certificate to back them up.
3. The reality is in California your system doesn't survive legal scrutiny assuming that the parent has a revised birth certificate.  It's probably discriminatory per se in the absence of a testosterone testing regime and the way the question is asked.  A question which talks about testosterone levels might be able to survive the legal scrutiny.  Now, you can argue that shouldn't be the ruling, but it is the reality.  (you could also probably just rely on the birth certificate deferring the legalities to the state of California though you never know)
4. You also have the problem of well what if someone does want to challenge.  Some coach playing for the state cup championship sees a kid and says that kid is trans...this is unfair....I want to challenge...might even file a lawsuit for a rules violation.  Well, the issue there is you get back to testosterone...you going to allow challenges picking on the trans kid, you have to allow challenges for testosterone usage.   So you've backdoored yourself into an (albeit limited) testosterone testing regime.

So, better, but I don't think you can ask the question that way and it sucks in the entire testing mechanism.  Hence my thumbnail, if it's not important enough to steroid test, it's not important enough to worry about the trans kids.  If you wanted to do a testosterone testing regime, it wouldn't necessarily extend to the whole system: you could cut out the younger ages, lower levels, non high level games...but to survive scrutiny it has to meticulously be tied to performance, not status.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 12, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> The issue here is you are neglecting the people who cheat (testosterone/steroids) and picking on the ones that just want to live their lives for a whole host of complicated reasons.  So let's fix it for you: presumably the form has a box that asks you to confirm no steroid/testosterone usage.


I'm all for the pro-steroid Olympics, so you've lost me here.


----------



## SIP (Aug 12, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The simplest rule is Y chromosomes in one division, everyone else in the other.
> 
> So, XY, XXY, and 46XY would compete on the men’s side.   XX and XXX would compete on the women’s.
> 
> ...


how about girls that play on the MLS next teams ?
so can girls plan on boys league? I know plenty of them.
2 just got committed to Stanford.

human is not just science, please have some empathy.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 12, 2022)

SIP said:


> how about girls that play on the MLS next teams ?
> so can girls plan on boys league? I know plenty of them.
> 2 just got committed to Stanford.
> 
> human is not just science, please have some empathy.


I have no problem with girls playing on a boys team.  I’ve coached some. 

After puberty, almost none of them can manage it. 

I recently watched a U15 boys team beat a top women’s college team.  This wasn’t even a top team.  A top U15 boys team can beat the USWNT, and they often do.

You can talk all you like about how you think girls can compete equally with boys.  When they actually play, the boys win.

Which is what we are talking about.


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 12, 2022)

SIP said:


> how about girls that play on the MLS next teams ?
> so can girls plan on boys league? I know plenty of them.
> 2 just got committed to Stanford.
> 
> human is not just science, please have some empathy.


Empathy for what?


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 13, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> I'm all for the pro-steroid Olympics, so you've lost me here.


In the future, the Federation encourages all athletes to engage in steroid usage and men and women play together, even in the pros.


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 13, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> In the future, the Federation encourages all athletes to engage in steroid usage and men and women play together, even in the pros.


Coed showers too ... or, so I heard.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

dad4 said:


> I have no problem with girls playing on a boys team.  I’ve coached some.
> 
> After puberty, almost none of them can manage it.
> 
> ...


I see.  So 11 boys playing against 1 girl is not a safety issue, and you'll even coach that, but you think 1 trans girl playing against 11 girls is super dangerous.   Is that because you're worried she'll turn your daughter into a sexual deviant?  Or just that she'll figure out that all your hatred of trans girls is irrational bs and she'll stop respecting you?


----------



## Code (Aug 15, 2022)

First things first.  Is soccer a contact sport?  If yes, then there is a player safety concern; size and strength matter.  If no, then why have a gender separation in the sport.  There is no reason to separate athletes based on gender in a non-contact sport, you only need different divisions of play; the individual players Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities should determine which division they play in.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Code said:


> First things first.  Is soccer a contact sport?  If yes, then there is a player safety concern; size and strength matter.  If no, then why have a gender separation in the sport.  There is no reason to separate athletes based on gender in a non-contact sport, you only need different divisions of play; the individual players Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities should determine which division they play in.


When there are legitimate safety concerns, sure it matters.  The problem here, however, is that there are no legitimate safety concerns when one youth trans girl plays on a team with other girls.  In fact, I love the hypocrisy of the transphobes claiming how unsafe it is to let a harmless 10 year old trans girl play with girls, but then immediately start tripping over themselves trying to prove they aren't transphobic by pointing out how they're ok with 11 boys playing against one girl.  Yeah, sure, safety is the concern.

In the end, it boils down to this.  Transphobes do not want trans girls playing with other girls because they do not have even the slightest empathy for the abuse that trans girls constantly suffer at the hands of people like them.  They are also terrified of the speculative possibility that their little girl might not win a trophy because of it, which will crush their self-esteem.  They are further terrified, but obviously won't admit, that a trans girl might cause their child to realize that all of her daddy's bigotry and religion is b.s.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

Code said:


> First things first.  Is soccer a contact sport?  If yes, then there is a player safety concern; size and strength matter.  If no, then why have a gender separation in the sport.  There is no reason to separate athletes based on gender in a non-contact sport, you only need different divisions of play; the individual players Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities should determine which division they play in.


If this were the case then we would separate soccer based on size (not age).  Anyone that has seen an elite team in the boys middle school ages will see that they tower over an equivalent bronze team the same age.  The bronze team might very well have players that are just as skilled but they are smaller and slower and can get bounced off the ball.  Yet the larger team is considered "elite" and the smaller team isn't.  We've all had that moment when the kid walks on to the field and all the parents gasp there is no way that player is "X" age.  We all know coaches take size into consideration when making their selections.

If the issue is safety (as opposed to performance) you'd have to segregate based on size...otherwise you are just picking on the trans kid, ignoring the 5 ft 12 year old boy that's otherwise a great athlete but is shorter and is facing a 6 ft beast of a player that's going to bounce off everyone he challenges.  I note middle school football, for example, has some size and weight rules for who can play certain positions.

If the issue is performance, the issue isn't contact/no contact, but solo/team sports.  The trans MTF is just going to have much more of an impact going 1 on 1 against other athletes than in a team.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> If this were the case then we would separate soccer based on size (not age).  Anyone that has seen an elite team in the boys middle school ages will see that they tower over an equivalent bronze team the same age.  The bronze team might very well have players that are just as skilled but they are smaller and slower and can get bounced off the ball.  Yet the larger team is considered "elite" and the smaller team isn't.  We've all had that moment when the kid walks on to the field and all the parents gasp there is no way that player is "X" age.  We all know coaches take size into consideration when making their selections.
> 
> If the issue is safety (as opposed to performance) you'd have to segregate based on size...otherwise you are just picking on the trans kid, ignoring the 5 ft 12 year old boy that's otherwise a great athlete but is shorter and is facing a 6 ft beast of a player that's going to bounce off everyone he challenges.  I note middle school football, for example, has some size and weight rules for who can play certain positions.
> 
> If the issue is performance, the issue isn't contact/no contact, but solo/team sports.  The trans MTF is just going to have much more of an impact going 1 on 1 against other athletes than in a team.


This is spot on. The difference in size and testosterone between a 10 year old trans girl and other 10 year old girls is far less than a boy who goes through puberty at 12 and his peers who haven't. Transphobes don't want to address real safety issues because they want to use categorical ones as cover to void having to accept the reality that they have zero empathy for a 10 year old trans girl.  They would prefer to bury their head in the sand about the disadvantages and abuse they suffer, so they use "safety" as an excuse even at an age where that argument is clearly bs.


----------



## Code (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> If this were the case then we would separate soccer based on size (not age).  Anyone that has seen an elite team in the boys middle school ages will see that they tower over an equivalent bronze team the same age.  The bronze team might very well have players that are just as skilled but they are smaller and slower and can get bounced off the ball.  Yet the larger team is considered "elite" and the smaller team isn't.  We've all had that moment when the kid walks on to the field and all the parents gasp there is no way that player is "X" age.  We all know coaches take size into consideration when making their selections.
> 
> If the issue is safety (as opposed to performance) you'd have to segregate based on size...otherwise you are just picking on the trans kid, ignoring the 5 ft 12 year old boy that's otherwise a great athlete but is shorter and is facing a 6 ft beast of a player that's going to bounce off everyone he challenges.  I note middle school football, for example, has some size and weight rules for who can play certain positions.
> 
> If the issue is performance, the issue isn't contact/no contact, but solo/team sports.  The trans MTF is just going to have much more of an impact going 1 on 1 against other athletes than in a team.


Sounds like you are of the opinion that soccer is not a contact sport.


----------



## Code (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> When there are legitimate safety concerns, sure it matters.  The problem here, however, is that there are no legitimate safety concerns when one youth trans girl plays on a team with other girls.  In fact, I love the hypocrisy of the transphobes claiming how unsafe it is to let a harmless 10 year old trans girl play with girls, but then immediately start tripping over themselves trying to prove they aren't transphobic by pointing out how they're ok with 11 boys playing against one girl.  Yeah, sure, safety is the concern.
> 
> In the end, it boils down to this.  Transphobes do not want trans girls playing with other girls because they do not have even the slightest empathy for the abuse that trans girls constantly suffer at the hands of people like them.  They are also terrified of the speculative possibility that their little girl might not win a trophy because of it, which will crush their self-esteem.  They are further terrified, but obviously won't admit, that a trans girl might cause their child to realize that all of her daddy's bigotry and religion is b.s.


Not sure why you have decided to focus on a specific age group in your position.  Prior to puberty the difference between male and female size, strength, and performance is pretty much irrelevent.  So, why even have a girls and boys distinction prior to U13?  Let's just have soccer teams, and the individual Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities will determine which level you play.

I'm of the opinion that soccer is a contact sport.  In contact sports testosterone matters.  The NWSL policy is a very pragmatic perspective.  Once people reach U13 in a contact sport there is a legitimate concern that grows as age increases (pun intended).  Is it as important as in combat sports (wrestling,  boxing, ect..) where there are strict weight classes because of the safety concerns? No.  Is the concern with testosterone in soccer as important as in Hockey, Football, or Rugby? I say Yes, it is.  Even though soccer does not have constant intense contact, like Football or Rugby, it does happen.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

What I find particularly curious about this entire "debate" is how not a single one of them will acknowledge that a 10 year old trans girl is likely to face tremendous abuse on a boys' team, let alone the abuse they almost always endure outside of kiddie sports.  They refuse to acknowledge that the primary reason that 10 year old trans girls are allowed to play on girls teams is because it significantly reduces the risk of abuse, the impact on the girls around her is minimal and, in fact, allowing a 10 year old trans girl to play will likely benefit many of them by helping teach them that inclusion and treating people with dignity and respect is far more important than a trophy or winning a soccer game for 10 year olds. The reality is there are legitimate and, in fact, very important reasons to allow trans children to play on girls' teams.  The transphobes cannot acknowledge their legitimacy even if they disagree about how to weigh those arguments, however, because giving legitimacy to those arguments means they must confront the fact that they chose the importance of trophies for their 10 year old daughter over human dignity for a class of people they hold in contempt.


----------



## Code (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> If this were the case then we would separate soccer based on size (not age).  Anyone that has seen an elite team in the boys middle school ages will see that they tower over an equivalent bronze team the same age.  The bronze team might very well have players that are just as skilled but they are smaller and slower and can get bounced off the ball.  Yet the larger team is considered "elite" and the smaller team isn't.  We've all had that moment when the kid walks on to the field and all the parents gasp there is no way that player is "X" age.  We all know coaches take size into consideration when making their selections.
> 
> If the issue is safety (as opposed to performance) you'd have to segregate based on size...otherwise you are just picking on the trans kid, ignoring the 5 ft 12 year old boy that's otherwise a great athlete but is shorter and is facing a 6 ft beast of a player that's going to bounce off everyone he challenges.  I note middle school football, for example, has some size and weight rules for who can play certain positions.
> 
> If the issue is performance, the issue isn't contact/no contact, but solo/team sports.  The trans MTF is just going to have much more of an impact going 1 on 1 against other athletes than in a team.



It would make a lot more sense to seperate based on size, than an arbitrary date in the year of birth, based on the examples you provided.  But, you can't dismiss strength as a factor.  As I said, Size and Strength matter.  I didn't say Size or Strength matter.  Strength is a factor that is not synonymous with size.  If you take a male and female (post puberty) of the same size, height and weight, they will not have the same level of strength.  Testosterone has a direct effect on muscle strength.  That is why, even with strict weight classes in individual combat sports, you don't see Female atheletes challenging Male athletes.  It has been attempted, and ends badly.  Combat sports commissions don't even entertain the possibility.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> What I find particularly curious about this entire "debate" is how not a single one of them will acknowledge that a 10 year old trans girl is likely to face tremendous abuse on a boys' team, let alone the abuse they almost always endure outside of kiddie sports.  They refuse to acknowledge that the primary reason that 10 year old trans girls are allowed to play on girls teams is because it significantly reduces the risk of abuse, the impact on the girls around her is minimal and, in fact, allowing a 10 year old trans girl to play will likely benefit many of them by helping teach them that inclusion and treating people with dignity and respect is far more important than a trophy or winning a soccer game for 10 year olds. The reality is there are legitimate and, in fact, very important reasons to allow trans children to play on girls' teams.  The transphobes cannot acknowledge their legitimacy even if they disagree about how to weigh those arguments, however, because giving legitimacy to those arguments means they must confront the fact that they chose the importance of trophies for their 10 year old daughter over human dignity for a class of people they hold in contempt.


As usual you are being an idiot and stovepiping a rather complext argument.  I would go out on a limb and say that not one person on this this site is against coed sports at young ages..  You weakly wrap yourself in culural/societal mumbo jumbo.  This is a CA forum, I doubt  anyone  is a "transphobe".  Idiotphobe maybe, but transphobe...come on sweetie, that's really not a thing here even though you would love that to be thing. Your culture war schtick is a bit tiresome but cute at the same time.  I detect sincere passion in your spirited defense of the trans community, especially with teens.  It's hard being a trans kid - physically and mentally...it usually goes hand in hand. 

I'm guessing you don't know alot about many things.  I think it's likely (and maybe I'm wrong) that you've never spent a minute or two  on the pitch in any type of competitive scenario.  The U20s did very poorly yesterday, imagine if they had played LAFC MLS U16s

but let's go ahead and listen to you rant about 10 year old coed soccer.  Be the squirrel and be proud.


----------



## Code (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> What I find particularly curious about this entire "debate" is how not a single one of them will acknowledge that a 10 year old trans girl is likely to face tremendous abuse on a boys' team, let alone the abuse they almost always endure outside of kiddie sports.  They refuse to acknowledge that the primary reason that 10 year old trans girls are allowed to play on girls teams is because it significantly reduces the risk of abuse, the impact on the girls around her is minimal and, in fact, allowing a 10 year old trans girl to play will likely benefit many of them by helping teach them that inclusion and treating people with dignity and respect is far more important than a trophy or winning a soccer game for 10 year olds. The reality is there are legitimate and, in fact, very important reasons to allow trans children to play on girls' teams.  The transphobes cannot acknowledge their legitimacy even if they disagree about how to weigh those arguments, however, because giving legitimacy to those arguments means they must confront the fact that they chose the importance of trophies for their 10 year old daughter over human dignity for a class of people they hold in contempt.



I don't disagree with anything you are saying in this comment.  Trans-players in childrens age brackets should be of no concern, and therefore its pointless to continue to debate or reference trans-children in the discussion.  Adolescent age brackets are a relevent discussion in the subject of trans-athletes, because Testosterone is a part of adolescence, and Testosterone also happens to be a big deal in Sports performance.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Code said:


> Not sure why you have decided to focus on a specific age group in your position.  Prior to puberty the difference between male and female size, strength, and performance is pretty much irrelevent.  So, why even have a girls and boys distinction prior to U13?  Let's just have soccer teams, and the individual Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities will determine which level you play.
> 
> I'm of the opinion that soccer is a contact sport.  In contact sports testosterone matters.  The NWSL policy is a very pragmatic perspective.  Once people reach U13 in a contact sport there is a legitimate concern that grows as age increases (pun intended).  Is it as important as in combat sports (wrestling,  boxing, ect..) where there are strict weight classes because of the safety concerns? No.  Is the concern with testosterone in soccer as important as in Hockey, Football, or Rugby? I say Yes, it is.  Even though soccer does not have constant intense contact, like Football or Rugby, it does happen.


Good question. Two reasons. First, because that is the hill the transphobes chose to die on when they chose to dehumanize and out a specific 10 year old girl at this website. Second, the situation of a 10 year old very obviously highlights the fact that literally none of the arguments that support imposing limitations on transgender participation make sense when applied to a 10 year old girl. That the answer to the question transgender participation is appropriate or not depends on a multitude of factors, including legitimate safety concerns, the societal importance or relative lack of importance of winning/losing at a particular age group or level, the importance of teaching inclusion at particular age group, the privacy interests at issue, and ways to make it fair for everyone, not just the transphobes who are desperate for they're (typically physically deficient) little princess to win a trophy.

Compare a 10 year old trans girl to the Penn swimmer. Is an NCAA championship societally important and an appropriate consideration when deciding what standards should apply? Sure, to some extent. Is the 10 year old girls' bracket at Surf Cup. No f**king way, since we're just talking about the fragile egos of some transphobic shit bag fathers. Is it important for society to take efforts to intervene to protect a fully grown adult who was a sufficiently elite enough to swim as a male at one of the best universities in the country? Maybe not, although those same rules also provide opportunity to far less elite swimmers to overcome much worse history of abuse, so maybe one trans woman winning a national championship in the entire history of the NCAA is a small price to pay to help less fortunate people. Regardless, is it important for society to protect 10 year old trans girls from what is almost inevitable abuse if we don't?  Absolutely.  Similarly, is it critically important to teach grown adults at Penn lessons in inclusion?  Sure, but not nearly as important as teaching those lessons to 10 year old children.

Does it make sense to DNA test players at the Olympics? Sure. Does DNA testing 10 year old girls at Surf Cup make any f**king sense at all? Of course not. Are there important privacy interests for 10 year old trans girls? As the shit bags here who took it upon themselves to try to out one have proven, absolutely. Do those same privacy concerns apply to an elite athlete who decided to accept their status as a public figure by participating in the Olympics, or even an NCAA championship? Absolutely not.

Does requiring testosterone suppression make sense at an Olympic level where biological male testosterone among elite athletes is hugely different than female athletes? Of course. Does it make sense at a prepubescent level where boys and girls still share very similar testosterone levels and before they are old enough to make an educated decision about this? Absolutely not.

Are there legitimate safety issues that need to be addressed in team sports at the pro and NCAA level? Sure. Are there with 10 year old girls? FFS, no.  I also disagree with your opinion that 13 year old should be a cut-off for transgender participation in comp soccer, but at least that's a rational opinion.  My daughter played trans girls all the way through club, and maybe even in college, with no problems.  Not a single GDA or ECNL trans girl ever caused a safety issue, and there are more than adequate guardrails in place to ensure that it doesn't happen.  There are rules that obviously prohibit dangerous play, there are three refs, two coaches, and a lot of thought that was put in by ECNL before letting it happen.  There is the fact that trans girls are incredibly rare and that I have yet to ever witness a trans girl who was out to hurt someone or play in a way that was physically dangerous.  It is a phantom fear.  It is far more likely that any girl hurt your kid than a trans girl who has been living in fear her entire life that even the slightest mis-step could ruin her life or get her killed.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

[QUOTE="Code said:


> I don't disagree with anything you are saying in this comment.  Trans-players in childrens age brackets should be of no concern, and therefore its pointless to continue to debate or reference trans-children in the discussion.  Adolescent age brackets are a relevent discussion in the subject of trans-athletes, because Testosterone is a part of adolescence, and Testosterone also happens to be a big deal in Sports performance.





Code said:


> Not sure why you have decided to focus on a specific age group in your position.  Prior to puberty the difference between male and female size, strength, and performance is pretty much irrelevent.  So, why even have a girls and boys distinction prior to U13?  Let's just have soccer teams, and the individual Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities will determine which level you play.
> 
> I'm of the opinion that soccer is a contact sport.  In contact sports testosterone matters.  The NWSL policy is a very pragmatic perspective.  Once people reach U13 in a contact sport there is a legitimate concern that grows as age increases (pun intended).  Is it as important as in combat sports (wrestling,  boxing, ect..) where there are strict weight classes because of the safety concerns? No.  Is the concern with testosterone in soccer as important as in Hockey, Football, or Rugby? I say Yes, it is.  Even though soccer does not have constant intense contact, like Football or Rugby, it does happen.


If safety is the concern, you could do a height/weight classification, as your combat sports examples illustrate.  It doesn't just have to be height.  You can't come after the trans kid if you are letting the 5 ft 12 year old kid get blasted by 6 ft built like a line backer early bloomer

If performance is your concern, then testosterone test.  You can't come after the trans kids until you come after the cheaters who are doing steroids.  If it's not important enough to testosterone test, then the only thing you are doing is targeting the MTF transgenders because it's easy to go after them and you don't want your kids to go through the inconvenience or expense to testosterone test. It also catches BTW the small number of girls who for some biological reason has some very high testosterone level.

My only point is systems which ends in "kick out the trans kid" but leaves in place the other obvious targets has no other end than we don't want the trans kid to play.   If it's not important to take out the surrounding concerns, it's not important enough to kick out the trans kid.  Besides, we want a policy in place that encourages kids to take the steps to make sure they are 100% sure of their choice before undertaking drastic measures and we don't want to rush them into transitioning because they want the opportunity to do something as stupid as play competitive sports.  Once they hit college, sure use greater scrutiny (I don't believe Lia Thomas should have been given such a pass)...in individual sports sure use greater scrutiny (I also think if we are talking records and state championships, though, individual sports should have to steroid test).


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Happened again said:


> As usual you are being an idiot and stovepiping a rather complext argument.  I would go out on a limb and say that not one person on this this site is against coed sports at young ages..  You weakly wrap yourself in culural/societal mumbo jumbo.  This is a CA forum, I doubt  anyone  is a "transphobe".  Idiotphobe maybe, but transphobe...come on sweetie, that's really not a thing here even though you would love that to be thing. Your culture war schtick is a bit tiresome but cute at the same time.  I detect sincere passion in your spirited defense of the trans community, especially with teens.  It's hard being a trans kid - physically and mentally...it usually goes hand in hand.
> 
> I'm guessing you don't know alot about many things.  I think it's likely (and maybe I'm wrong) that you've never spent a minute or two  on the pitch in any type of competitive scenario.  The U20s did very poorly yesterday, imagine if they had played LAFC MLS U16s
> 
> but let's go ahead and listen to you rant about 10 year old coed soccer.  Be the squirrel and be proud.


You're a clown, but it is common for transphobes to bury their heads in the sand with all the bs nonsense being spewed by their transphobic brethren.  A couple people have tried to out a 10 year old girl as trans.  Others here are making the argument of "biology" to categorically exclude all trans girls from participation at all age levels. Others believe we should subject 10 year old girls to the NWSL requirement of testosterone suppression in order to play.  Some have claimed that 10 year old children playing soccer is a "safety issue".  And you lapped it all up.

I have no idea why you think the US losing a U20 WWC cup has anything to do with trans girls playing soccer, besides the fact that it is indicative of your inability to think rationally.  You do understand that the U20 WWC team involves a bunch of kids who have been thrown together at the last minute and asked to play as a coherent unit with players with whom they do not have nearly the same familiarity that the Netherlands players have with their teammates, right?  But, hey, have you considered the fact that the Netherlands was among the first countries in the world to change their gender marker on their official identity papers? And is one of the most inclusive countries in the world with respect to LGBTQ rights? That the Netherlands doesn't ban schools from discussing transgender status, unlike some states here?  Have you considered the possibility that maybe the US would be better at U20 soccer if parents here stopped raising their children to hate trans people and spend their time at their daughter's soccer games less pissy that maybe the goalie with short hair is a "boy"? 

I do have plenty of experience in competitive "scenarios" btw.  It is obvious, however, that you have zero experience with trans people other than to dehumanize them and support their ongoing abuse, of course.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Happened again said:


> As usual you are being an idiot and stovepiping a rather complext argument.  I would go out on a limb and say that not one person on this this site is against coed sports at young ages..  You weakly wrap yourself in culural/societal mumbo jumbo.  This is a CA forum, I doubt  anyone  is a "transphobe".  Idiotphobe maybe, but transphobe...come on sweetie, that's really not a thing here even though you would love that to be thing. Your culture war schtick is a bit tiresome but cute at the same time.  I detect sincere passion in your spirited defense of the trans community, especially with teens.  It's hard being a trans kid - physically and mentally...it usually goes hand in hand.
> 
> I'm guessing you don't know alot about many things.  I think it's likely (and maybe I'm wrong) that you've never spent a minute or two  on the pitch in any type of competitive scenario.  The U20s did very poorly yesterday, imagine if they had played LAFC MLS U16s
> 
> but let's go ahead and listen to you rant about 10 year old coed soccer.  Be the squirrel and be proud.


Sad little guy is just so depressed that the U20 WNT lost a soccer game.  Surely it means the end of the United States unless we immediately ban trans girls from being able to play on girls teams, right?  Do you think there is still time to save America?


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Can one of you transphobes explain to me why a 10 year old trans girl is a safety risk, but it's totally fine for one girl to play on a boys team and against 11 boys?


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Can one of you transphobes explain to me how you reconcile your argument that "biology" mandates that girls should only be allowed to play girls, but co-ed soccer is ok?  Are you saying that biological girls should only be biological girls when you say so, but it's ok to mix boys and girls when you say so?


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 15, 2022)

Can one of you transphobes explain to me why the government should not interfere with private business, but it should absolutely interfere with a private business that allows a 10 year old trans girl to play goalie at Surf Cup?


----------



## Happened again (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> Sad little guy is just so depressed that the U20 WNT lost a soccer game.  Surely it means the end of the United States unless we immediately ban trans girls from being able to play on girls teams, right?  Do you think there is still time to save America?


Funny, know your audience.  Your panties in a bunch about tranphobia and you've yet to pay attention to pretty much anything.  Thanks for the XY attribution but you swing and miss again.  Certainly not a little guy...Still a somewhat little girl  though...last time I checked, I'm holding on strong to XX.   Please go back to your little wittle room and argue with yourself.  Certainly obvious you completely missed the point in regards to the U20s.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> You're a clown, but it is common for transphobes to bury their heads in the sand with all the bs nonsense being spewed by their transphobic brethren.  A couple people have tried to out a 10 year old girl as trans.  Others here are making the argument of "biology" to categorically exclude all trans girls from participation at all age levels. Others believe we should subject 10 year old girls to the NWSL requirement of testosterone suppression in order to play.  Some have claimed that 10 year old children playing soccer is a "safety issue".  And you lapped it all up.
> 
> I have no idea why you think the US losing a U20 WWC cup has anything to do with trans girls playing soccer, besides the fact that it is indicative of your inability to think rationally.  You do understand that the U20 WWC team involves a bunch of kids who have been thrown together at the last minute and asked to play as a coherent unit with players with whom they do not have nearly the same familiarity that the Netherlands players have with their teammates, right?  But, hey, have you considered the fact that the Netherlands was among the first countries in the world to change their gender marker on their official identity papers? And is one of the most inclusive countries in the world with respect to LGBTQ rights? That the Netherlands doesn't ban schools from discussing transgender status, unlike some states here?  Have you considered the possibility that maybe the US would be better at U20 soccer if parents here stopped raising their children to hate trans people and spend their time at their daughter's soccer games less pissy that maybe the goalie with short hair is a "boy"?
> 
> I do have plenty of experience in competitive "scenarios" btw.  It is obvious, however, that you have zero experience with trans people other than to dehumanize them and support their ongoing abuse, of course.



Gawd you are an idiot.  what are you even spewing forth here?  Now I'm anti U20s?  didn't we just go through this in another topic?  Unseat your panties and center yourself.   You will be amazed to realize that we agree on the dominance of US women's soccer, now, and in the foreaseable future.  All of the other stuff you mention is gibberish....again, I admire your gallant defense of trans kids.  They deserve it - tough being one.  In practice I doubt you could really defend anything..


Please lift the little tiny pebble and crawl back into the hole it covered.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> If safety is the concern, you could do a height/weight classification, as your combat sports examples illustrate.  It doesn't just have to be height.  You can't come after the trans kid if you are letting the 5 ft 12 year old kid get blasted by 6 ft built like a line backer early bloomer
> 
> If performance is your concern, then testosterone test.  You can't come after the trans kids until you come after the cheaters who are doing steroids.  If it's not important enough to testosterone test, then the only thing you are doing is targeting the MTF transgenders because it's easy to go after them and you don't want your kids to go through the inconvenience or expense to testosterone test. It also catches BTW the small number of girls who for some biological reason has some very high testosterone level.
> 
> My only point is systems which ends in "kick out the trans kid" but leaves in place the other obvious targets has no other end than we don't want the trans kid to play.   If it's not important to take out the surrounding concerns, it's not important enough to kick out the trans kid.  Besides, we want a policy in place that encourages kids to take the steps to make sure they are 100% sure of their choice before undertaking drastic measures and we don't want to rush them into transitioning because they want the opportunity to do something as stupid as play competitive sports.  Once they hit college, sure use greater scrutiny (I don't believe Lia Thomas should have been given such a pass)...in individual sports sure use greater scrutiny (I also think if we are talking records and state championships, though, individual sports should have to steroid test).


No one is saying "kick out the trans kid".

They are saying "find them a spot on a coed or boys team"

Ok.  You three can go back to your usual "transphobe" name calling.  The kid is still welcome to play against the other XY kids.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

dad4 said:


> No one is saying "kick out the trans kid".
> 
> They are saying "find them a spot on a coed or boys team"
> 
> Ok.  You three can go back to your usual "transphobe" name calling.  The kid is still welcome to play against the other XY kids.


Well, let's analyze.

If safety is a concern, then I guess we don't care about the safety of the MTF transkid playing because once they take the hormone or the puberty blocker, they'll be a deterioration of their stature vis-a-vis non impaired males.

If performance is a concern, it's the same.  They'll fall behind non impaired males.

You could make the dividing line when they begin to take hormones or puberty blockers.  However, that has the nasty side effect that we don't want to encourage kids to rush into transition prematurely.  It's in our interest to make sure that if they are making such a permanent choice, they make it as late as possible and not put in incentives for them to rush before they are 100% sure.

BTW, I never called you a transphobe.  I challenged your line of reasoning.  At first you said it was the y chromosome but that turned out to just be pretextual.  I invited you to a performance standard, but you didn't seem concerned with the cheaters-- that would mean singling out a group for their status not their performance.  Someone suggested a height/weight standard, but then that wasn't applied evenly around other boys and girls.  You developed a system intellectually that got you to where it wanted based on prior conceived notions.  Only you can answer why and what's in your heart.  Here's the check on that: well then I assume the same goes under your newest proposed system for the FTM...you are o.k. with them, even if they are on testosterone, with them playing with the girls for as long as they want to, until they are ready to voluntarily make the switch...correct?


----------



## SIP (Aug 15, 2022)

dad4 said:


> No one is saying "kick out the trans kid".
> 
> They are saying "find them a spot on a coed or boys team"
> 
> Ok.  You three can go back to your usual "transphobe" name calling.  The kid is still welcome to play against the other XY kids.


please protect all kids' (human) privacy. 

there are girls have XY chromosomes, there are several syndrome cause it.  And there are boys who have XX chromosomes. when a gene on the Y chromosome ends up on an X chromosome, causing that X chromosome to function more like a Y. most of them live their entire lives without knowing it. and they don't need to know because they want to play soccer. 

stop this conversation already.


----------



## Code (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> Good question. Two reasons. First, because that is the hill the transphobes chose to die on when they chose to dehumanize and out a specific 10 year old girl at this website. Second, the situation of a 10 year old very obviously highlights the fact that literally none of the arguments that support imposing limitations on transgender participation make sense when applied to a 10 year old girl. That the answer to the question transgender participation is appropriate or not depends on a multitude of factors, including legitimate safety concerns, the societal importance or relative lack of importance of winning/losing at a particular age group or level, the importance of teaching inclusion at particular age group, the privacy interests at issue, and ways to make it fair for everyone, not just the transphobes who are desperate for they're (typically physically deficient) little princess to win a trophy.
> 
> Compare a 10 year old trans girl to the Penn swimmer. Is an NCAA championship societally important and an appropriate consideration when deciding what standards should apply? Sure, to some extent. Is the 10 year old girls' bracket at Surf Cup. No f**king way, since we're just talking about the fragile egos of some transphobic shit bag fathers. Is it important for society to take efforts to intervene to protect a fully grown adult who was a sufficiently elite enough to swim as a male at one of the best universities in the country? Maybe not, although those same rules also provide opportunity to far less elite swimmers to overcome much worse history of abuse, so maybe one trans woman winning a national championship in the entire history of the NCAA is a small price to pay to help less fortunate people. Regardless, is it important for society to protect 10 year old trans girls from what is almost inevitable abuse if we don't?  Absolutely.  Similarly, is it critically important to teach grown adults at Penn lessons in inclusion?  Sure, but not nearly as important as teaching those lessons to 10 year old children.
> 
> ...



I never said that 13 year old transgender participation should be cut off.  I said that is the age when the concern becomes relevant.  For the sake of all athletes, trans and cis, we should be having a logical and serious discussion about what and if any guidlines should be considered before some problem erupts about it during play.  Is it age based? Size based? Testosterone based?  ect...  USYS and USClubSoccer should be including guidelines and policies in the rules to avoid all the foreseable drama that is going to occur on the fields if they just try to ignore it.  Transgender athletes in youth sports is probably more common than anybody realizes, but the scenario is not going to become less likely as time moves on.  I'm sure we all recognize that more transgender people are coming out publically than ever before.  I don't have the answers, but I do have a lot of questions and opinions.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Well, let's analyze.
> 
> If safety is a concern, then I guess we don't care about the safety of the MTF transkid playing because once they take the hormone or the puberty blocker, they'll be a deterioration of their stature vis-a-vis non impaired males.
> 
> ...


What is in their heart?  Doesn't matter.   That is their business, not mine.  I hope they find their path.

What I care about is the longer bones, the extra nuclei in their muscle cells, the added lung capacity, and the rest of the advantages any XY athlete received from their testosterone years.

Sincerity of belief doesn't erase any of that.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

dad4 said:


> What is in their heart?  Doesn't matter.   That is their business, not mine.  I hope they find their path.
> 
> What I care about is the longer bones, the extra nuclei in their muscle cells, the added lung capacity, and the rest of the advantages any XY athlete received from their testosterone years.
> 
> Sincerity of belief doesn't erase any of that.


You completely missed the point.  You accused me of calling YOU a transphobe.  I said I can't determine what's in YOUR heart.  What makes it suspect, though, is that you push every special case to the result that YOU want and predetermined before going into this intellectual exercise.  Only YOU can explain that.

The question you haven't been able to answer is "what's the point?"  What's the point of restricting MTFs from participating where they are most comfortable: with the girls.

Now you say the concern is the testosterone exposure, so it's performance.  Well, steroids do the same thing.  You don't seem to worried about catching the cheaters.  If so, what difference does it all make?  You are picking on the transkid that just wants to play with the girls, but you are letting the cheaters go scott free (for whatever reason...maybe you personally don't want to be inconvenienced by the cost and hassels of testosterone testing....maybe again it's pretextual and you are o.k. with turning a blind eye to the cheat but want to get the transkid...only YOU know what's in YOUR heart).  You can't get away from this....if this is you concern, you can't pick on the easy fruit of the transkid and turn a blind eye to the cheaters.  If it's important enough to restrict the transkid (who may be on estrogen or puberty blockers and therefore unable to keep up with the testosterone males), it's important enough to test for testosterone, particularly as, unlike college kids, they haven't 100% gone through the transformative changes


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> You completely missed the point.  You accused me of calling YOU a transphobe.  I said I can't determine what's in YOUR heart.  What makes it suspect, though, is that you push every special case to the result that YOU want and predetermined before going into this intellectual exercise.  Only YOU can explain that.
> 
> The question you haven't been able to answer is "what's the point?"  What's the point of restricting MTFs from participating where they are most comfortable: with the girls.
> 
> Now you say the concern is the testosterone exposure, so it's performance.  Well, steroids do the same thing.  You don't seem to worried about catching the cheaters.  If so, what difference does it all make?  You are picking on the transkid that just wants to play with the girls, but you are letting the cheaters go scott free (for whatever reason...maybe you personally don't want to be inconvenienced by the cost and hassels of testosterone testing....maybe again it's pretextual and you are o.k. with turning a blind eye to the cheat but want to get the transkid...only YOU know what's in YOUR heart).  You can't get away from this....if this is you concern, you can't pick on the easy fruit of the transkid and turn a blind eye to the cheaters.  If it's important enough to restrict the transkid (who may be on estrogen or puberty blockers and therefore unable to keep up with the testosterone males), it's important enough to test for testosterone, particularly as, unlike college kids, they haven't 100% gone through the transformative changes


BTW the immediate consequence of this is that you will have absolutely 100% pushed more people to get transitional surgery or to go on puberty blockers to exactly avoid the issue of testoterone exposure.   The choice those parents will have to face is put them on it at age 12 or 13, when they aren't sure it will stick, or give up their chance to forever play competitive sports.  Again, I think that's the wrong incentive.  Considering how permanent something even like testosterone blockers are, and considering how many transgendered people come to regret their choice, and considering the big medical malpractice cases now floating around by providers failing to adequately screen for other mental conditions, this is exactly NOT the sophie's choice we want to be putting on parents with kids who may or may not turn out to have this issue.


----------



## timmyh (Aug 15, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> What I find particularly curious about this entire "debate" is how not a single one of them will acknowledge that a 10 year old trans girl is likely to face tremendous abuse on a boys' team, let alone the abuse they almost always endure outside of kiddie sports.  They refuse to acknowledge that the primary reason that 10 year old trans girls are allowed to play on girls teams is because it significantly reduces the risk of abuse, the impact on the girls around her is minimal and, in fact, allowing a 10 year old trans girl to play will likely benefit many of them by helping teach them that inclusion and treating people with dignity and respect is far more important than a trophy or winning a soccer game for 10 year olds. The reality is there are legitimate and, in fact, very important reasons to allow trans children to play on girls' teams.  The transphobes cannot acknowledge their legitimacy even if they disagree about how to weigh those arguments, however, because giving legitimacy to those arguments means they must confront the fact that they chose the importance of trophies for their 10 year old daughter over human dignity for a class of people they hold in contempt.


No, I am not transphobic.  No, I don't think youth trophies are all that important.  Yes, I think calling out a 10 year old is a really, really sorry thing to do. 

But shouldn't your vitriol be directed at the "tremendous abuse from boys teams?" Why are you giving them a complete pass for not treating a teammate or opponent with respect and dignity, but a women who has worked hard to, say, swim really fast just got left off the NCAA podium and thus has to be the one to pay the price in the name of "respect and dignity?" 

Seems you should turn your turrets to the real problem (respect and dignity from male teammates) instead of sidestepping that with a solution that allows them onto female teams where post-puberty MTF teens and adults clearly have an unmatchable physical advantage that rails against the fundamental reasons of fairness that men and women were separated in sports in the first place. 

If your primary reason a MTF athlete should be allowed to play on a women's team is so that the men don't make fun of her, then it seems you're shaking your fist at the wrong cloud and berating the wrong parents.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

timmyh said:


> No, I am not transphobic.  No, I don't think youth trophies are all that important.  Yes, I think calling out a 10 year old is a really, really sorry thing to do.
> 
> But shouldn't your vitriol be directed at the "tremendous abuse from boys teams?" Why are you giving them a complete pass for not treating a teammate or opponent with respect and dignity, but a women who has worked hard to, say, swim really fast just got left off the NCAA podium and thus has to be the one to pay the price in the name of "respect and dignity?"
> 
> ...


The reason why they should be allowed to compete is because that’s where they feel the most comfortable.  The secondary reason is because those on blockers or hormones can no longer keep up with the non impaired males. It flips the burden to those that want to restrict to answer the question: why not?

the answer may very well be different for the pre pubescent mtf, adolescent mtf and post hs mtf as well as what’s at stake in the sport/the level. Also as a reminder every issue that revolves around mtf you have the exact opposite issue for ftm. A clue for whether bigotry is motivating someone is if the answer is kick them both out and there is no rational limiting principle.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 15, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> The reason why they should be allowed to compete is because that’s where they feel the most comfortable.  The secondary reason is because those on blockers or hormones can no longer keep up with the non impaired males. It flips the burden to those that want to restrict to answer the question: why not?
> 
> the answer may very well be different for the pre pubescent mtf, adolescent mtf and post hs mtf as well as what’s at stake in the sport/the level. Also as a reminder every issue that revolves around mtf you have the exact opposite issue for ftm. A clue for whether bigotry is motivating someone is if the answer is kick them both out and there is no rational limiting principle.


what ages are we talking about?  

This goes way beyond sports...sports participation is such a small fraction of the overall population.  With sports - fairness in competition at the highest levels should be a concern..safety etc.  Very small population but still a concern...

I love it how people (not targeting you Grace) talk about adminstering puberty blockers  and hormone treatment like they are giving out nerds to young, still developing kids. There is minimal research on long term effects.  A lot to think about when making a decision to go down this path.  Puberty blockers are reversible, hormone treatment not so much.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

Happened again said:


> what ages are we talking about?
> 
> This goes way beyond sports...sports participation is such a small fraction of the overall population.  With sports - fairness in competition at the highest levels should be a concern..safety etc.  Very small population but still a concern...
> 
> I love it how people (not targeting you Grace) talk about adminstering puberty blockers  and hormone treatment like they are giving out nerds to young, still developing kids. There is minimal research on long term effects.  A lot to think about when making a decision to go down this path.  Puberty blockers are reversible, hormone treatment not so much.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 15, 2022)

Happened again said:


> what ages are we talking about?
> 
> This goes way beyond sports...sports participation is such a small fraction of the overall population.  With sports - fairness in competition at the highest levels should be a concern..safety etc.  Very small population but still a concern...
> 
> I love it how people (not targeting you Grace) talk about adminstering puberty blockers  and hormone treatment like they are giving out nerds to young, still developing kids. There is minimal research on long term effects.  A lot to think about when making a decision to go down this path.  Puberty blockers are reversible, hormone treatment not so much.


They are both dangerous and carry the risk of long term irreversible damage. The problem is there’s a trade off. For some cases it will be very very obvious from an early age what’s going on.  But a portion of even those obvious cases will be wrongly diagnosed.  The trade off is also really high….the pressure to diagnose early is because (as some have said) the effects of testosterone are drastic and irreversible…if the mtf is going to have the best shot at a normal life if they insist on doing it better do it early…on the other hand if they get the diagnosis wrong it’s tragic and also irreversible.

that’s why all other things being equal (such as we don’t go after the cheaters) we need to think hard about policies that encourage early transitions.  My debate with dad4 has largely circulated with adolescents in youth sports.  The standard in college athletics should be harsher and more strict.  Presumably if testosterone is the issue, no one would have a problem with a mtf playing youth soccer that goes on hormone blockers before the full freight of puberty hits (if the answer is still no without a limiting principle there’s a possibility bigotry is in fact guiding the person). The question of whether we should allow such treatments is broader than the scope of a youth soccer forum and as I said complicated.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 16, 2022)

timmyh said:


> No, I am not transphobic.  No, I don't think youth trophies are all that important.  Yes, I think calling out a 10 year old is a really, really sorry thing to do.
> 
> But shouldn't your vitriol be directed at the "tremendous abuse from boys teams?" Why are you giving them a complete pass for not treating a teammate or opponent with respect and dignity, but a women who has worked hard to, say, swim really fast just got left off the NCAA podium and thus has to be the one to pay the price in the name of "respect and dignity?"
> 
> ...


I see.  So instead of the Civil Rights Act, we should have just told black children to get their shit together and sit at the front of the bus and at that lunch counter?  Yes, it make a ton of sense to tell a 10 year old trans girls to just suck it up and play on a boy's team because making them endure what is likely to be an abusive environment is the best way to change the minds of other 10 year old transphobic shits.  Dumping the responsibility for educating transphobes onto children is a really stupid idea. It would be one thing if you could count on every adult involved to treat children with dignity and respect, and to make their children do the same, but this thread alone  has shown how much of a fantasy that is.  Clearly, a lot of people hold trans children in contempt, so making the trans children suck it  in the hope that maybe it will work out is not an acceptable solution. Your proposal also seems to incorrectly assume that gender identity is a bullshit concept.

I am not giving anyone a free pass.  If you had any desire to have a legitimate conversation, you would have acknowledged what I've already said about the NCAA swimmer.  Once again, whining that a trans child shouldn't be able to play on a soccer team because an adult trans swimmer won an NCAA title is a ridiculously stupid comparison for reasons already stated.  If you think that it's fine to treat a 10 year old like shit because you're bitter an adult trans swimmer won a race in a pool, well, yes you are transphobic.  If you are living in fear that a post-pubescent 14 year old trans girl will hurt other girls in a soccer game given all the other guardrails in place to prevent that from happening, yes you are transphobic.  If you are unwilling to even consider that the unmatchable physical and emotional abuse that trans girls endure is a legitimate factor in determining the circumstances in which trans girls should be allowed to participate in girls sports, then you are transphobic.  If you think kiddie trophies are so important that "fundamental fairness" mandates making trans children play with their biological gender without regard to the abuse that will likely result, and you refuse to understand the very simple concept that "fairness" also includes ensuring trans children have the opportunity to play a sport free from abuse, yes, you are transphobic.


----------



## timmyh (Aug 16, 2022)

Your civil rights analogy is really irrelevant. That was a quest for fundamental equality. This subject is exploring whether enabling fundamental inequality serves a more noble purpose. 

I clearly was not talking about 10 year olds.  I think you're inclusive stance there is 100% spot on. 

I was not talking about "hurting others."  I agree that is a silly argument with the sole purpose of justifying exclusion. 

I was not talking about kiddie trophies that are largely irrelevant. 

I am most certainly willing to consider the abuse teams kids suffer and weigh that against a multitude of other factors. 

I was clearly talking about post-pubescent teens and adults. And I think your flamethrowing lacks appropriate nuance in a complicated discussion.  

This isn't even a real discussion,  because you are so fired up about the obvious transphobes that you aren't reasonably engaging with anyone who might be trying to have a real conversation. You are instead lumping anyone who may not agree with your personal opinion together and trying to score rhetorical points, and it isn't really helping the discourse. 

But maybe that's your agenda and I am being trolled by hoping I may learn something that helps refine or change my opinion here.


----------



## Kicker 2.0 (Aug 16, 2022)

timmyh said:


> But maybe that's your agenda and I am being trolled by hoping I may learn something that helps refine or change my opinion here.


This hits the nail on the head!


----------



## dad4 (Aug 16, 2022)

The question isn't really about youth rec sports.  Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in.  You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.  

It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The question isn't really about youth rec sports.  Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in.  You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.
> 
> It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.


There are actually 3 groups here that have to be analyzed separately: preteens, adolescents, and adults.  The rules for each will be different.  The hardest case is the adolescents.  They shouldn't be conflated with adults, because we also have to be mindful of the incentives we are creating.

Here's the reality, though.  ECNL is really in the scheme of things not that important.  It's not academy ball like the boy's program highest tier.  There's no drug testing so we aren't bending over backwards to ensure a level playing field.  There's nothing to stop the same balance you propose as for a rec program: play up a year.

Here are the tests with adolescents:
-if you think testosterone is a performance enhancing drug that unbalances the playing field, are you trying to catch the cheaters?  Presumably you are also o.k. with those that went on puberty blockers (or more drastically, transitioning) before 12/13/14 playing on the girls side without restrictions?  
-if you think it's a genetics thing, are you o.k. with FTM playing in the girls league, even if they are taking testosterone, until they are ready to shift?
-if it's a safety thing, are you in favor of size/weight restrictions on all players, and not just those because of their status?

Because otherwise there may be something motivating the person beyond just concerns about performance, safety or genetics.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The question isn't really about youth rec sports.  Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in.  You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.
> 
> It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.


It really isn't becoming an issue of "destabilizing the game" in ECNL.  This is made-up, chicken little, fear mongering.

You criticize Grace for arguing in circles but you keep saying the same thing when it just isn't the case.

Let them play where they feel most comfortable in competitive youth leagues.  Only call it an issue if it becomes one.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 16, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> There are actually 3 groups here that have to be analyzed separately: preteens, adolescents, and adults.  The rules for each will be different.  The hardest case is the adolescents.  They shouldn't be conflated with adults, because we also have to be mindful of the incentives we are creating.
> 
> Here's the reality, though.  ECNL is really in the scheme of things not that important.  It's not academy ball like the boy's program highest tier.  There's no drug testing so we aren't bending over backwards to ensure a level playing field.  There's nothing to stop the same balance you propose as for a rec program: play up a year.
> 
> ...


Ftm: 
The answer for ftm is that ftm athletes on monitored hormone supplements have an unfair advantage.  They should be welcome in a boys division.

Ftm athletes who are not on hormone supplements do not have an unfair advantage.  They should be welcome in the division of their choice.  

Ftm athletes who take unnecessarily large doses of hormone supplements are doping and should not be welcome in either division. 

Hope that's clear.  

Playing up:

Is a great solution for a pre pubescent girls league.

Playing up doesn't really do much for older girls leagues, because female puberty doesn't improve athletic performance.  Take a look at track and field times.  The boys are off like rockets from 13 to 18.  The high school girls often still lose to 8th graders.  The extra year isn't giving you as much.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 16, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> It really isn't becoming an issue of "destabilizing the game" in ECNL.  This is made-up, chicken little, fear mongering.
> 
> You criticize Grace for arguing in circles but you keep saying the same thing when it just isn't the case.
> 
> Let them play where they feel most comfortable in competitive youth leagues.  Only call it an issue if it becomes one.


Suppose it becomes an issue.  A team starts winning games they could never have won without the trans kid.  

How do you propose people raise the issue without putting an unfair spotlight on the kid?


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Suppose it becomes an issue.  A team starts winning games they could never have won without the trans kid.
> 
> How do you propose people raise the issue without putting an unfair spotlight on the kid?


Don't act like you are protecting trans-gender people from getting hurt.

I don't waste time legislating problems that don't exist and may never exist.  That is the province of fear mongers.

Ponder what it makes you if you put in all kinds of rules that just hurt people when it was never gonna be a problem.  FYI, what you described isn't per se a problem.  HEAVEN FORBID THE PLAYER CONTRIBUTE AND HELP THE TEAM WIN.  My ECNL captain DD would welcome this kid on her team or the other team.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Ftm:
> The answer for ftm is that ftm athletes on monitored hormone supplements have an unfair advantage.  They should be welcome in a boys division.
> 
> Ftm athletes who are not on hormone supplements do not have an unfair advantage.  They should be welcome in the division of their choice.
> ...


Well, at least we finally are on clear ground.  Performance it is.  "Ftm athletes who take unnecessarily large doses of hormone supplements are doping and should not be welcome in either division."  O.k., unless you want to go back to your witchhunt that you floated (which I welcome your disavowel even if you wouldn't come out and say it) and test only the trans kids, if you care about a level playing field so much, test for doping.  You could limit it the ages, divisions, and particular contests you want to exclude the trans people from, you can do it randomly.  If unusually high levelled testosterone girls get caught in it and they have to go on testosterone suppressants, too bad so sad...if she declines she can play with the boys.  Presumably as well if the teen undergoes puberty blockers or has the operation before puberty kicks in (we can argue about the age specifics: 12/13/14), no problem with them playing in the girls league.  It has the nasty side effect that you will be encouraging parents to take the risk of transitioning their kids earlier rather than wait, but collateral damage.  It's more important, after all, that the highly competitive and sacrosanct nature of ECNL kiddie ball be preserved.  While we are at it, why aren't the higher levels doing more to suss out the fake birth certificates we know are floating around out there?

BTW, I told you already solo sports need to be held to a different standard than teams sports.  The impact of one athlete is going to be much more severe on the competition, particular if records or individual championships are at stake.  The impact of one athlete on a team is much less severe (particularly soccer, less so basketball).


----------



## dad4 (Aug 16, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> Don't act like you are protecting trans-gender people from getting hurt.
> 
> I don't waste time legislating problems that don't exist and may never exist.  That is the province of fear mongers.
> 
> Ponder what it makes you if you put in all kinds of rules that just hurt people when it was never gonna be a problem.  FYI, what you described isn't per se a problem.  HEAVEN FORBID THE PLAYER CONTRIBUTE AND HELP THE TEAM WIN.  My ECNL captain DD would welcome this kid on her team or the other team.


Sure.  Your kid is captain, and would be happy to have the former boy as a teammate.  No sweat off her back.  She still has her spot.

Tell me how she would feel if she was the one who got bumped down to ECRL to make room for the same player.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sure.  Your kid is captain, and would be happy to have the former boy as a teammate.  No sweat off her back.  She still has her spot.
> 
> Tell me how she would feel if she was the one who got bumped down to ECRL to make room for the same player.


And there it is.  Transphobia in all its wonders.  Is there a difference if your kid gets dropped because of a better player that was born female?


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sure.  Your kid is captain, and would be happy to have the former boy as a teammate.  No sweat off her back.  She still has her spot.
> 
> Tell me how she would feel if she was the one who got bumped down to ECRL to make room for the same player.


Same as if there were 21 other players on the team that weren't trans.  

If the trans player earned the right to be Captain and my daughter stepped away from it with class, I'll know I've raised a strong and resilient adult.  Also, we've got our personal statement with guaranteed admission to Harvard! YES!!!


----------



## dad4 (Aug 16, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> And there it is.  Transphobia in all its wonders.  Is there a difference if your kid gets dropped because of a better player that was born female?


Dropped for a better female athlete?  Part of sports.  Learn from it.

Dropped for a genetically male athlete who is playing in a female league?  Unfair advantage, and not at all ok.  As bad as putting a U15 kid in a U14 league.

Now add one.  Suppose my son is dropped from the team to make space for a trans girl, or for a trans boy who takes supplements.  That's also just fine.  

I see you're back to the name calling.  Go play with Golden Gate.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Dropped for a better female athlete?  Part of sports.  Learn from it.
> 
> Dropped for a genetically male athlete who is playing in a female league?  Unfair advantage, and not at all ok.  As bad as putting a U15 kid in a U14 league.
> 
> ...


Please explain how a trans athlete who merely manages to push the 22nd player off the bench is "unfairly superior."   Sounds like a good fit to me.  Sounds like merely existing in the space is enough to trigger you.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Dropped for a better female athlete?  Part of sports.  Learn from it.
> 
> Dropped for a genetically male athlete who is playing in a female league?  Unfair advantage, and not at all ok.  As bad as putting a U15 kid in a U14 league.
> 
> ...


The issue is that you aren't recognizing that all these limitations are arbitrary constructs.   Why is it bad for a U15 kid to supplant a U14 kid in the league, but given we know about the vast differences in middle schools ages, it wasn't bad for my August birthday kid to lose his oldest designation and now have to play against January kids (plus he lost a year of soccer to boot)?  Wasn't that unfair?

What if the girl that comes and bumps your daughter is an XXY or just a girl with an unusual testosterone count?  What if she just happens to be unnaturally bigger and can bump the other kids off the ball?  What if they are on steroids and you aren't testing and don't know it?  It's all just arbitrary line drawing.  "Fairness" doesn't really exist....it's just winners and losers.

BTW, what we are talking about too is "fairness" within an arbitrary construct: women's sports.  In the fictional Federation we talked about, the only thing that matters is "being the best".  Instinctively, that's why women's pro sports have such a low audience eyeballs.  If it hadn't been for Title IX, we'd still have women's sports, but they wouldn't have proliferated as much as they did, and there certainly wouldn't be a level playing field.  So it isn't about being the "best"....what's it ultimately about?.....well it was about participation and equality, which makes the lines you are trying to draw both ironic and ephemeral.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 16, 2022)

I find using ECNL as an example is hilarious anyway.  As though being rostered on these teams reflects a true meritocracy to begin with.  So many people on these teams that didn't really compete to get their spots, so many to complain about before I would land on a trans kid.


----------



## espola (Aug 16, 2022)

There is a lot of talk about new players with physical advantages (however achieved) are "displanting" the weak end of the bench.  I can't remember that any of the teams my kids played on didn't have room to add a player.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 16, 2022)

timmyh said:


> Your civil rights analogy is really irrelevant. That was a quest for fundamental equality. This subject is exploring whether enabling fundamental inequality serves a more noble purpose.
> 
> I clearly was not talking about 10 year olds.  I think you're inclusive stance there is 100% spot on.
> 
> ...


I did not accuse you of arguing that trans children are going to hurt. I was speaking generally about those who did, and yes they're transphobic.  In other words, not everything is about you even if I'm discussing something that happens to be following up on one of your posts.  I have had plenty of real discussion about this, including that discussing post-pubescent arguments against are at least rational ones to make.  In fact, despite my obvious penchant to rake transphobes over the coals, I'm one of few people here who have actually acknowledged merits on the other side. But yes, I flame throw against bigots because shooting fish in a barrel like that is kinda fun.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

espola said:


> There is a lot of talk about new players with physical advantages (however achieved) are "displanting" the weak end of the bench.  I can't remember that any of the teams my kids played on didn't have room to add a player.


Some of the leagues have roster caps (I think for ECNL it's high at 28).  Given the substitution rules, they can't however play all of them.  ECNL tries to make this up (claims its because they care about development) by allowing players to play up but realistically what coach is going to play up some of his best players and risk a loss?  MLS Next, particularly the academy teams but also some of the regular club teams, solves this by some players just don't have an expectation to play, and some players (say the 3rd goalkeeper) don't even get to dress.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The question isn't really about youth rec sports.  Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in.  You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.
> 
> It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.


I see, so you're admitting the entire issue of "safety" is a bullshit one since you're cool with trans girls playing rec.  So your real issue is that you just don't want trans girls playing in whatever league you say so.  And that is because you get to decide which kiddie soccer trophies are just too important?

So why can a director of a rec program decide when it is ok but the directors of comp programs cannot?  Again, it all comes back to you and your daughter's fragile egos and your kid's lack of athletic ability.  Honestly, it sounds to me like she's the one who needs to be in a rec league.  I'm happy to send  participation trophies your way if it helps.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 16, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> Please explain how a trans athlete who merely manages to push the 22nd player off the bench is "unfairly superior."   Sounds like a good fit to me.  Sounds like merely existing in the space is enough to trigger you.


The trouble is the space, not the existence.

I also object to 15 years olds who exist in the space of U14 teams.  This doesn't mean you need to start calling me a "fifteenphobe".


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

dad4 said:


> The trouble is the space, not the existence.
> 
> I also object to 15 years olds who exist in the space of U14 teams.  This doesn't mean you need to start calling me a "fifteenphobe".


You are literally drawing artificially drawn borders to come up with a particular "space".  You unknowingly have stumbled into an absolutely great analogy that works against you.  You are yelling "no this is my space, stay out" instead of questioning why the space should be a circle rather than a square.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 16, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> Please explain how a trans athlete who merely manages to push the 22nd player off the bench is "unfairly superior."   Sounds like a good fit to me.  Sounds like merely existing in the space is enough to trigger you.


Because probably that's now how it would work.  And lay off the transphobe comments, it's a weak diversion. 

We can what aboutism this to death.  A high performing post pubescent male is going to wreak havoc on any girls team.  He will wreak havoc on the field.  I suppose this is where puberty blockers and hormone therapy comes in.  Complicated issue...regardless, post pubescent XY is likely to have an  unfair advantage over XX...it's just biology.  Puberty blockers and hormone treatment aside.

I love it when an argument gets thrown out the door once societal/cultural issues come into play.  Again, not transphobe - if that's what you want to label me , then please pound sand

I mean, did you watch swimming the last 6 months?  post pubescence development is not reversible...shoulder, hip bone density doesn't go away...you can certainly mess with it pre-pubescent, but not post.

Ulittle coed play..sure...coed league after 14/15..sure..


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 16, 2022)

Happened again said:


> Because probably that's now how it would work.  And lay off the transphobe comments, it's a weak diversion.
> 
> We can what aboutism this to death.  A high performing post pubescent male is going to wreak havoc on any girls team.  He will wreak havoc on the field.  I suppose this is where puberty blockers and hormone therapy comes in.  Complicated issue...regardless, post pubescent XY is likely to have an  unfair advantage over XX...it's just biology.  Puberty blockers and hormone treatment aside.
> 
> ...


Did you mean to reply to my post?  Your post doesn't seem to follow. I don't believe I labeled Dad4 it.  In fact, Dad4 more or less acknowledged it didn't matter whether the trans player was a good fit and not particularly high-performing on a team, it is enough that the trans player took a non-trans player's fault.  I appreciate Dad4 because he at least seems to have a coherent enough grasp of where the conversation is going to allow us to find to root of our disagreement.

Grace also goes to the heart of it by saying, sure we have these lines, but can they be drawn somewhere else more sensibly.  Fair point.

On the other hand, you are back to some other part of the argument that my post wasn't focused on.  You are talking about the idea that some elite soccer player from the boys' side is going transition then come in and "wreak havoc." I'm not labeling you as a person, but I see this level of speculation as fear mongering until we actually see it happen in ECNL, the highest level of youth girls soccer.  Theoretically, sure.  Just, in reality, why make a bunch of rules and legislate and lobby and get all upset and exhaust energy over something that isn't actually happening?  We wait until we see what it looks like, then we can see whether something needs to be fixed or whether it works itself out.

As a staunch republican, I'm all for letting the free market work itself out and for people to figure it out without authorities always sticking their noses in.  I'm also for my daughter having to deal with some real challenges, even unfair ones, without her reacting like a whiny baby.  Life ain't fair.  Oh, I'm sorry, one little trans kid took your bally?  Call the whaaaambulance.  I'll be darned if she can come crying to me.  Get back up and play harder.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

Happened again said:


> Because probably that's now how it would work.  And lay off the transphobe comments, it's a weak diversion.
> 
> We can what aboutism this to death.  A high performing post pubescent male is going to wreak havoc on any girls team.  He will wreak havoc on the field.  I suppose this is where puberty blockers and hormone therapy comes in.  Complicated issue...regardless, post pubescent XY is likely to have an  unfair advantage over XX...it's just biology.  Puberty blockers and hormone treatment aside.
> 
> ...


Well that’s the problem with a one size fits all policy. You are raising the worst case (a high performing mtf not on hormones or puberty blockers that goes in and wrecks the girls). The one case I’m familiar with (not soccer) was a mtf who was diagnosed when she was 7 and while a decent runner was pretty much indistinguishable from a girl with no upper body strength relative to the high performing boys. That argues for granting committees discretion for the best fit (but that would also spill over to boys and girls who are early/late bloomer and the possibility for corruption is high). And there should therefore be no objection to a mtf that goes on puberty blockers or has surgery before going through puberty…correct?

you Also can’t throw in an elite swimmer to this.  What happens in elite college sports has very little impact on an ecnl team sport where we aren’t doing testosterone testing. The rules might very well be different for both.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 16, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Well that’s the problem with a one size fits all policy. You are raising the worst case (a high performing mtf not on hormones or puberty blockers that goes in and wrecks the girls). The one case I’m familiar with (not soccer) was a mtf who was diagnosed when she was 7 and while a decent runner was pretty much indistinguishable from a girl with no upper body strength relative to the high performing boys. That argues for granting committees discretion for the best fit (but that would also spill over to boys and girls who are early/late bloomer and the possibility for corruption is high). And there should therefore be no objection to a mtf that goes on puberty blockers or has surgery before going through puberty…correct?
> 
> you Also can’t throw in an elite swimmer to this.  What happens in elite college sports has very little impact on an ecnl team sport where we aren’t doing testosterone testing. The rules might very well be different for both.


I know it isn't fair to compare an elite collegiate swimmer (more elite in one gender than the other) to youth soccer leagues.  Again, this is a circular argument being made in a make believe world - nothing has really happened yet in regards to soccer..it may never happen.  has happened in HS track though, and see the ruckus it caused.  It's an emotional argument not really based in science/biology, rather in today's society..Nothing wrong with that by the way.

And to kinda answer your question, in this make believe world:  If a pre-teen child undergoes treatment, then fine, as long as the field is level.  IF a post pubescent transgirl, without any type of treatment and who is progressing on a normal curve at age 16 gets on a field with girls...then no...not a level playing field. 

 I wonder how many kids/parents go through the trials and tribulations of pre pubescent treatment for a trans child.  It's not an easy environment to manage...usually sports are the last things on their mind.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 16, 2022)

Happened again said:


> I know it isn't fair to compare an elite collegiate swimmer (more elite in one gender than the other) to youth soccer leagues.  Again, this is a circular argument being made in a make believe world - nothing has really happened yet in regards to soccer..it may never happen.  has happened in HS track though, and see the ruckus it caused.  It's an emotional argument not really based in science/biology, rather in today's society..Nothing wrong with that by the way.
> 
> And to kinda answer your question, in this make believe world:  If a pre-teen child undergoes treatment, then fine, as long as the field is level.  IF a post pubescent transgirl, without any type of treatment and who is progressing on a normal curve at age 16 gets on a field with girls...then no...not a level playing field.
> 
> I wonder how many kids/parents go through the trials and tribulations of pre pubescent treatment for a trans child.  It's not an easy environment to manage...usually sports are the last things on their mind.


This is a thoughtful statement. Its also btw why I suggested that solo sports need to be held to a higher standard than team sports.

my only objection to your reasoning is that there is no such thing as a level playing field.  There never is in sports. It’s an illusion. It’s certainly not a level playing field for the 14 year old girl that just happens to be not as great of a runner, despite training as much as her team captain. Even more so if said team captain is xxy genetically or has a high testosterone count.  It’s not a level playing field for the 12 year old 5ft boy getting bounced off the ball by the 6ft early bloomer. It’s not a level playing field for a December birthday being forced to compete with a January birthday. And it’s certainly not a level playing field for the player who has to compete with the teenager that’s doping (I guess that means we put you down as someone who supports drug testing youth soccer athletes)

sometimes the closest we can get is “close enough” particularly when the results don’t really matter all that much (as say in Youth v academy or college soccer).  Putting the mtf in the boys league also isn’t a level playing field for the mtf (whether they are on hormones or not since they’ll most likely not want to build body mass in order to blend in).  Someone is always going to get screwed.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 16, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> This is a thoughtful statement. Its also btw why I suggested that solo sports need to be held to a higher standard than team sports.
> 
> my only objection to your reasoning is that there is no such thing as a level playing field.  There never is in sports. It’s an illusion. It’s certainly not a level playing field for the 14 year old girl that just happens to be not as great of a runner, despite training as much as her team captain. Even more so if said team captain is xxy genetically or has a high testosterone count.  It’s not a level playing field for the 12 year old 5ft boy getting bounced off the ball by the 6ft early bloomer. It’s not a level playing field for a December birthday being forced to compete with a January birthday. And it’s certainly not a level playing field for the player who has to compete with the teenager that’s doping (I guess that means we put you down as someone who supports drug testing youth soccer athletes)
> 
> sometimes the closest we can get is “close enough” particularly when the results don’t really matter all that much (as say in Youth v academy or college soccer).  Putting the mtf in the boys league also isn’t a level playing field for the mtf (whether they are on hormones or not since they’ll most likely not want to build body mass in order to blend in).  Someone is always going to get screwed.


I don’t know how many times you’ll have to repeat what you just wriote, but as long as folks keep whining about unfairness in youth soccer because of this or that, feel free to say the above all over each time. Maybe if some of the folks here read it enough, it might JUST start sinking in. Thx


----------



## dad4 (Aug 17, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> I don’t know how many times you’ll have to repeat what you just wriote, but as long as folks keep whining about unfairness in youth soccer because of this or that, feel free to say the above all over each time. Maybe if some of the folks here read it enough, it might JUST start sinking in. Thx


Sorry.  "Everything is unfair, so we don't need to try" is just sloppy reasoning.

We do try.  We have multiple age groups and multiple levels.  We have boys leagues, girls leagues, adult leagues, and corporate leagues.  

The question is not whether we try to divide people into different groups in order to create fairer games.   The answer to that question is clearly yes.

The question is, given that we divide kids into different groups, what is the correct group for a teenage boy experiencing gender issues.


----------



## MacDre (Aug 17, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sorry.  "Everything is unfair, so we don't need to try" is just sloppy reasoning.
> 
> We do try.  We have multiple age groups and multiple levels.  We have boys leagues, girls leagues, adult leagues, and corporate leagues.
> 
> ...


According to my kid and her friends that include binary, trans etc.  athlete’s should play in categories based on their birth sex and not gender.

Why don’t all of you old fucks stop pontificating and ask the kids how they feel?


----------



## Pollo Elastico (Aug 17, 2022)

MacDre said:


> According to my kid and her friends that include binary, trans etc.  athlete’s should play in categories based on their birth sex and not gender.
> 
> Why don’t all of you old fucks stop pontificating and ask the kids how they feel?


There is a reason we created womens/mens and girls/boys categories.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> There is a reason we created womens/mens and girls/boys categories.


This may actually be the stupidest of all the stupid arguments.  In reality, there is a reason "we" created actually categories that allow transgender girls to participate.  As long as you and your transphobic friends continue refusing to accept the legitimacy of those reasons, even if you believe they are outweighed by competing interests, you keep proving why those categories "we" created that allow transgender girls is necessary.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 17, 2022)

.


MacDre said:


> According to my kid and her friends that include binary, trans etc.  athlete’s should play in categories based on their birth sex and not gender.
> 
> *Why don’t all of you old fucks stop pontificating and ask the kids how they feel?*


That will never happen - old fucks don't want to hear truth, they want to wrap themselves around issues and pontificate - who cares what the kids think.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Sorry.  "Everything is unfair, so we don't need to try" is just sloppy reasoning.
> 
> We do try.  We have multiple age groups and multiple levels.  We have boys leagues, girls leagues, adult leagues, and corporate leagues.
> 
> ...


You are correct "everything is unfair, so we don't need to try" is sloppy reasoning.  So is "we have to preserve a level playing field" because there is no such thing.  The only thing we can do is create lines which hopefully are rational (and therefore justifiable) and therefore not arbitrary.  Like borders on the map, though, they are an artificial fiction, and someone is going to get screwed. 

It's also not rational to say the trans person (whatever their natural sex or chromosomal makeup) should be the one to get screwed just because of who they are.  That's just bigotry.  Someone is going to get screwed in this situation, the only question is who.

So, you think performance is an issue, you better be focused on performance.  It's not rational to say we don't care about the cheaters (who are also using testosterone) but we do care about the trans kid.  Also the trans kids whose performance is not impacted (mtfs on puberty blockers or surgery before puberty, ftms not on hormones) should be allowed to play in the female division.  Girls who are caught up with unusually high testosterone need to be dealt with too.

If you think it's safety, you better be worried about the 5ft kid who is facing the 6ft and not just care about the trans kid.

If you think it's genetics (which is really a purity test), you darn well better not exempt the genetic anomalies and if you are going to test, test everyone.

The biggest question, though, is always what difference does it make.  As far as ENCL kiddie soccer is concerned, at least to date we haven't shown a whole lot of concern in the 3 categories of issues that have been raised.  The moral hysteria around trans kids is therefore not justified.  It may very well be in other areas such as single sports or college D1 sports.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> There is a reason we created womens/mens and girls/boys categories.


Yes, there is.  But it wasn't about being the best.  The culprit here is title IX.  But for title ix, we would still have women's sports  But they wouldn't be as widely dispersed as they are now.  We've seen time and time again that when it comes to pro or college eyeballs, the public simply doesn't care about women's sports as much as they care about men's.  It's instinctual.  Being the best is the women's division is not about being the best...it's about being the best in a lesser division (most sports, some like gymnastics and ice skating excluded).   But what was the purpose of title ix?  It was to allow women to participate fully in sports (because people thought there was participatory value beyond just being the best) and equality (which is ironic then that now people are using the women's category to rail against the trans kids).

Speaking about fairness, even though by the time he graduates my son will be a better player than at least 95% of the same aged women in Socal, is it fair the 85th% of women will get a soccer scholarship (not to mention the 40th person potentially at his college that gets to sit on the bench in gridiron football) but he doesn't?


----------



## Pollo Elastico (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Speaking about fairness, even though by the time he graduates my son will be a better player than at least 95% of the same aged women in Socal, is it fair the 85th% of women will get a soccer scholarship (not to mention the 40th person potentially at his college that gets to sit on the bench in gridiron football) but he doesn't?


Yep it is fair. 

Those women you mention are competing amongst themselves and those that get scholarships will do so on a women's team. 

Your son if and when he gets a scholarship, it will be based on how competitive he is vs other men trying for spots on the men's team.

What isn't fair or right is a man getting a scholarship on a women's team.

I shake my head when I think the guy on the women's swim team at Penn was up for Woman of the Year in that sport. What a farce. And even more so that a lot of people think that is fantastic.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> Yep it is fair.
> 
> Those women you mention are competing amongst themselves and those that get scholarships will do so on a women's team.
> 
> ...


You are conflating a whole bunch of questions and making assumptions.  The guy on the women's team at Penn is completely different than ECNL kiddie soccer.  The swimming results matter a lot more than who wins a trophy at surf cup....there are records at stake, Olympics at stake, Woman of the Year at stake.  The swimmer is in a solo sport where it makes more of an impact than a team sport.  The swimmer is also an adult who is in a better position to make permanent life altering changes than a teen playing youth sport or a kid that is 7.  And at a certain point, we should be concerned with doping and make an effort to catch the cheaters.

My son will be competing for a scholarship where perhaps let's say 5 men's scholarships are offered for soccer.  An equivalent girl is competing for a scholarship where perhaps 18 scholarship are offered for soccer.  That's not a "level playing field".  Why?  Because we drew some artificial lines: football is counted as a sport but cheerleading is not, and men and women get equivalent numbers of scholarships even though there is far more interest in men's sports than there is among women's.   Why did we do that?  For reasons of participation and equity, not because we wanted to see who was the best in a sport or putting money where the interest was.


----------



## espola (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> You are conflating a whole bunch of questions and making assumptions.  The guy on the women's team at Penn is completely different than ECNL kiddie soccer.  The swimming results matter a lot more than who wins a trophy at surf cup....there are records at stake, Olympics at stake, Woman of the Year at stake.  The swimmer is in a solo sport where it makes more of an impact than a team sport.  The swimmer is also an adult who is in a better position to make permanent life altering changes than a teen playing youth sport or a kid that is 7.  And at a certain point, we should be concerned with doping and make an effort to catch the cheaters.
> 
> My son will be competing for a scholarship where perhaps let's say 5 men's scholarships are offered for soccer.  An equivalent girl is competing for a scholarship where perhaps 18 scholarship are offered for soccer.  That's not a "level playing field".  Why?  Because we drew some artificial lines: football is counted as a sport but cheerleading is not, and men and women get equivalent numbers of scholarships even though there is far more interest in men's sports than there is among women's.   Why did we do that?  For reasons of participation and equity, not because we wanted to see who was the best in a sport or putting money where the interest was.


 5 scholarships vs 18 scholarships?  You're manipulating the numbers to advance your argument.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

espola said:


> 5 scholarships vs 18 scholarships?  You're manipulating the numbers to advance your argument.


That's a fair critique.  If you have more realistic numbers happy to use those.  It's certainly not equivalent, however.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> You are conflating a whole bunch of questions and making assumptions.  The guy on the women's team at Penn is completely different than ECNL kiddie soccer.  The swimming results matter a lot more than who wins a trophy at surf cup....there are records at stake, Olympics at stake, Woman of the Year at stake.  The swimmer is in a solo sport where it makes more of an impact than a team sport.  The swimmer is also an adult who is in a better position to make permanent life altering changes than a teen playing youth sport or a kid that is 7.  And at a certain point, we should be concerned with doping and make an effort to catch the cheaters.
> 
> My son will be competing for a scholarship where perhaps let's say 5 men's scholarships are offered for soccer.  An equivalent girl is competing for a scholarship where perhaps 18 scholarship are offered for soccer.  That's not a "level playing field".  Why?  Because we drew some artificial lines: football is counted as a sport but cheerleading is not, and men and women get equivalent numbers of scholarships even though there is far more interest in men's sports than there is among women's.   Why did we do that?  For reasons of participation and equity, not because we wanted to see who was the best in a sport or putting money where the interest was.


Cheer was excluded because, in 1972, the athletic directors would have expanded the cheer squads and completely ignored all other women’s sports.  

I also thought men’s sports had more player interest.  Turn out I was wrong.  They do surveys, and overall youth participation rates are about equal.  

Your son is just facing the fact that he is in a second tier men’s sport, and second tier sports get less attention.  So, there are fewer scholarships, but he is facing less skilled athletes.  If he preferred football, there would be more scholarships, but he would be facing better athletes.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Cheer was excluded because, in 1972, the athletic directors would have expanded the cheer squads and completely ignored all other women’s sports.
> 
> I also thought men’s sports had more player interest.  Turn out I was wrong.  They do surveys, and overall youth participation rates are about equal.
> 
> Your son is just facing the fact that he is in a second tier men’s sport, and second tier sports get less attention.  So, there are fewer scholarships, but he is facing less skilled athletes.  If he preferred football, there would be more scholarships, but he would be facing better athletes.


As to your first point, cheer, yes but it's still an artificial line that was drawn: cheer is not a sport.  We can argue whether it was the right or wrong decision, but it's still, in the end, line drawing.

As to your second point, o.k. good to know.  Title IX sure seems successful that way then, in participation.

Men's gridiron football is also pretty arbitrary when it comes to determining who is a "better athlete" which is also dependent on the lines we draw.  Quarterbacks certain have great running skills, great hand eye coordination and get as much training as elite soccer goalkeepers (if not more).  Receivers too, less so than quarterbacks.  It's hard to jump into quarterback if you haven't been doing it since childhood....less hard as a receiver jumping in freshman year, though still difficult.  The line though sometimes is just selected based on physical size...yes there's some technical stuff they need to learn....yeah they also need to develop a certain mentality....but whether the linesman (who is getting the scholarship) is more of an athlete than the goalkeeper is an open question, let alone say a female figure skater.  Again there's no objective "fairness" here...it is an illusion...the argument you just made is that it is capitalism (which has a lot of merits, but "fairness" isn't necessarily one of them depending on how you define the term).


----------



## Pollo Elastico (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> My son will be competing for a scholarship where perhaps let's say 5 men's scholarships are offered for soccer. An equivalent girl is competing for a scholarship where perhaps 18 scholarship are offered for soccer. That's not a "level playing field". Why? Because we drew some artificial lines: football is counted as a sport but cheerleading is not, and men and women get equivalent numbers of scholarships even though there is far more interest in men's sports than there is among women's. Why did we do that? For reasons of participation and equity, not because we wanted to see who was the best in a sport or putting money where the interest was.


So the sports in college have to offer an equal amount of scholarships to men and women. 

And now what many are advocating is to allow men who wear dresses to take a scholarship reserved for women?

It is crazy. 

And now we have schools, gov agencies playing along producing documents, etc with silly stull like "people who menstrate" or "people who give birth". Who are those people? Women. Who cannot do those things? Men. And yet we increasingly have an Orwellian type situation being shoved down are throats in a variety of ways....

One of which is they we are to pretend that it is fine and ok for men to take spots in womens sports...and oh yeah by the way...call them women. 

I dont care what people do personally. If some guy wants to wear a dress and pretend he is a woman that is fine by me. I do have an issue with him playing in womens sports.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 17, 2022)

I keep seeing phrases in here like "men's sports" and "women's sports."

Can someone identify the sports where people are smacking the ball with their unique genitalia?  

Otherwise, we have sports in which all genders can play together equally, but we have different brackets or leagues based on a variety of things, some of which are correlated (but not perfectly) to level of play, some for safety, some for convenience, and some for fellowship/social reasons.


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> So the sports in college have to offer an equal amount of scholarships to men and women.
> 
> And now what many are advocating is to allow men who wear dresses to take a scholarship reserved for women?
> 
> ...


Wait a minute, you are saying that some girl can get dress up in a uniform and kick a ball and take away a spot in a collegiate classroom from my son, who scored better than her in every test and academic grades?  Some people take it as gospel that because it is status quo it must be right.  But maybe the current lines weren't drawn by God and we can try different things.

As a staunch republican I may have protested Title 9, so I have nothing to be upset about now unless I just hate change of any kind.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> So the sports in college have to offer an equal amount of scholarships to men and women.
> 
> And now what many are advocating is to allow men who wear dresses to take a scholarship reserved for women?
> 
> ...


a. again, you can have a separate standard for scholarships than who should play ECNL kiddie ball.  
b. not all women can menstrate and not all women can give birth.  It's not a good test.
c. the question you haven't answered is why do you have an issue playing in women's sports?  What's the objection other than "I don't like them" or "I don't like it".  Those are feelings, not rational lines being drawn.
d. do you have the same issue with women who become men if they choose to continue to play in women's sports? presumably then you are o.k. with the fully bearded, testosterone taking ftm continuing to play in the women's division
e. reading in the subtext, it's pretty apparent you do have an issue "if some guy wants to wear and dress and pretend he is a woman".  The word "pretend" minimizes a situation which is otherwise horrible (you really think someone would voluntarily go through all that just because they want to "pretend")


----------



## Pollo Elastico (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> again, you can have a separate standard for scholarships than who should play ECNL kiddie ball.


We not just have one ECNL team. And boys and girls can try out for that team?

The reason as we know is few if any girls would make the team. That is why we have girls and boys groups.




Grace T. said:


> b. not all women can menstrate and not all women can give birth. It's not a good test.


It is a good test. You may have some women that cannot menstrate or give birth. However you dont have any men that can give birth or menstrate. Rather straightforward. Biology determines that.




Grace T. said:


> the question you haven't answered is why do you have an issue playing in women's sports? What's the objection other than "I don't like them" or "I don't like it". Those are feelings, not rational lines being drawn.


The issue is there is a reason we created the divisions in the first place. It allows girls to play. If they had to compete for a spot on a boys ecnl team, they are not making those teams. It is why womens national teams lose to younger boys ecnl teams. And that is not feeling based. That is entirely rational.



Grace T. said:


> d. do you have the same issue with women who become men if they choose to continue to play in women's sports? presumably then you are o.k. with the fully bearded, testosterone taking ftm continuing to play in the women's division


The issue I have is women cannot become men. Nor can men become women. Surgically removing a penis or breasts does not suddenly make the person the other sex. They can dress as they like and act as they like. But the fact remains, surgery or drugs does not transform a man to a woman or a woman to a man. 


Grace T. said:


> e. reading in the subtext, it's pretty apparent you do have an issue "if some guy wants to wear and dress and pretend he is a woman". The word "pretend" minimizes a situation which is otherwise horrible (you really think someone would voluntarily go through all that just because they want to "pretend")


It is pretending. 

It is about as crazy as me one day declaring I am Asian or African American and expecting to receive minority scholarships, loans designated for minority biz, etc. I could start speaking Japanese, dressing in traditional clothing, taking on cultural mannerisms, etc. And yet none of that would make me Japanese. Dressing up as a women, doing a surgery, etc will not make me a woman either.


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 17, 2022)

It's obvious Elastic Chicken has no respect for people that don't feel comfortable staying in the gender they were born with. Refusing to acknowledge Gender dysphoria or to have empathy for those experiencing it is cruel.


----------



## espola (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> That's a fair critique.  If you have more realistic numbers happy to use those.  It's certainly not equivalent, however.


At NCAA Division 1, it's 9.9 to 14 for men/women soccer.  Or were you referring to something else?


----------



## Pollo Elastico (Aug 17, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> It's obvious Elastic Chicken has no respect for people that don't feel comfortable staying in the gender they were born with. Refusing to acknowledge Gender dysphoria or to have empathy for those experiencing it is cruel.


Not cruel at all. 

A man should not be allowed to play on a women's team....no matter how comfortable or uncomfortable he feels about his body. 

What is farcical is to allow men or boys to take spots reserved for girls/women. That is not only farcical...it is cruel. We created these divisions so women/girls can compete either individually or on a team. In college they even receive scholarships. A man feeling uncomfortable does not mean they get to take a scholarship or a spot on a womens team that should go to an actual woman. 

Nor should we hear the press LAUD the womens records a man in college now holds in swimming. How can a man told women's records.? In a sane world that wouldn't happen.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> b. *not all women can menstrate and not all women can give birth.  It's not a good test.*


Oh come on.   This is a test than NO MAN can pass, no matter how hard they try.  I wish they could do both, would make me very happy and giggly.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> Not cruel at all.
> 
> A man should not be allowed to play on a women's team....no matter how comfortable or uncomfortable he feels about his body.
> 
> ...


The spots are not reserved for biological women. You just want them to be because you are transphobic. If your little princess isn't good enough to compete against a trans girl, her career is just about over regardless of the trans girl.

I do not believe there is a single trans woman in college who has received an athletic scholarship. Your irrational fear that a trans woman will take away a scholarship from a biological women is, well, irrational. Worse, it is a bullshit argument because trans people who manage to excel despite all the abuse they suffer growing up are typically far more deserving of financial aid than virtually every spoiled little soccer princess.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> The issue is there is a reason we created the divisions in the first place. It allows girls to play. If they had to compete for a spot on a boys ecnl team, they are not making those teams. It is why womens national teams lose to younger boys ecnl teams. And that is not feeling based. That is entirely rational.


Uh, the issue is there is a reason "we" created the divisions *that allow trans participation* in the first place.  Again, you seem to forget that the divisions you want to exist don't.  Remember, you're the petulant child who is whining that you aren't getting things your way.

Would you feel better if "we" relabeled girls ECNL as "girls ECNL, which we would like to make clear for those transphobes out there who think a biology textbook is a soccer rulebook that we mean both birth and gender identity"? 

Feel free to create your own transphobic church league if you can't take it.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 17, 2022)

My suggestion, don't try to talk sense to anyone who thinks trans women should be able to play in women's sports. I guess this is what they meant when they said the "future is female" - the future is female for trans females. LMAO


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> Not cruel at all.
> 
> A man should not be allowed to play on a women's team....no matter how comfortable or uncomfortable he feels about his body.
> 
> ...


Again you are conflating.  What happens with the swimming records is entirely different from what happens in ECNL kiddie ball.  What happens with scholarships is different than ECNL kiddie ball.  Sweeping them all in one is lazy reasoning.  That's one red flag.

Other people have raised the performance, safety or genetics (purity concern).   You've raised another one: participation.  Firstly, that assumes the slots in youth soccer are limited...they aren't....there are plenty of teams that still struggle to make restore.   Second, you are basically sentencing the ftm in this case to not be able to play because they simply can't compete (after a time) with the other boys....the hormones will make them weaker and even if they aren't on hormones it's not like they will be body building with the rest of the team since they'll want to keep a more feminine shape.  Third, you totally ducked the question about then if it's o.k. for the ftm to play with the girls despite the testosterone or the full beard.  That in and of itself is a second red flag for your motivations.

You also said you "don't care what people do personally."  I note that's not enough to absolve you from bigotry.  Saying "I support the right of blacks to eat at the diner counter but I certainly wouldn't be friends with one" is certainly better than "segregation now and forever" but it's also not bigotry free.  Don't feel too bad....we have way to much cancel culture and everyone is, to quote a phrase, just a little bit racist.  People should endeavor, however, to separate feelings from reasoning, and to separate preconceived notions and biases from logic.  You haven't done that...you haven't answered the questions why does it all matter other than this issue of participation, which cuts both ways.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Highlander said:


> My suggestion, don't try to talk sense to anyone who thinks trans women should be able to play in women's sports. I guess this is what they meant when they said the "future is female" - the future is female for trans females. LMAO


The side that says mtf should have unfettered access to women's sports regardless of the level and the circumstances is just as bad as the side that says never and under no circumstances.  It's an appeal to emotion, full of preconceived ideas, and not thought out without any rational limiting principles.  Neither of you is making any sense.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 17, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> The side that says mtf should have unfettered access to women's sports regardless of the level and the circumstances is just as bad as the side that says never and under no circumstances.  It's an appeal to emotion, full of preconceived ideas, and not thought out without any rational limiting principles.  Neither of you is making any sense.


BS - Any logical female who is truly trying to compete would say female trans athletes should not compete against females. Go play co-ed leagues if you are trans...just don't take a females spot on a team or in a swim meet where it is about competition. How can any logical individual deny this? Even if its only one trans female athlete doing this, it's wrong.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> It is about as crazy as me one day declaring I am Asian or African American and expecting to receive minority scholarships, loans designated for minority biz, etc. I could start speaking Japanese, dressing in traditional clothing, taking on cultural mannerisms, etc. And yet none of that would make me Japanese. Dressing up as a women, doing a surgery, etc will not make me a woman either.


The real problem with your analogy, however, is that there is no soccer league that is reserved for biological Asians or African Americans.  In fact, if someone tried to do that in the U.S., it would be illegal.  In other words, you are missing the point.  The argument is not whether a trans girl is a biological girl, which no one is making anyway.  The issue is whether a private company should be allowed to decide that both can play in the same league.  

You're upset that USYS, ECNL, US Soccer, the NWSL, the NCAA, the Olympics, and others allow transgender participation provided certain conditions are met.  You have come out on the anti-free market, anti-capitalist, anti-constitutional, anti-inclusivity side of the argument.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Highlander said:


> BS - Any logical female who is truly trying to compete would say female trans athletes should not compete against females. Go play co-ed leagues if you are trans...just don't take a females spot on a team or in a swim meet where it is about competition. How can any logical individual deny this? Even if its only one trans female athlete doing this, it's wrong.


Because sports aren't solely about competition, at least on the youth level.    If youth sports were purely about competition, we would, for example, dope/testosterone test and rigorously suss out the fake birth certificates.   Sports are also about socialization and getting kids exercise.  Depending on the level, we might take the competition more seriously.  On the rec level, who care amongst a bunch of 8 year olds.  At the ECNL level, who cares as well...it's in essence glorified rec that you pay for...no one is going to care in 20 years that you won the stupid tournament trophy.

At the D1 college level or the academy youth level, it begins to get more serious...careers, records, national team participation is at stake.  The girls do not have an equivalent academy youth level and the play level for ECNL is very broad.  Perhaps if they did, where USWNT and Olympic recruitment is at stake, it would be a different story.  But that's not the reality we are dealing with.  It's not the cards that are dealt.

Further, if performance is your dividing line, presumably: 1. you are o.k. with testosterone testing (including testing that might catch some girls with some unnaturally high testosterone levels) because if you are going to go after someone, you have to go out after the cheaters first, 2. you'd be o.k. with some mtf who prior to 12/13/14 takes puberty blockers before entering the full swing of puberty to participate with the girls, and 3. you'd be o.k. with the ftm to continue to compete with the women for as long as they so desire, provided they aren't on testosterone.  If you aren't, then something other than performance may be motivating you.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 17, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> It is pretending.
> 
> It is about as crazy as me one day declaring I am Asian or African American and expecting to receive minority scholarships, loans designated for minority biz, etc. I could start speaking Japanese, dressing in traditional clothing, taking on cultural mannerisms, etc. And yet none of that would make me Japanese. Dressing up as a women, doing a surgery, etc will not make me a woman either.


As hard as it is to believe, I don't really think that they think putting on a dress and having a surgery magically turns them into biological women.  It doesn't.  It does allow them to present, however, with the gender that their dysphoria pushes them towards.  It's not something magical, but tragic and sad, and for which there is only an imperfect solution.  

I also point out that I agree it's not possible to change your race. It is entirely possible, however, for someone from another country to immigrate here, live and learn our customs, and take a citizenship test.  While they can't become an English descendent descended from the puritans, it is entirely possible for them to become, like the rest of us, Americans.  That's also what makes us different from some countries, like Japan.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 17, 2022)

Highlander said:


> BS - Any logical female who is truly trying to compete would say female trans athletes should not compete against females. Go play co-ed leagues if you are trans...just don't take a females spot on a team or in a swim meet where it is about competition. How can any logical individual deny this? Even if its only one trans female athlete doing this, it's wrong.


Are you mansplaining what women should believe?  Regardless, you are so full of shit.  Billie Jean King, Megan Rapinoe, and Candace Parker Join Nearly 200 Athletes Supporting Trans Youth Participation in Sports - Women's Sports Foundation (womenssportsfoundation.org) 

If you're afraid your daughter is the worst kid on the team and at risk of being displaced by a trans girl, the reality is she's the one who belongs in the co-ed rec league regardless of the trans player.  You are also conveniently ignoring that even if a girl on a roster of 20 is displaced, she wasn't displaced by the trans girl.  She was displaced by 19 biological girls and one trans girl, so maybe you should put the blame where it belongs.


----------



## GoldenGate (Aug 17, 2022)

Highlander said:


> BS - Any logical female who is truly trying to compete would say female trans athletes should not compete against females. Go play co-ed leagues if you are trans...just don't take a females spot on a team or in a swim meet where it is about competition. How can any logical individual deny this? Even if its only one trans female athlete doing this, it's wrong.


Anyone whose belief system is based on what a magical invisible all-powerful being in the sky told them to believe has no right to claim they are being logical and someone who sees through that bs is not.

Go take your kid to the rec co-ed league where she belongs.


----------



## dad4 (Aug 17, 2022)

And, as usual, Golden Gate decides to insult a child he has never met.


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 17, 2022)

dad4 said:


> And, as usual, Golden Gate decides to insult a child he has never met.


Stupid is as stupid does.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 17, 2022)

Golden Gate taking the opposite opinion as myself is further proof I am correct.


----------



## Happened again (Aug 17, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> Anyone whose belief system is based on what a magical invisible all-powerful being in the sky told them to believe has no right to claim they are being logical and someone who sees through that bs is not.
> 
> Go take your kid to the rec co-ed league where she belongs.


you are quite the bigot. Why do you hate christians and why do you act out on other people's kids?  You are so brave, mashing away on your keyboard.  And what is wrong with coed leagues?   It's as if you want to punish people's kids all the time..so weird...


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 17, 2022)

Highlander said:


> Golden Gate taking the opposite opinion as myself is further proof I am correct.


It's even more predictive than the Y chromosome.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 18, 2022)

GoldenGate said:


> Are you mansplaining what women should believe?  Regardless, you are so full of shit.  Billie Jean King, Megan Rapinoe, and Candace Parker Join Nearly 200 Athletes Supporting Trans Youth Participation in Sports - Women's Sports Foundation (womenssportsfoundation.org)
> 
> If you're afraid your daughter is the worst kid on the team and at risk of being displaced by a trans girl, the reality is she's the one who belongs in the co-ed rec league regardless of the trans player.  You are also conveniently ignoring that even if a girl on a roster of 20 is displaced, she wasn't displaced by the trans girl.  She was displaced by 19 biological girls and one trans girl, so maybe you should put the blame where it belongs.


This isn't about my daughter...but if it were, I would be pissed. This is about the female swimmer who didn't make the final 8 at the NCAA finals swimming events that Lia Thomas took. This is about the New Zealand woman weight lifter who didn't make the olympics because a trans female took her spot. How in the world can you think this is OK? Honestly GG...you and your woke cohorts are a total joke and in reality 90% of the people on gods green earth think trans females taking real females spots in competitive sports is complete BS. We might all not say it because we don't want to deal with your ilks BS backlash, but we are all thinking it. You guys come up with slogans like "the future is female" but when push comes to shove, they are the first ones you screw over.


----------



## Surf Zombie (Aug 18, 2022)

I’ve read a bit of this thread and, in my view, the discussion centers around a trans person asking for something that benefits them, ie, playing on a sports team that is the opposite of his or her birth gender. 

It gets even muddier if you flip it around. I saw a piece about the war in Ukraine and how the Ukrainian government mandated that all males aged 18-65 were not permitted to leave the country and were compelled to stay and fight the Russian invasion. The piece featured two trans individuals, both in their thirties. The first was a male who identified as a female. He took the position that because of his gender identity (female) he should be permitted to leave Ukraine and not have to stay and fight. The second person was a female who identified as a male. She complained about having to dress in woman’s clothes to appear more feminine so she could try to cross the border and leave the country and not be compelled to stay and fight, despite living her life as a male (but genetically being a female). 

Which person should have been made to stay fight and which should have been allowed to leave?


----------



## Pollo Elastico (Aug 18, 2022)

Surf Zombie said:


> Which person should have been made to stay fight and which should have been allowed to leave?


It isn't a tricky question at all. Ukrainian law stipulates men between 18-65 have to stay. 

The guy has to stay because despite what he wears or thinks is a male. 

The woman who usually dresses up as a male can leave. Why? For the simple reason she is a woman. 

Despite what they wear or what they think, one is a biological male and the other is a biological female.

What they think, or what they wear, or if they have surgically removed parts does not change the fact that one is an actual male and the other an actual female. 

Why on Earth would you think that is muddled?


----------



## Surf Zombie (Aug 18, 2022)

Pollo Elastico said:


> It isn't a tricky question at all. Ukrainian law stipulates men between 18-65 have to stay.
> 
> The guy has to stay because despite what he wears or thinks is a male.
> 
> ...


I personally don’t think it’s muddled at all. To me the biological male clearly is the person the Ukrainian government intended to stay and fight. Additionally, IMO biological males should play on male sports teams in HS, college, professionally and in the Olympics.

Pre-puberty, I personally don’t think it matters for a host of reasons including that kids of that age are of similar size and strength,  winning should not be the first priority at that age, etc.

The point I was trying to make is that for the people who wish to discuss this, the topic can get even messier if you are talking about a policy that befits a trans person as opposed to a policy that does not.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 18, 2022)

Surf Zombie said:


> I personally don’t think it’s muddled at all. To me the biological male clearly is the person the Ukrainian government intended to stay and fight. Additionally, IMO biological males should play on male sports teams in HS, college, professionally and in the Olympics.
> 
> Pre-puberty, I personally don’t think it matters for a host of reasons including that kids of that age are of similar size and strength,  winning should not be the first priority at that age, etc.
> 
> The point I was trying to make is that for the people who wish to discuss this, the topic can get even messier if you are talking about a policy that befits a trans person as opposed to a policy that does not.


You wanna know where it gets the most messy?  The entire bathroom thing.  Sure, I get the argument that people don't want some random trans mtf with his parts still in tact going into the bathroom/spa/lockeroom with their 12 year old daughter.   But then if we have a law that says people have to go to their biological bathrooms, you'd still get some person ftm  (who quite possibly could be attracted to women) going into the bathroom with their 12 year old daughter (if it's a locker room or spa your 12 year old daughter even legally would get to see everything).  What's more, you'll get demands under the equity laws to put urinals in the women's restrooms.  In that case, if you really care about exposing 12 year old girl's eyes to things they shouldn't see, a surgery rule makes the most sense.

For the Ukrainian question, the question is what is the function of the law separating men and women from service in the armed forces.  I don't think there's a good answer to this.  Being a feminist myself, I think the answer here should be both should be forced to stay...maybe allow the women with children and elderly to flee, but there's no good reason to excuse women from the defense of their country (I also think that it is long past time for the women in this country to register for the draft).


----------



## dad4 (Aug 18, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> You wanna know where it gets the most messy?  The entire bathroom thing.  Sure, I get the argument that people don't want some random trans mtf with his parts still in tact going into the bathroom/spa/lockeroom with their 12 year old daughter.   But then if we have a law that says people have to go to their biological bathrooms, you'd still get some person ftm  (who quite possibly could be attracted to women) going into the bathroom with their 12 year old daughter (if it's a locker room or spa your 12 year old daughter even legally would get to see everything).  What's more, you'll get demands under the equity laws to put urinals in the women's restrooms.  In that case, if you really care about exposing 12 year old girl's eyes to things they shouldn't see, a surgery rule makes the most sense.
> 
> For the Ukrainian question, the question is what is the function of the law separating men and women from service in the armed forces.  I don't think there's a good answer to this.  Being a feminist myself, I think the answer here should be both should be forced to stay...maybe allow the women with children and elderly to flee, but there's no good reason to excuse women from the defense of their country (I also think that it is long past time for the women in this country to register for the draft).


Messy?  Many schools around here just install a few single stall bathrooms.  It seems to solve the problem.


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 18, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Messy?  Many schools around here just install a few single stall bathrooms.  It seems to solve the problem.


Yeah, but we can't shift the world to single stall bathrooms.  The other way some places have been going is unisex bathrooms.  I personally don't like them but there are two ways to skin this cat.  It also doesn't get us away from incidents like the Korea spa incident.


----------



## chipmonk (Aug 18, 2022)

After a girl beat their daughters in sports, Utah parents triggered investigation into whether she was transgender
					

The girl’s school opened the student-athlete’s enrollment records dating back to kindergarten, confirming she had always been female, a Utah High School Activities Association representative told legislators.




					www.deseret.com


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 18, 2022)

chipmonk said:


> After a girl beat their daughters in sports, Utah parents triggered investigation into whether she was transgender
> 
> 
> The girl’s school opened the student-athlete’s enrollment records dating back to kindergarten, confirming she had always been female, a Utah High School Activities Association representative told legislators.
> ...


The question the article didn't answer was whether they tested for performance enhancing drugs.  It would be shocking to me that they didn't go there first.

Assuming they did, I'd bet a round of drinks that the girl either has a genetic or hormonal aberrance.  There is no such thing as a level playing field.


----------



## espola (Aug 18, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> The question the article didn't answer was whether they tested for performance enhancing drugs.  It would be shocking to me that they didn't go there first.
> 
> Assuming they did, I'd bet a round of drinks that the girl either has a genetic or hormonal aberrance.  There is no such thing as a level playing field.


Based on what?


----------



## Grace T. (Aug 18, 2022)

espola said:


> Based on what?


Just a hunch, based on the description.  This article and a few others don't specify what the sport or the discrepancy but they all suggest something was really materially different between the first and 2/3 place winners.


----------



## espola (Aug 18, 2022)

Grace T. said:


> Just a hunch, based on the description.  This article and a few others don't specify what the sport or the discrepancy but they all suggest something was really materially different between the first and 2/3 place winners.


Some of the farm girls where I grew up didn't look much like girls until they got into high school.  I remember getting beaten up by one in 6th grade.

Now it's one of my favorite fantasies.


----------



## Highlander (Aug 18, 2022)

espola said:


> Some of the farm girls where i grew up didn't look much like girls until they got into high school.  I remember getting beaten up by one in 6th grade.
> 
> Now it's one of my favorite fantasies.


LOL - I remember losing to one in an arm wrestling match. Good times!


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 18, 2022)

Highlander said:


> LOL - I remember losing to one in an arm wrestling match. Good times!


Please, tell us more about how you met your wife!


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 18, 2022)

Woodwork said:


> Please, tell us more about how you met your wife!


Found video of highlander meeting his wife:


----------



## zebrafish (Aug 18, 2022)

I don't have any substantive comment here but I think it is creepy hysterical that in the add feed for this thread there is an ad for online hormone therapy for trans people from "TransClinique".


----------



## Soccer Dad & Ref (Aug 18, 2022)

What’s happened in Utah is an ugly reflection of transphobia. Their governor even tried to veto the hate bill, saying it’s not something his citizens should even be worried about. Yet they did worry when their precious kids lost to a better team. Now, any poor girl in that state that doesn’t have long hair and small muscles is going to be a target of these hysterical parents. 

Sad to see, all for some boogie man in their minds.


----------



## espola (Aug 18, 2022)

zebrafish said:


> I don't have any substantive comment here but I think it is creepy hysterical that in the add feed for this thread there is an ad for online hormone therapy for trans people from "TransClinique".


Did you realize that the ad feeds are generally tailored to individual users?


----------



## Woodwork (Aug 19, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> What’s happened in Utah is an ugly reflection of transphobia. Their governor even tried to veto the hate bill, saying it’s not something his citizens should even be worried about. Yet they did worry when their precious kids lost to a better team. Now, any poor girl in that state that doesn’t have long hair and small muscles is going to be a target of these hysterical parents.
> 
> Sad to see, all for some boogie man in their minds.


As I said, a bunch of chicken littles.  As a staunch republican, I stand by the republican principals of logic over emotion, limited government, minding your own business, and being the city on the hill setting an example for the rest of the world.  These cry babies whipping themselves into a frenzy must be from some other party.


----------



## zebrafish (Aug 20, 2022)

espola said:


> Did you realize that the ad feeds are generally tailored to individual users?


Naaaawww, really? I had no idea how this internet thing works


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Aug 20, 2022)

The thoughtful replies to troll ratio is low here. Too many staunch trolls.


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 21, 2022)

Soccer Dad & Ref said:


> Even discussing it generally makes it hard on these children.  All they want is to lead a normal life, but haters seem to think what they are really doing is trying to find a way to get a hand up in life to ruin someone else's athletic dreams.  lol, yeah, that's the first thing on a 10-year old's mind: how can I ruin some one else's dreams of playing in college?


Simple. Play co-ed soccer. That's normal.


----------



## SurFutbol (Dec 21, 2022)

2nd Circuit tosses Connecticut transgender athlete challenge - POLITICO


----------



## NelsDrate (Dec 23, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Should sanctioning bodies allow male to female trans athletes to register on girls teams?
> 
> Please do not mention any specific child or team.  It is common enough to be an issue, but we can discuss the fairness questions without making life hard for some kid.


No.


----------



## thirteenknots (Dec 23, 2022)

dad4 said:


> Should sanctioning bodies allow male to female trans athletes to register on girls teams?


NO !

It is CHEATING, plain and simple.

A Male cannot become a Female.

A Female cannot become a Male.

Mutilating a Human Being to give the appearance
of the opposite sex is Fraud.


----------



## crush (Dec 24, 2022)




----------



## crush (Dec 26, 2022)

Rachel Levine ripped for demanding censorship of 'misinformation' on 'gender-affirming care' for kids
					

HHS Assistant Secretary Dr. Levine took heat for a recently-surfaced clip in which the official asked Big Tech to censor views disputing the positives of "gender-affirming care."




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 4, 2023)

People like to say that this is a fringe issue, and right now I mostly agree. But there will come a day when a top boys youth soccer team, in order to prove a political point, will enter a huge tournament like Surf Cup as a girls team, and decisions will need to be made. Lawsuits will be filed. Tournaments will be in an impossible situation: let them play and see 30-0 scores or reject them and face a discrimination lawsuit. 

College scholarships can be worth $100k a year. Is it out of the realm of possibility that a mid-level boy suddenly becomes the best girl soccer player in the state and snags a full ride to USC? Do you think college coaches will not jump at a chance to snag the best "girl" soccer players in order to turn their team around to keep their job?

I am all for letting people live how they want, but when that means you are taking valuable things away from others because it gives you an advantage, we need to be rational.


----------



## Carlsbad7 (Jan 4, 2023)

Over the last 6-7 years I've seen 3 "boys" playing on girls teams. Interestingly 2 out of the 3 were goalies. 

If you want to see how much society has changed reguarding boys playing on girls soccer teams watch the old Rodney Dangerfield movie Ladybugs. In the 80s a boy playing on a girls team was accepted as wrong + not even questioned. Now as long as boys really want to be a girl its ok.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 4, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> People like to say that this is a fringe issue, and right now I mostly agree. But there will come a day when a top boys youth soccer team, in order to prove a political point, will enter a huge tournament like Surf Cup as a girls team, and decisions will need to be made. Lawsuits will be filed. Tournaments will be in an impossible situation: let them play and see 30-0 scores or reject them and face a discrimination lawsuit.
> 
> College scholarships can be worth $100k a year. Is it out of the realm of possibility that a mid-level boy suddenly becomes the best girl soccer player in the state and snags a full ride to USC? Do you think college coaches will not jump at a chance to snag the best "girl" soccer players in order to turn their team around to keep their job?
> 
> I am all for letting people live how they want, but when that means you are taking valuable things away from others because it gives you an advantage, we need to be rational.


So you're saying that trans girls should not be allowed to play with other girls because maybe someday there might be a team of transphobic boys who decide to be even bigger assholes than typical transphobes?  Does this mean you're admitting it's the transphobes who are the problem, not the actual trans kids? Oh, and your incredibly stupid speculation about a mid-level boy trying to snag a college scholarship on a girls team conveniently omits the years of hormone therapy they need to do first.  And the fact that no one has ever done that in history.  And the fact that, yet again, the fake "problem" that you are creating to oppose trans children from playing has nothing to do with people who are legitimately transgender, but only people who are transphobic.  You are really so dense that you don't realize that you keep admitting that it's the transphobic people like yourself who are the problem?


----------



## MARsSPEED (Jan 4, 2023)

Well I'll just leave this here.

*In 1988, at the US Olympic trials in Indianapolis, Florence Griffith Joyner romped home in the female 100m quarterfinals to set a new world record of 10.49 seconds. In over 30 years, that record has yet to be broken. Five years ago, In 2017, 744 senior males ran 2825 100m races faster than 10.49s. 

In 1993, Russian Irina Privalova set the 60m world record which still stands 30 years later. Last year, 5 Senior Boys alone in the State of Maryland beat her time. 60m translates to the pitch much better than the 100m. Still, this shows just how much more physically dominent men are. *

This is just my personal opinion, but if one cannot legally vote, drink, or smoke, even with parent approval, I do not believe they should be allowed to make the choice to mutilate their body or be put on hormone blockers. However, once one reaches the age of 18, game on for whatever you want to do. 

I have nothing against those who choose to be homosexual, trans, or whatever, but I do have something against what science says about it's biological advantages over the opposite sex. Even with hormone blockers, especially if not taken before puberty, the biological makeup is still going to be a major advantage but like I said, it should absolutely be illegal to take hormone blockers before puberty. 

In all honesty it is also my opinion women taking hormones in trans to men should not be able to partake in Women's OR Men's sports. They will have physical advantages over women similar to steriods, yet not strong enough for Men's sports, especially contact sports. 

Lastly, when one talks about "feelings", I always find it interesting that for every one transgender that might have mental struggles, you could probably multiply that number at 5x for the teammates around them that are forced to accept what is likely an unfair advantage, and if their are also locker rooms involved, the additional mental stress from that. If you want proof, just look at Lia Thomas who started her transformation late. Hormone therapy after puberty. Fellow teammates and competitors equally highly upset. So on, so forth. 

If Steroids are illegal than so should Female-to-Male (biological male genes are performance enhancing) trans athletes, as well as female to male (male hormone treatments pretty much are steroids.)

Again, sorry, I'm not against homosexuality or however one identifies, but Trans in sports is a losing debate. In the end, it hurts girls and young women much more than it hurts the Trans girl itself. To play Devil's advocate, I do think this is a State issue and should be settled in States. That way, with states in favor, families can move there if they so choose. I think the NCAA should take a serious look on how to approach this issue. 













7-0 U15 Boys win over U23 Womens National team (w/Rose Lavelle and others)





Quinn, Canadian Trans, First Trans National Team player. (Another women sadly left off roster for human born with male genome).





U17 Boy allowed to play with girls team.








						transgender basketball player in AAU event
					






					www.youtube.com


----------



## Kicker4Life (Jan 4, 2023)

MARsSPEED said:


> Well I'll just leave this here.
> 
> *In 1988, at the US Olympic trials in Indianapolis, Florence Griffith Joyner romped home in the female 100m quarterfinals to set a new world record of 10.49 seconds. In over 30 years, that record has yet to be broken. Five years ago, In 2017, 744 senior males ran 2825 100m races faster than 10.49s.
> 
> ...


just an FYI….according to Wikipedia, Quinn was born a female and transitioned to Non Binary.  They is why the NWSL permits “them” to play. 

Other than that I would agree with much of your sentiment


----------



## MARsSPEED (Jan 4, 2023)

Kicker4Life said:


> just an FYI….according to Wikipedia, Quinn was born a female and transitioned to Non Binary.  They is why the NWSL permits “them” to play.
> 
> Other than that I would agree with much of your sentiment


Ok, I no problem with they/them then. My apologies on the mistake.


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 5, 2023)

SurFutbol said:


> So you're saying that trans girls should not be allowed to play with other girls because maybe someday there might be a team of transphobic boys who decide to be even bigger assholes than typical transphobes?  Does this mean you're admitting it's the transphobes who are the problem, not the actual trans kids? Oh, and your incredibly stupid speculation about a mid-level boy trying to snag a college scholarship on a girls team conveniently omits the years of hormone therapy they need to do first.  And the fact that no one has ever done that in history.  And the fact that, yet again, the fake "problem" that you are creating to oppose trans children from playing has nothing to do with people who are legitimately transgender, but only people who are transphobic.  You are really so dense that you don't realize that you keep admitting that it's the transphobic people like yourself who are the problem?


No one except the Olympics requires "years of hormone therapy". The trans girl does not need to undergo ANY hormone therapy in high school to be offered a college scholarship. Just that they need their testosterone levels within a certain range during the season. This is AFTER puberty. 

At least you aren't arguing that trans girls don't have an athletic advantage. That's a start. 

A trans boy wanting to compete with boys at any level: FINE
A trans girl wanting to compete with girls at a rec level: FINE
A trans girl wanting to compete with girls at the highest level: NOT FINE

The argument that it doesn't happen much yet is one I often hear. Granted, it's rare. But we can't just ignore it.


----------



## whatithink (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> No one except the Olympics requires "years of hormone therapy". The trans girl does not need to undergo ANY hormone therapy in high school to be offered a college scholarship. Just that they need their testosterone levels within a certain range during the season. This is AFTER puberty.
> 
> At least you aren't arguing that trans girls don't have an athletic advantage. That's a start.
> 
> ...


I'd suggest that because it's so rare, we pretty much can (& most people do) ignore it. Given your delineation of when a trans girl can play, this seems to be less about them playing and more about whether they may take a scholarship from your DD - very NIMBY attitude as far as I can see.

From my perspective, my kids (both genders) will get a scholarship or not, but they'll go to a college for an education, and it'll be picked based on that, not based on any sports program. In the here & now, I really don't care about my kids W/L ratio and/or whether the team that just beat my DDs team has one or more trans girls; they are kids play youth soccer.


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 5, 2023)

whatithink said:


> I'd suggest that because it's so rare, we pretty much can (& most people do) ignore it. Given your delineation of when a trans girl can play, this seems to be less about them playing and more about whether they may take a scholarship from your DD - very NIMBY attitude as far as I can see.
> 
> From my perspective, my kids (both genders) will get a scholarship or not, but they'll go to a college for an education, and it'll be picked based on that, not based on any sports program. In the here & now, I really don't care about my kids W/L ratio and/or whether the team that just beat my DDs team has one or more trans girls; they are kids play youth soccer.


You accuse me of forming an opinion based on my family situation when you know nothing about it, and then declare you don't care because your kids will not get athletic scholarships? Ok. 

All we should care about is athletic equality, and like it or not, going through puberty as a male gives you an advantage.


----------



## Kicker4Life (Jan 5, 2023)

All good until…….









						Female High-School Volleyball Athlete Suffers Serious Head Injury after Transgender Player Spikes  ‘Abnormally Fast’ Ball | National Review
					

She is still recovering from long-term concussion symptoms, including problems with her vision.




					www.nationalreview.com


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> You accuse me of forming an opinion based on my family situation when you know nothing about it, and then declare you don't care because your kids will not get athletic scholarships? Ok.
> 
> All we should care about is athletic equality, and like it or not, going through puberty as a male gives you an advantage.


The problem though is that once you establish a rule banning trans athletes you have to establish a protocol for catching rule breakers and challenging kids may not meet the test (particularly in California where you can get your birth certificate changed relatively easily even to neutral). 

If you truly care about "advantages", then presumably you care enough as well to catch the steroid cheaters, however rare that may be, and would advocate for youth soccer to start implementing some doping protocols (especially since both problems are essentially linked to testosterone).  If it's important enough to exclude the trans kids, it's certainly important enough to catch the cheaters.


----------



## crush (Jan 5, 2023)

Kicker4Life said:


> All good until…….
> 
> 
> 
> ...


100%


----------



## toucan (Jan 5, 2023)

[QUOTE All we should care about is athletic equality, and like it or not, going through puberty as a male gives you an advantage.
[/QUOTE]

There is no such thing as "equality" in sports, at least in the way you present your argument.  All sports are biased to favor inborn characteristics as opposed to those you can practice or develop.  Watch any soccer game with kids aged 11-15.  Some are significantly taller and physically more mature than others.  At the college level, the average PAC-12 womens' soccer player is almost 5'8", which puts her at about the 90th percentile for height.  Some runners have a gene which allows them to process oxygen slightly more efficiently.  Quarterbacks usually have huge hands.  Yet nobody complains about these genetic and hormonal advantages.

Then there are medically-created athletic advantages.  In youth soccer, I am aware of a number of players who underwent hormone therapies to grow taller, as did Lionel Messi.  In baseball, pitchers get Tommy John surgery, which makes their elbows stronger than they could naturally achieve, while batters get eye surgery to help them see pitches better.  Yet nobody complains about these medically-created advantages.

As to whether "going to puberty as a male" gives a male-to-female transgender athlete an advantage, you may be correct.  So what?  We already countenance genetic, hormonal and man-made advantages in sports.  Why draw the line at transgender?


----------



## sockma (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> The problem though is that once you establish a rule banning trans athletes you have to establish a protocol for catching rule breakers and challenging kids may not meet the test (particularly in California where you can get your birth certificate changed relatively easily even to neutral).
> 
> If you truly care about "advantages", then presumably you care enough as well to catch the steroid cheaters, however rare that may be, and would advocate for youth soccer to start implementing some doping protocols (especially since both problems are essentially linked to testosterone).  If it's important enough to exclude the trans kids, it's certainly important enough to catch the cheaters.


We don't drug test youth soccer players but we do ban it. So according to your logic, we should stick with the same application.  I agree let's ban trans M2F from competing in high level sports, but don't check their hormone level and go with the honesty method unless there is substantial evidence that requires testing.

In college and professional sports, there is drug testing so colleges and professionals can test for all M2F issues too.


----------



## sockma (Jan 5, 2023)

toucan said:


> [QUOTE All we should care about is athletic equality, and like it or not, going through puberty as a male gives you an advantage.


There is no such thing as "equality" in sports, at least in the way you present your argument.  All sports are biased to favor inborn characteristics as opposed to those you can practice or develop.  Watch any soccer game with kids aged 11-15.  Some are significantly taller and physically more mature than others.  At the college level, the average PAC-12 womens' soccer player is almost 5'8", which puts her at about the 90th percentile for height.  Some runners have a gene which allows them to process oxygen slightly more efficiently.  Quarterbacks usually have huge hands.  Yet nobody complains about these genetic and hormonal advantages.

Then there are medically-created athletic advantages.  In youth soccer, I am aware of a number of players who underwent hormone therapies to grow taller, as did Lionel Messi.  In baseball, pitchers get Tommy John surgery, which makes their elbows stronger than they could naturally achieve, while batters get eye surgery to help them see pitches better.  Yet nobody complains about these medically-created advantages.

As to whether "going to puberty as a male" gives a male-to-female transgender athlete an advantage, you may be correct.  So what?  We already countenance genetic, hormonal and man-made advantages in sports.  Why draw the line at transgender.
[/QUOTE]

While every athlete can undergo vision correction, most athletes are not allowed hormone therapy unless there is health logic to do so.  Lionel Messi's hormone therapy was to help with a medical condition he had and it didn't give him an unfair advantage against other athletes, it was going to help his body create the hormones it naturally would have created if he wasn't sick.

With M2F, you're asking elite sports to ignore the highest forms of unfair advantages and that's not going to happen.

For everyone who says this is not a problem bc how the minute numbers of trans, then please recognize that even with such a minute number of trans, it has already affected women's sports.  M2F athletes already have created issues in the following sports:  biker, swimmer, volleyball, basketball, runner, etc.  

That's a lot for such a small group of people. So imagine when the M2F surgeries in the next generation increase, how much more issues will it cause?


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

sockma said:


> We don't drug test youth soccer players but we do ban it. So according to your logic, we should stick with the same application.  I agree let's ban trans M2F from competing in high level sports, but don't check their hormone level and go with the honesty method unless there is substantial evidence that requires testing.
> 
> In college and professional sports, there is drug testing so colleges and professionals can test for all M2F issues too.


If you read my prior posts, I'm in favor of a college/professional ban, particularly in individual sports, since the stakes are high enough to do drug testing (though I'd be open to an argument for x number of years post-surgery).

The problem with the logic you lay out lies in the words "substantial evidence".  It's where it self-evidently stumbles all over itself.   The fact you even had to use those words shows the problem with your argument.

1. There is no such standard for drug testing in youth soccer.  At least with respect to the MLS Next rules, I don't see anywhere in either the rules or player conduct where protocols for performance enhancing drugs are laid out or even an outright prohibition....there's a lose policy in the code of conduct for drugs and alcohol....if I'm wrong happy to have you correct me and spell it out where exactly the protocols appear. I see, however, that in black and white the standards for discriminatory and bigoted conduct are laid out, gambling on your game, and putting the MLS in ill repute.

2. If it's a hormone test, then you are back to square 1 with the cheaters since steroids are essentially hormone based (testosterone is a performance enhancing drug).  There is no effective difference so you have to answer then what would trigger your "substantial evidence" standard in both cases.

 3. otherwise what you are left with is presenting the correct birth certificate, which as we've established, in California is easy to get around


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

sockma said:


> There is no such thing as "equality" in sports, at least in the way you present your argument.  All sports are biased to favor inborn characteristics as opposed to those you can practice or develop.  Watch any soccer game with kids aged 11-15.  Some are significantly taller and physically more mature than others.  At the college level, the average PAC-12 womens' soccer player is almost 5'8", which puts her at about the 90th percentile for height.  Some runners have a gene which allows them to process oxygen slightly more efficiently.  Quarterbacks usually have huge hands.  Yet nobody complains about these genetic and hormonal advantages.
> 
> Then there are medically-created athletic advantages.  In youth soccer, I am aware of a number of players who underwent hormone therapies to grow taller, as did Lionel Messi.  In baseball, pitchers get Tommy John surgery, which makes their elbows stronger than they could naturally achieve, while batters get eye surgery to help them see pitches better.  Yet nobody complains about these medically-created advantages.
> 
> As to whether "going to puberty as a male" gives a male-to-female transgender athlete an advantage, you may be correct.  So what?  We already countenance genetic, hormonal and man-made advantages in sports.  Why draw the line at transgender.



With M2F, you're asking elite sports to ignore the highest forms of unfair advantages and that's not going to happen.


[/QUOTE]

This is not a correct statement.  The highest form of unfair advantage would be performance enhancing drugs which at least in youth soccer we DO NOT go after.  The next highest form of unfair advantage is the falsified birth certificates, which while there is a velvet rope there, as seen by former ads on this site for false papers and given anecdotally how many there are floating around out there, we police laughably when it comes to youth soccer, particularly now post-COVID when originals of the papers don't even need to be submitted.


----------



## sockma (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> With M2F, you're asking elite sports to ignore the highest forms of unfair advantages and that's not going to happen.


This is not a correct statement.  The highest form of unfair advantage would be performance enhancing drugs which at least in youth soccer we DO NOT go after.  The next highest form of unfair advantage is the falsified birth certificates, which while there is a velvet rope there, as seen by former ads on this site for false papers and given anecdotally how many there are floating around out there, we police laughably when it comes to youth soccer, particularly now post-COVID when originals of the papers don't even need to be submitted.
[/QUOTE]
What do you think M2F?  It's performance enhancing drugs on steroids.


----------



## sockma (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> If you read my prior posts, I'm in favor of a college/professional ban, particularly in individual sports, since the stakes are high enough to do drug testing (though I'd be open to an argument for x number of years post-surgery).
> 
> The problem with the logic you lay out lies in the words "substantial evidence".  It's where it self-evidently stumbles all over itself.   The fact you even had to use those words shows the problem with your argument.
> 
> ...


I used your words and your logic to explain it to you but now you're arguing against yourself too.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

sockma said:


> This is not a correct statement.  The highest form of unfair advantage would be performance enhancing drugs which at least in youth soccer we DO NOT go after.  The next highest form of unfair advantage is the falsified birth certificates, which while there is a velvet rope there, as seen by former ads on this site for false papers and given anecdotally how many there are floating around out there, we police laughably when it comes to youth soccer, particularly now post-COVID when originals of the papers don't even need to be submitted.


What do you think M2F?  It's performance enhancing drugs on steroids.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, so if you think MLS Next and ECNL soccer are important enough to put in place drug protocols, then I'd be more open to the argument that MTF should be banned using similar protocols.  Otherwise you are just picking on the trans kids but ignoring the outright cheaters.  If so then an unfair advantage is not really your concern but something else....


sockma said:


> I used your words and your logic to explain it to you but now you're arguing against yourself too.


Nope.  Your argument fell apart when you used the words "substantial evidence".  It's a cheat.  You used those words as a logical short cut to try and avoid some heavy lifting that might put you in a bad place. My argument is all about "o.k. if you are concerned about advantages, but then be consistent" even if it might inconvenience you and yours such as by having to get and pay for periodic labs.  E.g., what is the "substantial evidence" you had in mind....a girl that looks butch enough she might have been born a boy?....same standard for a girl with drug testing....pull out the girl and have her tested because she's athletic enough she might be using testosterone?  Like this?









						Utah school secretly investigated if winning female student athlete is transgender
					

An athletics association scrutinized the winner’s records after parents of two girls who lost the competition complained




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## toucan (Jan 5, 2023)

In reply to Sockma:

I don't accept any part of your argument.  Yes, every athlete "*can* undergo vision correction," but that is an inconsistent argument, because every athlete *can* also become transgender.  You do not even bother to address genetic advantages such as height, or hormonal advantages such as early puberty.

Your argument that transgender athletes create "the highest form of unfair advantages" is hyperbolic to say the least.  Brittany Griner playing women who are 5'4" or less in a basketball game is definitely a "higher" form of an unfair advantage.  Do you think that she would be in the WNBA if she did not have such extraordinary height?


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> This is not a correct statement.  The highest form of unfair advantage would be performance enhancing drugs which at least in youth soccer we DO NOT go after.  The next highest form of unfair advantage is the falsified birth certificates, which while there is a velvet rope there, as seen by former ads on this site for false papers and given anecdotally how many there are floating around out there, we police laughably when it comes to youth soccer, particularly now post-COVID when originals of the papers don't even need to be submitted.


Your argument is that because there are other forms of cheating we should ignore this one?

We have procedures to verify birth certificates. Registrars take a whole class on it. 

Innate physical advantages can't be controlled for (except in sports like wrestling and weightlifting).

Steroids are illegal and expensive. And we lack cheap testing methods at the youth level. If we had a $5 test I would support testing after allegations are made. 

What separates this form of cheating from the other ones, though, is that they merely need to say five words to gain an immediate physical advantage: "I identify as a girl".


----------



## whatithink (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> You accuse me of forming an opinion based on my family situation when you know nothing about it, and *then declare you don't care because your kids will not get athletic scholarships*? Ok.


ah, bless, and yet I didn't say that! Relax, they are just kids playing soccer.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> Your argument is that because there are other forms of cheating we should ignore this one?
> 
> We have procedures to verify birth certificates. Registrars take a whole class on it.
> 
> ...


No, my argument is that unless you are going to not ignore the blatant forms of cheating (which youth soccer is literally doing nothing about), you can't pick on the trans kid (who unlike the kids taking steroids have objectives other than plain cheating...no one is declaring they want to identify as a girl just to play on a girls team...that's just false fear mongering)

You also exaggerate the amount the steroids cost (and no, they are not "illegal" in the same way heroine is....it's illegal for a doctor to prescribe them for purposes such as athletic advantage, but that hasn't stopped a ton of them from prescribing opioids to addicts, and it makes your argument worse because you are turning a blind eye to conduct you think is illegal but punishing conduct the state has deemed not only legal but acceptable).

Finally, if you think the standard should be greater than "I identify as a girl" that would be a fair argument in my book.  For example, requiring hormonal treatment or actually living as a girl or getting a birth certificate (which as we've established in California is relatively easy to change).  But that's not your argument which makes the point facetious.  You are looking for a ban.


----------



## toucan (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> What separates this form of cheating from the other ones, though, is that they merely need to say five words to gain an immediate physical advantage: "I identify as a girl".


Your're premise is wrong, and so is your conclusion.  Identifying as a girl is not cheating.  
Neither is being taller, stronger or more physically mature than other girls.
Neither is having an earlier birthday than other girls.
Neither is having more economic resources than other girls.
People are different.  That does not make them cheaters.


----------



## whatithink (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> Innate physical advantages can't be controlled for (except in sports like wrestling and weightlifting).


Relative age effect is a real thing, US soccer delved into it a few years back, although they may have moved on from it now - idk. So, you can manage innate physical advantages early and then reset when they level out ... but nobody does that I'm aware of.

Kids that mature early or are older (in a given year) generally dominate at the elite level, i.e. get on the teams at the beginning and then stay there more often than not. There are books that have been written about it, empirically demonstrating it across multiple sports.

So if you want an "issue" in youth sports that is disadvantaging a very large number of participants, then this is a far better hill for you to pick.


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> No, my argument is that unless you are going to not ignore the blatant forms of cheating (which youth soccer is literally doing nothing about), you can't pick on the trans kid (who unlike the kids taking steroids have objectives other than plain cheating...no one is declaring they want to identify as a girl just to play on a girls team...that's just false fear mongering)
> 
> You also exaggerate the amount the steroids cost (and no, they are not "illegal" in the same way heroine is....it's illegal for a doctor to prescribe them for purposes such as athletic advantage, but that hasn't stopped a ton of them from prescribing opioids to addicts, and it makes your argument worse because you are turning a blind eye to conduct you think is illegal but punishing conduct the state has deemed not only legal but acceptable).
> 
> Finally, if you think the standard should be greater than "I identify as a girl" that would be a fair argument in my book.  For example, requiring hormonal treatment or actually living as a girl or getting a birth certificate (which as we've established in California is relatively easy to change).  But that's not your argument which makes the point facetious.  You are looking for a ban.


What on Earth. You are all over the place. 

Going through male puberty and then declaring you will compete against females in athletics is cheating. Full stop. You argue we should allow it. I do not agree. 

I am NOT looking for a ban. I have never said that. In fact, I have said the opposite. If trans girls want to play sports, fine. Just not at the highest level where their advantages could strip girls of opportunities and scholarships.


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 5, 2023)

whatithink said:


> Relative age effect is a real thing, US soccer delved into it a few years back, although they may have moved on from it now - idk. So, you can manage innate physical advantages early and then reset when they level out ... but nobody does that I'm aware of.
> 
> Kids that mature early or are older (in a given year) generally dominate at the elite level, i.e. get on the teams at the beginning and then stay there more often than not. There are books that have been written about it, empirically demonstrating it across multiple sports.
> 
> So if you want an "issue" in youth sports that is disadvantaging a very large number of participants, then this is a far better hill for you to pick.


Being born with a physical advantage is NOT the same as declaring you deserve a physical advantage after puberty. 

No one can control when they were born. No one can control if their parents were athletes. 

But any male high school athlete, right now, can gain an enormous athletic advantage instantly by speaking those 5 words. And sports is a zero sum game.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> What on Earth. You are all over the place.
> 
> Going through male puberty and then declaring you will compete against females in athletics is cheating. Full stop. You argue we should allow it. I do not agree.
> 
> I am NOT looking for a ban. I have never said that. In fact, I have said the opposite. If trans girls want to play sports, fine. Just not at the highest level where their advantages could strip girls of opportunities and scholarships.


It's funny that you think ECNL is the "highest levels".  It's just glorified kiddie soccer for which we don't even care enough to do drug testing.

If I'm all over the place it's because I'm playing whack a mole with your arguments which are entirely inconsistent and turning you around into a pretzel.  Like I said, I'm open to restrictions, but I think they need to be applied equitably across all concerns....not just because we don't like the trans kids.  Where are you all over the place in your arguments?  Well, now you trotted out the word cheating.  That's an argument fallacy.  You can't argue something is cheating because it's cheating.  That's the classic circular argument. The entire argument we are having is over what should and shouldn't be considered "cheating" (which you are giving the blatant steroid cheaters a pass but going after those who are engaged in an otherwise legal activity).


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> It's funny that you think ECNL is the "highest levels".  It's just glorified kiddie soccer for which we don't even care enough to do drug testing.
> 
> If I'm all over the place it's because I'm playing whack a mole with your arguments which are entirely inconsistent and turning you around into a pretzel.  Like I said, I'm open to restrictions, but I think they need to be applied equitably across all concerns....not just because we don't like the trans kids.  Where are you all over the place in your arguments?  Well, now you trotted out the word cheating.  That's an argument fallacy.  You can't argue something is cheating because it's cheating.  That's the classic circular argument. The entire argument we are having is over what should and shouldn't be considered "cheating" (which you are giving the blatant steroid cheaters a pass but going after those who are engaged in an otherwise legal activity).


p.s.  Here's an example of a consistent policy: 1) steroids are banned and you have to sign the code of conduct banning them.  But if suspicion of you taking elicit drugs is raised we'll ignore it since there's no investigation mechanism, 2) you must play under the birth certificate of your assigned gender (which in California we know is easy to alter and you'll have to figure out what to do with the nonbinaries).  But if suspicion of you being a different gender than your birth certificate is raised, we'll ignore it since there's no investigation mechanism, 3) you must play in the correct birth age as verified by your birth certificate (but we aren't going to do anything about the counterfeit records and registrars that might turn a loose eye, and if there is suspicion of you not being the correct age we'll ignore it).  Velvet ropes for all.  Where you got in trouble was your "substantial evidence" since it would subject any girl that can be said to be "butch" or "athletic" and performs well to a random drug or gender test.


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> It's funny that you think ECNL is the "highest levels".  It's just glorified kiddie soccer for which we don't even care enough to do drug testing.
> 
> If I'm all over the place it's because I'm playing whack a mole with your arguments which are entirely inconsistent and turning you around into a pretzel.  Like I said, I'm open to restrictions, but I think they need to be applied equitably across all concerns....not just because we don't like the trans kids.  Where are you all over the place in your arguments?  Well, now you trotted out the word cheating.  That's an argument fallacy.  You can't argue something is cheating because it's cheating.  That's the classic circular argument. The entire argument we are having is over what should and shouldn't be considered "cheating" (which you are giving the blatant steroid cheaters a pass but going after those who are engaged in an otherwise legal activity).


I don't give any cheaters passes. Trans girls, steroid cheats, birth certificate forgers, whatever.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> I don't give any cheaters passes. Trans girls, steroid cheats, birth certificate forgers, whatever.


Yes you are, because you are advocating a "substantial evidence" standard for the trans girl (you o.k. for example with what happened in the Utah article?) but giving a velvet rope for steroid cheats and birth certificate forgers.  What not giving a pass would be is either velvet ropes for everyone, random testing for everyone, mandatory testing for everyone, or testing on accusation for everyone.  But what you are doing is singling out the trans kid because it particularly offends you (wonder why?) and you think it's easy to catch, but turning a blind eye to everything else that might impact you personally (e.g., paying for drug testing).  There's words for that and they begin with the initials "W.H."  If that's your position, I oppose such actions on principle, whether they are Spanish moriscos, puritan noncomformists or trans kids.


----------



## MARsSPEED (Jan 5, 2023)

toucan said:


> In reply to Sockma:
> 
> I don't accept any part of your argument.  Yes, every athlete "*can* undergo vision correction," but that is an inconsistent argument, because every athlete *can* also become transgender.  You do not even bother to address genetic advantages such as height, or hormonal advantages such as early puberty.
> 
> Your argument that transgender athletes create "the highest form of unfair advantages" is hyperbolic to say the least.  Brittany Griner playing women who are 5'4" or less in a basketball game is definitely a "higher" form of an unfair advantage.  Do you think that she would be in the WNBA if she did not have such extraordinary height?


Brittney Griner? That’s a man baby!


----------



## crush (Jan 5, 2023)

MARsSPEED said:


> Brittney Griner? That’s a man baby!


WTF? Dom, is this one of those photo shops?


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Jan 5, 2023)

toucan said:


> As to whether "going to puberty as a male" gives a male-to-female transgender athlete an advantage, you may be correct.  So what?  We already countenance genetic, hormonal and man-made advantages in sports.  Why draw the line at transgender?


The logical end of this line of thinking and most of the "if I say I'm a women/girl, I should be able to compete in sports with women/girls" crowd is that there is no men's soccer or women's soccer (pick your sport) - just soccer. That certainly solves the problem. However, the overwhelming evidence is that the separation of male and female sports does even the playing field for those who menstruate (women).

I did laugh when I read this.

--
As to whether "going to puberty as a male" gives a male-to-female transgender athlete an advantage, you may be correct.  So what?
--

It reminded me of this.


----------



## MARsSPEED (Jan 5, 2023)

So, say Trans are banned from playing the sport of whatever they are transitioning to. That extremely small amount of people have they’re feelings hurt but can still play with their original sex.

Now say we allow all trans to play as whatever sex they desire, still a very small percentage of people, however, the amount of young girls and ladies that are affected, whether by coming in 2nd, 3rd, or 4th, locker room trauma, and other psychological factors, far outnumbers those who decided to transition.

On top of this, if we do allow, we are also excusing science and the physical advantages MTF persons have and that is not a debate.

Look, we do not allow PEDs in any sport and for good reason. Male genetics are performance enhancing over women, end of story. Bigger heart, lungs and bone structure. Hormones aren’t going to change that. I don’t know why anyone thinks these persons should be given a free pass.

This subject is strictly about “feelings” and nothing about science. People who support this thinking are choosing to put feelings over facts which is yet another dangerous precedent.

For those who want to mention Birth Certificates in the same category or drug testing, totally different subjects and not parallel. All a parent can do is accuse a family of lying about age or sex to higher ups. After that, it is on those higher ups, and how much they want to push who are then at the mercy of some government employee who probably does not want to do their job. So in the end, the accuser is actually powerless.

Moving on to girls using PEDs, really? With the population of Trans being very small, I would wager girls using steriods who are not in transition, much small than the Trans community. Not only that, the girl would have obvious properties and the parents would be risking arrest for child abuse. Funny how that is considered child abuse yet parents who allow their girls to get private parts cut off, are not. Anyway.

Do MTF have any advantage over biological females?
Yes. 100% absolute and proven by science.

Do FTM using hormone treatments have any advantage over biological females?
Yes. 100% absolutely and proven by science.

If we want to make this political and talk about equality then either of the above are not equal to biological females and have a proven advantage.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

MARsSPEED said:


> So, say Trans are banned from playing the sport of whatever they are transitioning to. That extremely small amount of people have they’re feelings hurt but can still play with their original sex.
> 
> Now say we allow all trans to play as whatever sex they desire, still a very small percentage of people, however, the amount of young girls and ladies that are affected, whether by coming in 2nd, 3rd, or 4th, locker room trauma, and other psychological factors, far outnumbers those who decided to transition.
> 
> ...


My objection to this is your statement that we do not allow peds in sports. We do…just not at the levels that are drug tested…most youth sports are not covered. I was at a party with certain gridiron football parents over the holidays and am actually shocked at how widespread they are. While certainly not every athlete or maybe even the majority of boys, the stories were certainly shocking and I venture to say that it’s more than rare.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 5, 2023)

No one is saying we should an anyone from sports.

At most, people are arguing that high end girls sports should be reserved for XX people, and that XY people should play boys, coed, or rec.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

dad4 said:


> No one is saying we should an anyone from sports.
> 
> At most, people are arguing that high end girls sports should be reserved for XX people, and that XY people should play boys, coed, or rec.


I think part of the problem we are having is what is a high end sport. Some people seem to be under the impression ecnl or non academy mls ball is high end. It’s not. If it’s not important enough to drug test it’s not high end


----------



## Carlsbad7 (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> I think part of the problem we are having is what is a high end sport. Some people seem to be under the impression ecnl or non academy mls ball is high end. It’s not. If it’s not important enough to drug test it’s not high end


Agree x1000% until I can bet on the game it's not high end. ;-)


----------



## MARsSPEED (Jan 5, 2023)

I don’t care what end. Create more Co-ed opportunities. The funny thing about that is that ot will just backfire. For anyone who has participated in co-ed sports, you know there is a certain regulation for how many females must play and be on a team. You know why? Because males teams made with only one female dominate the teams that have five or six females.

Stop trying to break things that aren’t broken for the sake of peoples feelings. Understand the consequences and to why there are consequences to actions.

“You want to transition? Ok, just know that you will not be able to play in girls sports BECAUSE YOU WERE BORN A MALE. Sorry but you can’t change that. You will have to continue playing with the boys. Why? Because it is the wrong choice based on everything we know about science, even if your as coordinated as a baby giraffe. Sorry, but these are the unfortunate facts. Your choice. You will have many many more choices like this in your future, many of those will likely hurt your feelings even more. So please get used to it now. As you know, you live in this world and THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND YOU AND YOUR DECISIONS. It would be selfish for you to believe that and I would be a horrible parent for letting you believe that.”

Deal with it.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

MARsSPEED said:


> I don’t care what end. Create more Co-ed opportunities. The funny thing about that is that ot will just backfire. For anyone who has participated in co-ed sports, you know there is a certain regulation for how many females must play and be on a team. You know why? Because males teams made with only one female dominate the teams that have five or six females.
> 
> Stop trying to break things that aren’t broken for the sake of peoples feelings. Understand the consequences and to why there are consequences to actions.
> 
> ...


You make a lot of really good points and it’s probably one of the better arguments I’ve heard (focused on personal choices but it still doesn’t address the cheating issue on which it still fails).   I do, however, point out that it’s funny, given what side you were on the debate on another issue, that you fall back on the science (as in that argument there is a lot of disagreement in a situation for which there are no good solutions). The selfish point also made me chuckle. The argument only works if the science really is settled on what’s the best treatment in a particular situation (which it isn’t)


----------



## dad4 (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> I think part of the problem we are having is what is a high end sport. Some people seem to be under the impression ecnl or non academy mls ball is high end. It’s not. If it’s not important enough to drug test it’s not high end


By “high end”, I mean the top level for that age group.

So, within U15 soccer, ECNL is high end for girls.  

If there is some other term you prefer, use that.  I am simply referring to whether it is one of the top divisions for that sport and that age group.


----------



## espola (Jan 5, 2023)

MARsSPEED said:


> I don’t care what end. Create more Co-ed opportunities. The funny thing about that is that ot will just backfire. For anyone who has participated in co-ed sports, you know there is a certain regulation for how many females must play and be on a team. You know why? Because males teams made with only one female dominate the teams that have five or six females.
> 
> Stop trying to break things that aren’t broken for the sake of peoples feelings. Understand the consequences and to why there are consequences to actions.
> 
> ...


A problem with absolute rules is that it does not allow consideration of special cases.  Some people are born with unusual genetics or developmental malformations that make the determination of gender difficult at birth.  I believe this has been covered already in this or a similar thread so I won't bother with repetition.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 5, 2023)

dad4 said:


> By “high end”, I mean the top level for that age group.
> 
> So, within U15 soccer, ECNL is high end for girls.
> 
> If there is some other term you prefer, use that.  I am simply referring to whether it is one of the top divisions for that sport and that age group.


Just because something is the top group doesn’t make it high end or worthy of high end treatment. Given all the complaints on these forums of the mixed level of play at ecnl it’s not ecnl. If the girls were to develop a true academy system geared at producing Uswnt players and pro athletes I’d be more open to the argument. But as it stands right now ecnl is just glorified kiddie ball.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 5, 2023)

Grace T. said:


> Just because something is the top group doesn’t make it high end or worthy of high end treatment. Given all the complaints on these forums of the mixed level of play at ecnl it’s not ecnl. If the girls were to develop a true academy system geared at producing Uswnt players and pro athletes I’d be more open to the argument. But as it stands right now ecnl is just glorified kiddie ball.


You want us to call it the "top group", instead of "high end"?   WTF.  They mean exactly the same thing.

You're just quibbling over semantics because you have no argument to make.


----------



## TopesWin (Jan 5, 2023)

Kicker4Life said:


> All good until…….
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree in principal but National Review has become nothing more than another right wing disinformation channel - sadly - so it is little use linking to it as a source of actual information.


----------



## Kicker4Life (Jan 6, 2023)

TopesWin said:


> I agree in principal but National Review has become nothing more than another right wing disinformation channel - sadly - so it is little use linking to it as a source of actual information.


True, but I vetted it with other sources as well,  below is the local news link…









						Districts cancels girls volleyball games against school with trans player, cites safety concerns
					

Cherokee County Schools in North Carolina have decided to halt all future competition between one of its school’s female volleyball teams and the rest of the te




					wtov9.com


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Jan 6, 2023)

TopesWin said:


> I agree in principal but National Review has become nothing more than another right wing disinformation channel - sadly - so it is little use linking to it as a source of actual information.


Ok, newby. Who are your comprehensive, centrist sources of absolute truth?


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> You want us to call it the "top group", instead of "high end"?   WTF.  They mean exactly the same thing.
> 
> You're just quibbling over semantics because you have no argument to make.


No my argument is ecnl isn’t top level ball just glorified kiddie ball. You’re problem is you can’t see that just because something is the highest level offered that doesn’t make it a top of the line elite product, as made evident be the constant complaints on this site about the level of play in ecnl. The girls don’t really have an elite level like the boys mls next academies. Again if they were to implement a truly elite system geared at training pros and uswnt I might feel differently about the argument. Because otherwise there’s very little distinguishing ecnl from the arbitrary line drawn against npl, ga or even flight 1 ball.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 6, 2023)

TopesWin said:


> I agree in principal but National Review has become nothing more than another right wing disinformation channel - sadly - so it is little use linking to it as a source of actual information.


Here’s the issue I have with the volleyball story. I think safetyism is the strongest argument as far as youth soccer is concerned (not protect my daughters scholarship opportunities in ecnl because she’s “elite” but then I go and complain about how others in ecnl don’t deserve to be there because they aren’t elite). But we ignore safetyism in other contexts

when my son was 11 he was in the 80th % of height and went up against a team with a kid on it who was at least 140 and had the height of a full grown adult. That kid was bodying my sons teammates off the ball easily, injured 1 kid, was knocking the goalkicks down the field, was banging balls at my kids head in goal and was just shoving everyone out of the way on corners. We didn’t care about safetyism in that context. My son and his teammates just had to take their beating from the 1kid and they called it a lesson. The parents of course grumbled the kid had to be playing on false papers, but it’s just if not more likely that the kid was just an early bloomer.

if we care about safety, kids should be assigned based on their height and weight, not their age, given that we know how differently they develop


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> No one except the Olympics requires "years of hormone therapy". The trans girl does not need to undergo ANY hormone therapy in high school to be offered a college scholarship. Just that they need their testosterone levels within a certain range during the season. This is AFTER puberty.
> 
> At least you aren't arguing that trans girls don't have an athletic advantage. That's a start.
> 
> ...


The NCAA does require hormone therapy dimwit.  

No, it is not required in HS because HS sports is not important.  The mere fact that people like you make stupid arguments that trans girls should not be allowed to play because transphobic ones might abuse the opportunity rather conclusively establishes that lessons in inclusivity are far more important and necessary than winning and losing HS games.  And if a legitimately trans player gets a scholarship, good for her.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> What on Earth. You are all over the place.
> 
> Going through male puberty and then declaring you will compete against females in athletics is cheating. Full stop. You argue we should allow it. I do not agree.
> 
> I am NOT looking for a ban. I have never said that. In fact, I have said the opposite. If trans girls want to play sports, fine. Just not at the highest level where their advantages could strip girls of opportunities and scholarships.


You don't understand what cheating is.  When trans players are allowed to play in a league, they are doing so in accordance with the express rules of the governing body.  That is not cheating.  You are just making up nonsense excuses to rationalize how much you hate trans people without having to admit it.  

What I find interesting about transphobes like yourself is that you almost always proclaim that you're "pro business" and "government hands off", yet here you are trying to tell people that private entities shouldn't be allowed to decide who can participate in their own leagues that they created and oversee.  Am I right that you claim to be a "pro business" "conservative"?  Do you think that the government should be "hands off" - except apparently when it involves the sanctity of children's sports which is just so important that the world will end if a trans girl wins a HS race in Connecticut?

I am going to make something very clear for you.  Winning and losing youth sports is not important, especially compared to civil rights and inclusivity, which people like you keep proving time and again.  At the college and professional levels, sports become more important, which explains why there are increasingly restrictive rules than at the youth level.  Sometimes it turns out that even those rules don't work well, as the Penn swimmer situation seemed to bring to light, so they revise those rules to make them more "fair" in a way that addresses everyone's interests - not just the transphobic dads' who are irrationally scared shitless that their child might lose a race or maybe even a scholarship to a transphobic boy who is abusing the process by pretending to be trans.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 6, 2023)

espola said:


> A problem with absolute rules is that it does not allow consideration of special cases.  Some people are born with unusual genetics or developmental malformations that make the determination of gender difficult at birth.  I believe this has been covered already in this or a similar thread so I won't bother with repetition.


We aren't talking about Kleinfelter’s syndrome or Castor Semenya's condition.


SurFutbol said:


> The NCAA does require hormone therapy dimwit.
> 
> No, it is not required in HS because HS sports is not important.  The mere fact that people like you make stupid arguments that trans girls should not be allowed to play because transphobic ones might abuse the opportunity rather conclusively establishes that lessons in inclusivity are far more important and necessary than winning and losing HS games.  And if a legitimately trans player gets a scholarship, good for her.


Who the hell are you to tell someone else that their sport is not important?   There are millions of kids to whom their sports are important.  It’s not your place to decide for them that girls sports just don’t matter.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> We aren't talking about Kleinfelter’s syndrome or Castor Semenya's condition.
> 
> Who the hell are you to tell someone else that their sport is not important?   There are millions of kids to whom their sports are important.  It’s not your place to decide for them that girls sports just don’t matter.


Who the hell are you to tell someone that civil rights and inclusivity are not important?  There are millions of kids who think civil rights and inclusivity are important. In fact, so many people who think that civil rights and inclusivity are important that sports governing bodies have implemented rules allowing trans girls to play sports.

For the record, I also didn't say that youth sports isn't important.  I did say that winning and losing isn't important at the youth level. If your child loses a U16 game to a team with a trans girls, whatever.  If she doesn't make the HS soccer team and a trans girl does, it also means that she was worse than 20+ cis kids, so also whatever.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> Who the hell are you to tell someone else that their sport is not important?   There are millions of kids to whom their sports are important.  It’s not your place to decide for them that girls sports just don’t matter.


The problem with this argument is we can do it all day:

-Who are you to say ECNL matters but Flight 1 doesn't matter?
-Who are you to say that it doesn't matter if the trans kid has a safe and inclusive place to participate in?
-Who are you to say that the trans kids right to a scholarship is more important than my kid's right to a scholarship?
-Who are you to say that your daughter deserves to be in ECNL but there are others who are diluting the competition?
-Who are you to say that it's fair that my 11 year old kid has to be subjected to a kid who looks 16 banging balls at his head all day that he can do nothing about?
-Who are you to say that the 16 year old kid doesn't have any more right to play than your 11 year old kid?

Both sides in the dispute have legitimate concerns and interests, which is why it makes the issue difficult with no obvious solution.  "Who the hell are you" is the laziest of lazy arguments.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 6, 2023)

SurFutbol said:


> Who the hell are you to tell someone that civil rights and inclusivity are not important?  There are millions of kids who think civil rights and inclusivity are important. In fact, so many people who think that civil rights and inclusivity are important that sports governing bodies have implemented rules allowing trans girls to play sports.
> 
> For the record, I also didn't say that youth sports isn't important.  I did say that winning and losing isn't important at the youth level. If your child loses a U16 game to a team with a trans girls, whatever.  If she doesn't make the HS soccer team and a trans girl does, it also means that she was worse than 20+ cis kids, so also whatever.


Allowing XY athletes to enter into female events is not a civil rights issue.   

There are real civil rights issues for LGBTQ people.  Safety and workplace discrimination are still problems.  Pushing XY athletes into women’s sports just makes it more difficult to make any progress on those.

 Ten years ago, the popular image of gay rights was a happy young couple kissing on their wedding.   Why do you want to erase that image and replace it with a picture of a dude stealing a girl’s trophy?   (Yes, a dude.  Because that’s what the photo is going to look like.)


----------



## GLangevinito (Jan 6, 2023)

SurFutbol said:


> You don't understand what cheating is.  When trans players are allowed to play in a league, they are doing so in accordance with the express rules of the governing body.  That is not cheating.  You are just making up nonsense excuses to rationalize how much you hate trans people without having to admit it.
> 
> What I find interesting about transphobes like yourself is that you almost always proclaim that you're "pro business" and "government hands off", yet here you are trying to tell people that private entities shouldn't be allowed to decide who can participate in their own leagues that they created and oversee.  Am I right that you claim to be a "pro business" "conservative"?  Do you think that the government should be "hands off" - except apparently when it involves the sanctity of children's sports which is just so important that the world will end if a trans girl wins a HS race in Connecticut?
> 
> I am going to make something very clear for you.  Winning and losing youth sports is not important, especially compared to civil rights and inclusivity, which people like you keep proving time and again.  At the college and professional levels, sports become more important, which explains why there are increasingly restrictive rules than at the youth level.  Sometimes it turns out that even those rules don't work well, as the Penn swimmer situation seemed to bring to light, so they revise those rules to make them more "fair" in a way that addresses everyone's interests - not just the transphobic dads' who are irrationally scared shitless that their child might lose a race or maybe even a scholarship to a transphobic boy who is abusing the process by pretending to be trans.


When your argument descends into assumptions and personal attacks, you've already lost. 

There is no serious debate that a woman who went through puberty as a boy will have physical athletic advantages. So how do you handle these cases? What is fair? Like it or not, whatever decision you make, you will be taking an opportunity away from a trans girl or a girl. 

In my mind, trans girls can still compete at the highest levels of the sport - if they compete against individuals who went through puberty as boys. How is that not the fairest solution?


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 6, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> In my mind, trans girls can still compete at the highest levels of the sport - if they compete against individuals who went through puberty as boys. How is that not the fairest solution?


Because if they are on testosterone blockers, hormones or had the surgery, they can't compete on the same level either with a boy who is fully on testosterone at the current time.  Yes, they have a certain advantage relative to most girls, but they certainly aren't on the same level as the boys.  So that's not the "fairest" solution either because you are still shafting someone....in this case the trans kid.  On an individual sports level you could mitigate against this by having them play like athletes, but still not everyone will be in the same place and given the rarity it would be hard to aggregate a team, let alone an "elite" team, even at the college level.  One solution is to not allow them to switch until they have taken such measures, but 1) that has unintended consequences on encouraging kids to take that drastic step (which some have been recorded to regret) at an earlier age and 2) that's not going to satisfy some people on the ban side who'll (correctly) argue the trans athlete still has advantages by having to gone part way or wholly through puberty on testosterone.

Similarly, I note you have the opposite problem in reverse with FTM who are on testosterone.  Given testosterone is a PED, it's not "fair" to have them play on the same team as other girls some will argue, but at the same time it's going to take them quite of bit of time to catch up with the birth born boys.  If they go on testosterone after puberty, the birth born boys will always have an advantage over them.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> Allowing XY athletes to enter into female events is not a civil rights issue.
> 
> There are real civil rights issues for LGBTQ people.  Safety and workplace discrimination are still problems.  Pushing XY athletes into women’s sports just makes it more difficult to make any progress on those.
> 
> Ten years ago, the popular image of gay rights was a happy young couple kissing on their wedding.   Why do you want to erase that image and replace it with a picture of a dude stealing a girl’s trophy?   (Yes, a dude.  Because that’s what the photo is going to look like.)


Absolutely it is a civil rights issue.  You and your compadres are taking the position that private entities should not be allowed to decide who may participate in their own leagues.  You believe they should be prohibited by law from allowing trans girls and women from participating solely by virtue of the fact that they are trans.  That is about as fundamental a civil rights issue as there can be.  Claiming this is not a civil rights issue in the same post in which you disrespectfully refer to trans girls as "dudes" and accuse them of "stealing" when they are complying with league rules only reinforces that fact.  

If you want to create your own transphobic kiddie league, go for it.


----------



## espola (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> We aren't talking about Kleinfelter’s syndrome or Castor Semenya's condition.


How does your absolute birth-gender rule handle situations like that?

"Most of the time when a baby is born intersex, doctors and the family decide on a sex, either male or female, and raise the baby as the gender expected of that sex. It’s pretty common for surgery to be done on the baby’s genitals and also for the child to be given hormones to make them fit into male/female categories as they go through puberty."

What is Intersex? | Definition of Intersexual (plannedparenthood.org)


----------



## dad4 (Jan 6, 2023)

espola said:


> How does your absolute birth-gender rule handle situations like that?
> 
> "Most of the time when a baby is born intersex, doctors and the family decide on a sex, either male or female, and raise the baby as the gender expected of that sex. It’s pretty common for surgery to be done on the baby’s genitals and also for the child to be given hormones to make them fit into male/female categories as they go through puberty."
> 
> What is Intersex? | Definition of Intersexual (plannedparenthood.org)


An XX/XY standard does not, by itself, handle classification of intersex athletes.   

My limited understanding is that most intersex conditions produce enough testosterone that those athletes cannot fairly compete as women.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

GLangevinito said:


> When your argument descends into assumptions and personal attacks, you've already lost.
> 
> There is no serious debate that a woman who went through puberty as a boy will have physical athletic advantages. So how do you handle these cases? What is fair? Like it or not, whatever decision you make, you will be taking an opportunity away from a trans girl or a girl.
> 
> In my mind, trans girls can still compete at the highest levels of the sport - if they compete against individuals who went through puberty as boys. How is that not the fairest solution?


At the youth level, those cases have been handled by not worrying about who wins or loses.  They have been handled by evaluating safety issues and addressing them as needed. 

If you think it is "fair" to force a trans girl to play soccer with the boys of transphobic parents like you, there is no point in discussing fairness with you.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 6, 2023)

SurFutbol said:


> Absolutely it is a civil rights issue.  You and your compadres are taking the position that private entities should not be allowed to decide who may participate in their own leagues.  You believe they should be prohibited by law from allowing trans girls and women from participating solely by virtue of the fact that they are trans.  *That is about as fundamental a civil rights issue as there can be.*  Claiming this is not a civil rights issue in the same post in which you disrespectfully refer to trans girls as "dudes" and accuse them of "stealing" when they are complying with league rules only reinforces that fact.
> 
> If you want to create your own transphobic kiddie league, go for it.


Allowing XY athletes to gate crash women’s sports is your _*most fundamental civil rights issue*_?  

Really?  More important than preserving recognition of gay marriage, an end to workplace discrimination, and prevention of anti-gay assaults.  Your number one priority is making sure Lia Thomas can compete in the women’s division instead of the men’s?


----------



## dad4 (Jan 6, 2023)

SurFutbol said:


> At the youth level, those cases have been handled by not worrying about who wins or loses.  They have been handled by evaluating safety issues and addressing them as needed.
> 
> If you think it is "fair" to force a trans girl to play soccer with the boys of transphobic parents like you, there is no point in discussing fairness with you.


From here, it looks like the gay lobby managed to intimidate the standards bodies.  Do what we say or we will call you a transphobe and pressure sponsors to drop you.

It carries no weight with me.  No matter what the rest of us do, people like you are going to call people “transphobe“ 8 days a week.


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> From here, it looks like the gay lobby managed to intimidate the standards bodies.  Do what we say or we will call you a transphobe and pressure sponsors to drop you.
> 
> It carries no weight with me.  No matter what the rest of us do, people like you are going to call people “transphobe“ 8 days a week.


So no "trust the experts" in this case?


----------



## Grace T. (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> Allowing XY athletes to enter into female events is not a civil rights issue.
> 
> There are real civil rights issues for LGBTQ people.  Safety and workplace discrimination are still problems.  Pushing XY athletes into women’s sports just makes it more difficult to make any progress on those.
> 
> Ten years ago, the popular image of gay rights was a happy young couple kissing on their wedding.   Why do you want to erase that image and replace it with a picture of a dude stealing a girl’s trophy?   (Yes, a dude.  Because that’s what the photo is going to look like.)


This is why you get accused of being a transphobe (even if that's not your intent, and I, for one, am willing to assume the best).

"Allowing XY athletes to enter into female events is not a civil rights issue"

Yes, it really is, because the question we are trying to answer is whether or not an action is discriminatory and when (if ever) such athlete should be allowed to enter.  We are balancing the interests of the T in the LGBTQ against others, which by definition does make it a civil rights issue.  I also note that you have the same issue in reverse-- forcing FTM XX athletes to play with the boys because they are on testosterone, even though they may not have the advantages of having had testosterone during puberty, but your answer there is also dump them all with the boys.

"There are real civil rights issues for LGBTQ people".

Last I heard you were cis so, given your prior argument, "who are you" to tell LGBTQ what they should and shouldn't be concerned with.  Yeah yeah, lazy argument, but it's somewhat distasteful that you are implying "we accepted gay marriage so why do you have to keep pushing this stuff on us...shouldn't you be happy about gay marriage?"  I note that the interests of the LGBTQ community aren't monolith either and there's plenty of discomfort between the groups.  One famous joke from "Modern Family" points out the L and G probably have the least in common venn diagram wise.

"Yes, a dude. Because that's what the photo is going to look like".

This statement is probably the one most dripping in bigotry.  It would surprise you to learn that back in law school I didn't want to spend my time doing stuffy law review work so I did legal aid work.  My first client was a T who was being evicted because her landlord found out who she was and didn't like it (from friends that were visiting).  The person transitioned fairly early in life, knew from the beginning they were T, and you could not tell for the life of you.  Yes, it's quite possible the photo looks like something out of South Park.  But that's not necessarily the case, and your assumption that it would be is frankly disappointing.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> Allowing XY athletes to gate crash women’s sports is your _*most fundamental civil rights issue*_?
> 
> Really?  More important than preserving recognition of gay marriage, an end to workplace discrimination, and prevention of anti-gay assaults.  Your number one priority is making sure Lia Thomas can compete in the women’s division instead of the men’s?


I did not say that.  It is pretty obvious that I did say it is fundamental - meaning basic and essential - not "more important".  I do understand how people like you misrepresent what words actually mean, but that is the type of bs argument that transphobes need to make to distract from their blatant transphobia.

You are also engaging in what is called moral licensing.  Moral licensing is the concept of convincing yourself that your abysmal behavior isn't actually bad because you claim to support at least some good behavior.  Perhaps the most common example is when someone claims the have black friends to rationalize why their racist behavior isn't racist.  Here, you're at least pretending to support gay rights, sort of, to rationalize your abysmal position as to trans people. Actually, your commentary is more accurately "moral licensing by proxy", which is worse.  Specifically, you can't even muster personal support for a civil rights cause.  Instead, you're pointing to civil rights issues that others support to rationalize why you hate trans people so much.  

Also, nice try attempting to define children as "athletes".  They're children. Winning and losing a game as children just doesn't matter.

I also specifically said earlier that the NCAA rules at the time the Penn swimmer won probably weren't "fair", but you obviously know that and still ignored it.  Again, this is the kind of bs argument that desperate transphobes need to do because they don't have any legitimate arguments to support their position.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> From here, it looks like the gay lobby managed to intimidate the standards bodies.  Do what we say or we will call you a transphobe and pressure sponsors to drop you.
> 
> It carries no weight with me.  No matter what the rest of us do, people like you are going to call people “transphobe“ 8 days a week.


You've made it pretty clear from the offensive manner by which you refer to trans children that you're transphobic.  You and your friends have also made it very clear how important it is to have inclusive policies for trans girls in youth sports, so thank you for that.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 6, 2023)

SurFutbol said:


> You've made it pretty clear from the offensive manner by which you refer to trans children that you're transphobic.  You and your friends have also made it very clear how important it is to have inclusive policies for trans girls in youth sports, so thank you for that.


As predicted, calling people transphobe.

As I said, it is your go-to argument.    If someone thinks you are wrong, accuse them of bigotry.


----------



## SurFutbol (Jan 6, 2023)

dad4 said:


> As predicted, calling people transphobe.
> 
> As I said, it is your go-to argument.    If someone thinks you are wrong, accuse them of bigotry.


The truth is what it is. I'm a bit surprised you're pushing back on this but, then again, David Duke also denied being racist.


----------



## kickingandscreaming (Jan 6, 2023)

Ha! I love lectures about "truth" from a poster that changes "they" screen name every few months. The causes "they" support are diminished by what "they" represent. What a fraud.


----------



## GLangevinito (Saturday at 8:56 AM)

So far, SurFutbol and Grace's arguments have presented in no solutions other that "too bad for the natural born girls". Oh, and name calling. 

I don't accept that. 

The LGBT community spent a long time convincing people that people are born gay, and I wholeheartedly agree. It's exactly the opposite for trans people. They tell us that they feel like they were born the wrong sex, and there is no way to confirm these feelings, so we accept them. I'm completely fine with all this - until their feelings result in a sudden and unfair advantage that takes opportunities away from others. 

If I feel like I was born the wrong race, should I be eligible for affirmative action help? 

I'm all for personal freedom, you do you. But that stops when your freedom to choose negatively impacts someone else.


----------



## GLangevinito (Saturday at 9:06 AM)

SurFutbol said:


> Also, nice try attempting to define children as "athletes".  They're children. Winning and losing a game as children just doesn't matter.


How are they not athletes? At what age do you start calling them athletes?

Of course the W's and the L's don't really matter. No one but you have advanced that straw man. 

What matters is FAIRNESS. And competition. And opportunities. College scouts don't care about wins, but they can't evaluate a kid who is on the bench. While you are bending over backwards to try and accommodate the wishes of a trans girl to play a sport at the highest level with a biological advantage, you are pushing someone aside. That's not fair.


----------



## Grace T. (Saturday at 1:09 PM)

GLangevinito said:


> So far, SurFutbol and Grace's arguments have presented in no solutions other that "too bad for the natural born girls". Oh, and name calling.
> 
> I don't accept that.
> 
> ...


Errr…I expressly said I was willing to give dad4 the benefit of the doubt. I for one really believe we are all bigoted in some ways, no matter who we are, and have a tough time seeing or accepting that we are. It’s part of the human condition. No need to jump on each other or cancel each other. Also no reason not to call it out when it happens.

I have put forward a proposal. I think the restrictions should be on a sliding scale. Most restricted for pro national and Olympic teams. More restrictions for individual sports than team sports. Where we disagree is over whether ecnl is anything more than glorified kiddie soccer. My test is simple: if we care enough to sus out the blatant cheaters, then we can care enough to think about the trans kids. Otherwise all you are doing is singling them out, which has the neg consequences that some cis girls might also be subject to scrutiny (which again should happen only if we are also calling out the blatant cheaters). If you don’t care about the cheaters, and aren’t willing to bear the burden or inconvenience, your points about fairness are just garbage masking underlying bias.

my position is probably the most centrist here.My Schtick is I just thrive on callingout the logical inconsistencies of others particularly when they’ve taken opposite positions in other contexts. It’s fun.


----------



## dad4 (Saturday at 5:21 PM)

Grace T. said:


> Errr…I expressly said I was willing to give dad4 the benefit of the doubt. I for one really believe we are all bigoted in some ways, no matter who we are, and have a tough time seeing or accepting that we are. It’s part of the human condition. No need to jump on each other or cancel each other. Also no reason not to call it out when it happens.
> 
> I have put forward a proposal. I think the restrictions should be on a sliding scale. Most restricted for pro national and Olympic teams. More restrictions for individual sports than team sports. Where we disagree is over whether ecnl is anything more than glorified kiddie soccer. My test is simple: if we care enough to sus out the blatant cheaters, then we can care enough to think about the trans kids. Otherwise all you are doing is singling them out, which has the neg consequences that some cis girls might also be subject to scrutiny (which again should happen only if we are also calling out the blatant cheaters). If you don’t care about the cheaters, and aren’t willing to bear the burden or inconvenience, your points about fairness are just garbage masking underlying bias.
> 
> my position is probably the most centrist here.My Schtick is I just thrive on callingout the logical inconsistencies of others particularly when they’ve taken opposite positions in other contexts. It’s fun.


Someone took the opposite position in other contexts?  Who????

I am pretty sure everyone on this thread is opposed to kids using performance enhancing drugs in youth soccer.   Nor was anyone in favor of using fake birth certificates.  

You‘re saying “If thing 1 is ok, then thing 2 must be ok, too.”.   But no one said anything about thing 1 being ok.


----------



## Grace T. (Saturday at 6:10 PM)

dad4 said:


> Someone took the opposite position in other contexts?  Who????
> 
> I am pretty sure everyone on this thread is opposed to kids using performance enhancing drugs in youth soccer.   Nor was anyone in favor of using fake birth certificates.
> 
> You‘re saying “If thing 1 is ok, then thing 2 must be ok, too.”.   But no one said anything about thing 1 being ok.


In your case I tweaked your nose for being so ready to accept the establishment experts in one context, but rejecting them in this context (supposedly because they were captured by the lgbtq lobby). I just found that really funny.

you and I are actually pretty close in positions in this context. Our primary differences is that I think you have some biases that you don’t realize are bigoted or intend to be harsh (but are) and you think ecnl is some glorified elite institution worthily of being treated as top of the line when it doesn’t behave that way, even when it comes to thinks like overt cheating such as through ped


----------



## SurFutbol (Monday at 7:30 AM)

GLangevinito said:


> How are they not athletes? At what age do you start calling them athletes?
> 
> Of course the W's and the L's don't really matter. No one but you have advanced that straw man.
> 
> What matters is FAIRNESS. And competition. And opportunities. College scouts don't care about wins, but they can't evaluate a kid who is on the bench. While you are bending over backwards to try and accommodate the wishes of a trans girl to play a sport at the highest level with a biological advantage, you are pushing someone aside. That's not fair.


If a kid is on the bench to the extent that they cannot get scouted, they are not good enough to play college soccer.  If a player has been "pushed aside" because a trans player took her spot, she was really "pushed aside" by 10 biological girls.  You also cannot identify a single biological girl in history who has ever been denied the opportunity to play college soccer because of a trans player, because it has never happened.  You just keep making up fake hysterical hypotheticals because reality is beyond your grasp.  In reality, "fairness" also includes accepting that those who support trans participation have legitimate reasons, even if you believe they are outweighed by other legitimate factors.  Not your bs fake ones.


----------



## crush (Monday at 7:55 AM)

SurFutbol said:


> If a kid is on the bench to the extent that they cannot get scouted, they are not good enough to play college soccer.  If a player has been "pushed aside" because a trans player took her spot, she was really "pushed aside" by 10 biological girls.  You also cannot identify a single biological girl in history who has ever been denied the opportunity to play college soccer because of a trans player, because it has never happened.  You just keep making up fake hysterical hypotheticals because reality is beyond your grasp.  In reality, "fairness" also includes accepting that those who support trans participation have legitimate reasons, even if you believe they are outweighed by other legitimate factors.  Not your bs fake ones.


Surf Futbol, you have some good takes at times but this has to be one of your worst takes ever, moo  The fact that you and Grace like each other is amazing and it show two avatars can change and agree on some things. I have honest Q for you. Why do men like you want to take away any roster spot or a job away from a biological female and give that spot to a biological male, who has a mans body 100% and call that man a female and now eligible to take showers and play with the girls? This is insane with all due respect.


----------



## Grace T. (Monday at 9:40 AM)

crush said:


> Surf Futbol, you have some good takes at times but this has to be one of your worst takes ever, moo  The fact that you and Grace like each other is amazing and it show two avatars can change and agree on some things. I have honest Q for you. Why do men like you want to take away any roster spot or a job away from a biological female and give that spot to a biological male, who has a mans body 100% and call that man a female and now eligible to take showers and play with the girls? This is insane with all due respect.


You can't get away though from the fact you also have the reverse problem.  Because you have FTM who eventually are ruled ineligible from playing with the girls because they are taking testosterone, which is a performance enhancing drug.  Nevertheless, that FTM is a biological female.  So just falling back on biology doesn't get you there.

The issue of bathrooms and showers are completely different than whether they should be allowed to play and should be decided separately (I note you also have the reverse issue there as you will eventually wind up with a FTM with ah.....equipment.....and who might very well be interested in girls....in the girls locker room if you go purely on a biological test).


----------



## crush (Monday at 9:53 AM)

Grace T. said:


> You can't get away though from the fact you also have the reverse problem.  Because you have FTM who eventually are ruled ineligible from playing with the girls because they are taking testosterone, which is a performance enhancing drug.  Nevertheless, that FTM is a biological female.  So just falling back on biology doesn't get you there.
> 
> The issue of bathrooms and showers are completely different than whether they should be allowed to play and should be decided separately (I note you also have the reverse issue there as you will eventually wind up with a FTM with ah.....equipment.....and who might very well be interested in girls....in the girls locker room if you go purely on a biological test).


The fact were having a discussion about who can shower and play sports with the girls is insane. I'm sorry Grace T and this is with all due respect to your belief system and Surf Futbol beliefs ((aka The Long Game, Golden Gate, EOTL and probably a few others)) agrees with you and likes you now. I like that. When this is over we ALL need to go have a beer and have a face to face meet up. Vegas? I appreciate everyone and their positions they have on this subject and I love to debate the latest goings on in life. Right now, some men want to also be females so they can take roster spot or a actual job away from a real female. Playing dress up, wear a wig, wear cute dress and put on make up to feel like a women does not make that person a female. Because of this fact, I find the man playing dress up ineligible to shower and or play sports on the girls team against other female teams in the freaking leagues of any female league only. Thank God my dd aged out.


----------



## Grace T. (Monday at 10:02 AM)

crush said:


> The fact were having a discussion about who can shower and play sports with the girls is insane. I'm sorry Grace T and this is with all due respect to your belief system and Surf Futbol beliefs ((aka The Long Game, Golden Gate, EOTL and probably a few others)) agrees with you and likes you now. I like that. When this is over we ALL need to go have a beer and have a face to face meet up. Vegas? I appreciate everyone and their positions they have on this subject and I love to debate the latest goings on in life. Right now, some men want to also be females so they can take roster spot or a actual job away from a real female. Playing dress up, wear a wig, wear cute dress and put on make up to feel like a women does not make that person a female. Because of this fact, I find the man playing dress up ineligible to shower and or play sports on the girls team against other female teams in the freaking leagues of any female league only. Thank God my dd aged out.


Errr....1. Showers/locker rooms are a different issue.  Just because you let someone play ECNL ball doesn't necessarily follow they have to shower together. and 2. you conveniently ignore that you have the opposite issue because there are people (however rare) going the other way.  If you care about you dear daughter being in the same locker room as equipment you still need to address the issue with something other than the biological test.  I'm not saying there shouldn't be the rule (I wouldn't want my dear daughter to be forced to see equipment if she didn't want to), but yours doesn't get you there.  sorry but 3. this sounds a lot like the talk about gay service men and how they should have been banned from the military....men and women would have to have people from the same gender looking at them in the shower....there's a bunch of solutions to it (I personally think we should implement the Starship Troopers solution.....everyone gets to see everyone else's equipment   ).  What lots of county and school districts have done is implement privacy changing areas and showers.


----------



## espola (Monday at 10:03 AM)

Grace T. said:


> Errr…I expressly said I was willing to give dad4 the benefit of the doubt. I for one really believe we are all bigoted in some ways, no matter who we are, and have a tough time seeing or accepting that we are. It’s part of the human condition. No need to jump on each other or cancel each other. Also no reason not to call it out when it happens.
> 
> I have put forward a proposal. I think the restrictions should be on a sliding scale. Most restricted for pro national and Olympic teams. More restrictions for individual sports than team sports. Where we disagree is over whether ecnl is anything more than glorified kiddie soccer. My test is simple: if we care enough to sus out the blatant cheaters, then we can care enough to think about the trans kids. Otherwise all you are doing is singling them out, which has the neg consequences that some cis girls might also be subject to scrutiny (which again should happen only if we are also calling out the blatant cheaters). If you don’t care about the cheaters, and aren’t willing to bear the burden or inconvenience, your points about fairness are just garbage masking underlying bias.
> 
> my position is probably the most centrist here.My Schtick is I just thrive on callingout the logical inconsistencies of others particularly when they’ve taken opposite positions in other contexts. It’s fun.


If you are doing it for fun, some might call that trolling.


----------



## espola (Monday at 10:07 AM)

dad4 said:


> Someone took the opposite position in other contexts?  Who????
> 
> I am pretty sure everyone on this thread is opposed to kids using performance enhancing drugs in youth soccer.   Nor was anyone in favor of using fake birth certificates.
> 
> You‘re saying “If thing 1 is ok, then thing 2 must be ok, too.”.   But no one said anything about thing 1 being ok.


I'm not entirely opposed to it.  Adolescence is usually the appropriate time for people to correct or choose to improve their genetic and developmental lot in life through medically-supervised administration of steroids and growth hormones, and in many cases steroids that would cause a PED test failure are the best medication for some diseases.


----------



## crush (Monday at 10:08 AM)

Grace T. said:


> Errr....1. Showers/locker rooms are a different issue.  Just because you let someone play ECNL ball doesn't necessarily follow they have to shower together. and 2. you conveniently ignore that you have the opposite issue because there are people (however rare) going the other way.  If you care about you dear daughter being in the same locker room as equipment you still need to address the issue with something other than the biological test.  I'm not saying there shouldn't be the rule (I wouldn't want my dear daughter to be forced to see equipment if she didn't want to), but yours doesn't get you there.  sorry but 3. this sounds a lot like the talk about gay service men and how they should have been banned from the military....men and women would have to have people from the same gender looking at them in the shower....there's a bunch of solutions to it (I personally think we should implement the Starship Troopers solution.....everyone gets to see everyone else's equipment   ).  What lots of county and school districts have done is implement privacy changing areas and showers.


Err....we disagree.


----------



## Grace T. (Monday at 10:17 AM)

crush said:


> Err....we disagree.


You don't care if your daughter sees equipment....the equipment isn't what is motivating you...you only don't want them to be in the locker room with someone who is xy????

p.s. presumably you don't care either if your dear daughter is being ogled by a fellow student or gym teacher that is lesbian?


----------



## crush (Monday at 10:40 AM)

Grace T. said:


> You don't care if your daughter sees equipment....the equipment isn't what is motivating you...you only don't want them to be in the locker room with someone who is xy????
> 
> p.s. presumably you don't care either if your dear daughter is being ogled by a fellow student or gym teacher that is lesbian?


Wow, lot's of presumes on your part. The shower part can be dealt with so no need to debate that. BTW, I just read a story out of Ohio where a Transgender raped a girl in the girls bathroom on HS campus. Equipment used like that is pure evil! My compliant is the physical advantage and that's it. My best pal's son does Drag Queen shows Grace. Super cool guy and would never allow any kids to the shows. No library performance. His shows have drinks so you must be 21 to enter. If my son came to me at 16 and told me, "dad, I now identify as a women and my new name is Trixie. Also, I quit the boys team and now I want to play on the girls team and go beat other girls in soccer and I need your help." I would love Trixie no less then when I loved her as my boy. However, I would tell Trixie she needs to beat on the boys to get better and the girls will not make you a better futboler.


----------



## SurFutbol (Monday at 12:49 PM)

crush said:


> Surf Futbol, you have some good takes at times but this has to be one of your worst takes ever, moo  The fact that you and Grace like each other is amazing and it show two avatars can change and agree on some things. I have honest Q for you. Why do men like you want to take away any roster spot or a job away from a biological female and give that spot to a biological male, who has a mans body 100% and call that man a female and now eligible to take showers and play with the girls? This is insane with all due respect.


You cannot identify a single roster spot that has ever been taken away from a biological girl because of a trans girl.  It is remarkable that you're ignoring that even if a biological girl doesn't make "the 18", it is because there were 17 biological girls who were far more responsible for that happening than the trans girl.  There are also no caps on roster sizes at colleges, which probably explains why no one here can point to a single biological girl in history who was ever denied a college roster spot or scholarship because of a trans woman.  The truth of the matter is this is not a zero sum game. Biological girls who are good enough to play college soccer do.  The girls who are good enough to get scholarships also do.  Even to the extent there has ever been any trans collegiate soccer players, they have been so rare, so unimpactful, that you can't even identify one let alone find one who deprived someone else of a roster spot.  Rather than recognize that you're creating a fake problem, you and your friends go on witch hunts trying to out children you suspect of being trans, like the biological girl who got raked over the coals and defamed earlier at this site. Despicable.

Also, no one has said anything about having to shower with anyone else, and there are some obvious and simple solutions to that problem that you intentionally ignore because you don't have any good arguments to make.


----------



## crush (Monday at 1:44 PM)

SurFutbol said:


> You cannot identify a single roster spot that has ever been taken away from a biological girl because of a trans girl.  It is remarkable that you're ignoring that even if a biological girl doesn't make "the 18", it is because there were 17 biological girls who were far more responsible for that happening than the trans girl.  There are also no caps on roster sizes at colleges, which probably explains why no one here can point to a single biological girl in history who was ever denied a college roster spot or scholarship because of a trans woman.  The truth of the matter is this is not a zero sum game. Biological girls who are good enough to play college soccer do.  The girls who are good enough to get scholarships also do.  Even to the extent there has ever been any trans collegiate soccer players, they have been so rare, so unimpactful, that you can't even identify one let alone find one who deprived someone else of a roster spot.  Rather than recognize that you're creating a fake problem, you and your friends go on witch hunts trying to out children you suspect of being trans, like the biological girl who got raked over the coals and defamed earlier at this site. Despicable.
> 
> Also, no one has said anything about having to shower with anyone else, and there are some obvious and simple solutions to that problem that you intentionally ignore because you don't have any good arguments to make.


I don't want men saying their now women to play sports with girls. Simple is simple. We agree to disagree. I love all people. I told you about my pal Mike who dressed up as a women at times and went to drag shows. Mike feels like a women and prefers dressing up as a women but even he just told me he agrees with me. I like that you and Grace like each other on this topic. Ancient Mother or Mother Nature is coming to take her rightful place in the Divine. Men have made a complete mess of this planet and now they want to take away female all together. This is straight up whack man. I love all my frens in the LBGT+ Community. However, if your born a man, then you can only play against the men. If your born a female and you want to challenge the men, then it's ok. It's about the physical and not the equipment. I could care a less if you want to be a women play dress up part time. It's your choice Surf Futbol and just be you man.


----------



## AKD (Monday at 10:03 PM)

Andrew Falconer on Instagram
					

Andrew Falconer shared a post on Instagram. Follow their account to see 54 posts.




					www.instagram.com


----------



## crush (Today at 5:05 AM)

Females Only. Sorry fellas, if you want to play with and against the girls, you need to find a co-ed league on Sundays or during the week doing intermurals. 









						I helped sue to protect women's sports in West Virginia, and we won
					

I helped sue to protect women's sports in West Virginia, and we won because federal court upheld the Save Women’s Sports Act and using Title IX as intended.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## crush (Today at 5:34 AM)

Woof woof woof!!!


----------



## dad4 (Today at 7:31 AM)

SurFutbol said:


> You cannot identify a single roster spot that has ever been taken away from a biological girl because of a trans girl.  It is remarkable that you're ignoring that even if a biological girl doesn't make "the 18", it is because there were 17 biological girls who were far more responsible for that happening than the trans girl.  There are also no caps on roster sizes at colleges, which probably explains why no one here can point to a single biological girl in history who was ever denied a college roster spot or scholarship because of a trans woman.  The truth of the matter is this is not a zero sum game. Biological girls who are good enough to play college soccer do.  The girls who are good enough to get scholarships also do.  Even to the extent there has ever been any trans collegiate soccer players, they have been so rare, so unimpactful, that you can't even identify one let alone find one who deprived someone else of a roster spot.  Rather than recognize that you're creating a fake problem, you and your friends go on witch hunts trying to out children you suspect of being trans, like the biological girl who got raked over the coals and defamed earlier at this site. Despicable.
> 
> Also, no one has said anything about having to shower with anyone else, and there are some obvious and simple solutions to that problem that you intentionally ignore because you don't have any good arguments to make.


Asking people to name a girl who lost a slot to a mtf trans athlete is equivalent to asking people to name the youth athletes in question.  Don‘t ask for that.  Let the kids have their privacy.


----------



## SurFutbol (Today at 8:02 AM)

dad4 said:


> Asking people to name a girl who lost a slot to a mtf trans athlete is equivalent to asking people to name the youth athletes in question.  Don‘t ask for that.  Let the kids have their privacy.


Uh, I did not ask anyone to identify anyone.  I am just saying they can't.  Because they don't know of any.  

This is just more transphobic bs.


----------



## SurFutbol (Today at 8:24 AM)

crush said:


> Woof woof woof!!!
> 
> View attachment 15379


So you're mocking gay and trans people by equating their lifestyle decisions to f**king animals?  Honestly, you're a real POS.  I guess that should come as no surprise, though, for a guy who tried to leverage his 13 year old daughter's ability to play soccer as a source of family income because he's too much of a loser to get a job and support the family himself.


----------



## dad4 (Today at 8:32 AM)

SurFutbol said:


> Uh, I did not ask anyone to identify anyone.  I am just saying they can't.  Because they don't know of any.
> 
> This is just more transphobic bs.


Let’s try out your argument in other contexts.

No one ever lost a roster slot to a trans athlete, because they also were worse than the non-trans athletes.

No one ever lost a roster slot to a doping athlete, because they also were worse than the non-doping
athletes.

No one ever lost a roster slot to an athlete who paid a bribe, because they also were worse than the non-bribing
athletes.

No one ever lost a roster slot to an athlete whose mom slept with the coach, because they also were worse than the athletes whose mom didn’t sleep with the coach.

It’s the same argument.  Now do you see how stupid it is?


----------



## espola (Today at 8:41 AM)

Another log on the fire --

Zambia Star to Play in World Cup After Passing Gender Eligibility Test - SportsBrief.com


----------



## Grace T. (36 minutes ago)

dad4 said:


> Let’s try out your argument in other contexts.
> 
> No one ever lost a roster slot to a trans athlete, because they also were worse than the non-trans athletes.
> 
> ...


I gotta say this is a hella good retort on your part. It’s a body slam…fun to see. But you sorta have in the process hoisted yourself by your own petard on the ecnl issue…if you don’t care about these other issues you shouldn’t care about the trans kid. You just implied it yourself.


crush said:


> Females Only. Sorry fellas, if you want to play with and against the girls, you need to find a co-ed league on Sundays or during the week doing intermurals.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it’s interesting. I really do think we are heading to a place where the issue is going to be decided red state v blue state.  Guess some of you guys should take my prior advice and think about heading out 


I do think the arguments raised in the case are somewhat dangerous and have a possibility of boomeranging. They seem to rely on the overt argument that women and women’s sport is lesser and therefore needs to be protected. It therefore undermines the argument for example for equal pay for the Uswnt, womens pro sports and even the foundations for title ix (as opposed to a participatory argument which would cut in the trans kids favor). They make the mistaken assumption that protection somehow means equal (it doesn’t…it in fact implies the opposite). While we all (hopefully) know men and women in fact are different, it undermines one of the major tenets of pre post modernist feminism of the last 60 years


----------



## SurFutbol (32 minutes ago)

dad4 said:


> Let’s try out your argument in other contexts.
> 
> No one ever lost a roster slot to a trans athlete, because they also were worse than the non-trans athletes.
> 
> ...


You really are clueless. If a kid loses their 18th spot on the roster to a trans/doping/bribery paying/mommy coach f**king player, it still does not change that it has no impact on whether they will play in college, let alone get a scholarship.  They're still not very good regardless of the one person you think "unfairly" displaced them, and they are not going to get scholarship money or a college offer regardless.

I do concede that the doper potentially impacts offers and scholarship money for someone else, but only for a legitimate baller.  That is not the case for the player whose mommy bribes or f**ks the coach because the kids who are better will still start and will still prove themselves better.  But even the doping issue is a very different situation than with a trans player, because the doper is trying to dupe the college coach whereas the college coach will always know if a player is trans before signing day.  Never in history has a D1 program offered a trans soccer player a scholarship, and it will never happen because no one is going to throw away their precious little scholarship money on someone who will need to sit out for hormone suppression, and for whom it will completely speculative what kind of player they will be, or whether they'll even care about soccer, when they get through it.  Also, never in history has a D1 program ever done anything other than potentially add a roster spot for a trans player.

But let's say you're right, which you aren't.  So what?  There are legitimate reasons to allow trans participation like inclusivity and diversity and the fact that kiddie soccer just isn't that important compared to civil rights - that you continue to avoid talking about and which do not apply to the doping/bribery paying/mommy f**king player.  In fact, it is offensive to try to lump trans girls into a class of people who are cheaters.  As you know, the rules are very clear in club soccer about trans participation at the youth level. They are not cheaters, nor are they doing anything dishonest like the others. This is just another ridiculous set of hypotheticals to distract from the reality that trans girls have never once in history denied a single cis girl of either a scholarship or roster spot on a college team.  Never once in history has a trans girl ever denied a roster spot to an NWSL team.  Never once in history has a trans girl been the reason the 19th best player on a club team wasn't able to play in college.  No one here can identify a single person who was ever denied a college opportunity because of a trans player because it has never happened. You're just making shit up.


----------



## espola (21 minutes ago)

Grace T. said:


> I gotta say this is a hella good retort on your part. It’s a body slam…fun to see. But you sorta have in the process hoisted yourself by your own petard on the ecnl issue…if you don’t care about these other issues you shouldn’t care about the trans kid. You just implied it yourself.
> 
> it’s interesting. I really do think we are heading to a place where the issue is going to be decided red state v blue state.  Guess some of you guys should take my prior advice and think about heading out
> 
> ...


Nonsense.


----------



## crush (17 minutes ago)

SurFutbol said:


> So you're mocking gay and trans people by equating their lifestyle decisions to f**king animals?  Honestly, you're a real POS.  I guess that should come as no surprise, though, for a guy who tried to leverage his 13 year old daughter's ability to play soccer as a source of family income because he's too much of a loser to get a job and support the family himself.


Sorry to trigger you tiger. Look, the point of the post was this lady is now Transcannine. That's her choice by she can't enter herself into The World Dog show.


----------



## crush (13 minutes ago)

Grace T. said:


> I gotta say this is a hella good retort on your part. It’s a body slam…fun to see. But you sorta have in the process hoisted yourself by your own petard on the ecnl issue…if you don’t care about these other issues you shouldn’t care about the trans kid. You just implied it yourself.
> 
> it’s interesting. I really do think we are heading to a place where the issue is going to be decided red state v blue state.  Guess some of you guys should take my prior advice and think about heading out
> 
> ...


Women need protections from the men who want their spot and they will do whatever the hell they need to get that spot, even saying their a woman now. This is insane


----------



## Grace T. (2 minutes ago)

crush said:


> Women need protections from the men who want their spot and they will do whatever the hell they need to get that spot, even saying their a woman now. This is insane


When it comes to the participation argument, you gotta bear in mind that there are also people (FTM) moving the other way.  From a macro overall perspective, the numbers should near balance out.  You are still dealing with the same overall numbers in each pool.  The question is when you assign each to the other, and how you divide up scare resources within the pool such as scholarship money.  It puts folks in the unseemly place of having to argue "don't touch my scholarship money" or "let's protect ECNL ball but o.k. to sacrifice the F1 ballers", which is why they rather argue about fairness or safety, but as has been shown, neither gets you there 100%.


----------



## SurFutbol (1 minute ago)

espola said:


> Nonsense.





crush said:


> Sorry to trigger you tiger. Look, the point of the post was this lady is now Transcannine. That's her choice by she can't enter herself into The World Dog show.
> View attachment 15385


Your response to being called out for posting an offensive comparison between trans people and people who have sex with animals is to call me triggered?  The only one of us who has been triggered is the one who has been freaking out about rules allowing trans participation in sports, most of which have been in place for over a decade.  I do understand how people like you claim that anyone who disagrees with you is "triggered", despite the fact that you're the one who is so bent out of shape about existing rules.  That is because you have nothing legitimate to say.


----------

