I just don’t see entering XX events as a legitimate interest of any XY athlete.If you are going to refuse to consider the legitimate the interests of trans girls, …
That's why Lia "The Transgender Swimmer" that won 1st place in all female swim race is of grave concern for so many. And it's not because the 2nd place swimmer sucked and wasn't really good enough to win Gold at the Swim Meet up. This is 100% concern for 90% of us, regardless if you support Grampa or Nikki Haley. Have you heard about Felix the futbol player who was not playing much with the boys and is now Felicia? Just wait dad, this is only starting. Mike is now Michele, Robert is now Bobbi, Bret is now Britney and Bruce is Caitlyn. I like how Bruce decided to spell Caitlyn.If anything, the better question is why transgirls don’t win boys events more often. There’s no real reason they shouldn’t.
You are a literal idiot- there is an entire business being driven by people who are creating the idea that a trans female can become a bio female. Are you part of that idiot train? What a disgusting thing for you to say - you certainly hate women.
Let's here from what the Orange Man has to say on this topic. If The Lion Mr. Trump pulls off the upset in 2024, this is how he will handle things. Oh boy and oh joy, here we go again!! Buckle up buttle cups, it's about to get real gnarly!
President Trump’s Plan to Protect Children from Left-Wing Gender Insanity
President Trump today announced his plan to stop the chemical, physical, and emotional mutilation of our youth.rumble.com
I just don’t see entering XX events as a legitimate interest of any XY athlete.
A transgirl without hormone reduction has all the advantages of being a boy, and none of the disadvantages of being a girl. Even with hormone reduction, they retain the muscle nuclei, lung capacity, and bone structure of a boy.
I do believe that transgirls have a legitimate interest in entering boys events, and being allowed to play with their XY peers.
If anything, the better question is why transgirls don’t win boys events more often. There’s no real reason they shouldn’t.
I think we got here through a combination of misogyny and anti-gay bias.
The macho types in charge of sports are likely to see girls sports as unimportant, but also to see gay athletes as inherently weaker.
From that perspective, putting a XY trans athlete in the women’s division makes sense. But it only makes sense if you see the trans XY athlete as inherently inferior to a cis XY athlete, and you also see the girls’ league as inherently inferior to the boys’ league.
a. What do you mean by "inferior". If in development, at least as far as youth soccer is concerned, girl's leagues are inferior to the boy's league because of the way we structured it (not inherently). The boys have a pro academy system from which (in conjunction with Europe) the national teams are drawn. The girls do not. That's why these forums are always filled with people complaining about how the ECNL competition is diluted and such and such teams don't deserve to be in ECNL. Don't come crying to me about that: our fellow forum posters are the ones always complaining.I think we got here through a combination of misogyny and anti-gay bias.
The macho types in charge of sports are likely to see girls sports as unimportant, but also to see gay athletes as inherently weaker.
From that perspective, putting a XY trans athlete in the women’s division makes sense. But it only makes sense if you see the trans XY athlete as inherently inferior to a cis XY athlete, and you also see the girls’ league as inherently inferior to the boys’ league.
This is unscientific nonsense Mr. The Science. "they retain the muscle nuclei, lung capacity, and bone structure of a boy". They don't. There is some reduction in their overall performance, and in part it depends when they started. It's not 100% which is where the science and the debate really is: when, if ever, does it balance out to the xx. But we also know that there's a reduction vis-a-vis the cis xy. "There's no real reason they shouldn't". Yes, there is....it depends on the amount of testosterone reduction there is. The problem from a scientific point of view is that their bell curve is neither equivalent to the cis xx female or the cis xy male.I just don’t see entering XX events as a legitimate interest of any XY athlete.
A transgirl without hormone reduction has all the advantages of being a boy, and none of the disadvantages of being a girl. Even with hormone reduction, they retain the muscle nuclei, lung capacity, and bone structure of a boy.
I do believe that transgirls have a legitimate interest in entering boys events, and being allowed to play with their XY peers.
If anything, the better question is why transgirls don’t win boys events more often. There’s no real reason they shouldn’t.
Your posts here are a great example of someone saying "girls sports are not important".Wow, that is some serious mental gymnastics to rationalize the irrational. I think you forgot the part about how winning and lo
Keep these coming. This is exactly why it is important to allow trans girls to play with other girls. The next generation needs to learn that trans people are not dangerous and deserve dignity and respect, and that it is really their unemployed, uneducated transphobic shitbag daddies who deserve the derision of their children.
Your posts here are a great example of someone saying "girls sports are not important".
How many times have you insulted someone else's sport with a diminutive like "kiddie"? A few hundred by now? Every single time, you were insulting girls sports. You never once made the claim about boys sports.
So, yeah. Misogyny.
If you see it as two bell curves, one shifted, that's good.This is unscientific nonsense Mr. The Science. "they retain the muscle nuclei, lung capacity, and bone structure of a boy". They don't. There is some reduction in their overall performance, and in part it depends when they started. It's not 100% which is where the science and the debate really is: when, if ever, does it balance out to the xx. But we also know that there's a reduction vis-a-vis the cis xy. "There's no real reason they shouldn't". Yes, there is....it depends on the amount of testosterone reduction there is. The problem from a scientific point of view is that their bell curve is neither equivalent to the cis xx female or the cis xy male.
r
a. What do you mean by "inferior". If in development, at least as far as youth soccer is concerned, girl's leagues are inferior to the boy's league because of the way we structured it (not inherently). The boys have a pro academy system from which (in conjunction with Europe) the national teams are drawn. The girls do not. That's why these forums are always filled with people complaining about how the ECNL competition is diluted and such and such teams don't deserve to be in ECNL. Don't come crying to me about that: our fellow forum posters are the ones always complaining.
b. If by "inferior" you mean lower performing, well that's an inherent part of your argument why women's leagues need to protected. They aren't as good as the men. The Quakes u15 team recently beat the chinese national women's adult team. Women's soccer is just lesser performing than the US, which explains attendance and revenues figures for women's sports. So why have separate leagues if women are lesser in sports? Because women deserve to participate in sports as well and would otherwise be pushed out by the men.
c. "But it only makes sense if you see the trans xy athlete as inherently inferior to the cis xy athlete". They'll have a range of distribution just like any one else, so the odds are that the trans athlete (who because of body image likely doesn't view themselves as macho and hasn't put time into weight lifting) will have a higher bell curve than the xx athletes but any trans athlete might fall inferior to the top performing xx athletes.
d. Conversely, the issue with trans xy v cis xy isn't just that the trans xy athlete isn't likely in the weight room trying to bulk up (because they don't want people like you to make fun of their appearance, as you have suggested on these boards that they are "obvious"). But, if you put the trans xy on testosterone blockers and female hormones, at that point they are biologically inferior to the cis xy athlete and their bell curve is shifted. In the very same way you argue that a trans xy athlete is not balanced to an xx athlete, a trans athlete either chemically or surgically altered is not balanced to an xy athlete. So there is nothing "fair" about leaving them to compete with a cis xy athlete. You are left with three choices: a. put them somewhere where someone is disadvantaged, b. separate competition, or c. try to scientifically create a balance (and the jury is still out on whether c. is achievable). The bell curve of the xy athlete on an alteration is inherently inferior to that of a cis male, the same way an xx athlete is, but perhaps not in degree
e. equating gay people with trans people is the absolute height of anti-gay bigotry. I'm personally offended.
Your hypocrisy on top of everything else is you've built a mathematical model to support your preferred outcome: ECNL, which doesn't drug test, is somehow this magical high performing tier (despite the incessant criticism on this forum of the level of competition), so you are, despite your belief that men have an inherent advantage over women due to testosterone, prepared to sacrifice ECRL, GA, NPL and flight 1 since they aren't worthy. Your model, though, betrays you: it assumes the top performers are sorted into ECNL based on merit instead of some other factor (we all have complained on this forum that it's not a perfect meritocracy), that all the boys who are shifting are on the higher end of their distribution (while they can be, they aren't necessarily, and as the Chicago piece I posted early shows, in their experience, they overwhelmingly aren't or by now we would have seen a whole bunch more ct incidents every time something like this happens), and that PEDS, even if rare, would by necessity have the most impact on those top of the line performers.If you see it as two bell curves, one shifted, that's good.
If you have a shifted bell curve, almost all of your high end outliers will be from the right shifted subgroup.
Why? The bell curve's tail gets very skinny very fast. 5 standard deviations is one in a million. 3 standard deviations is one in 300.
So, a 2sd right shifted subgroup of 1000 will produce three times as many high outliers as an unshifted population of one million. (75% of the total. Important.)
For the center of the bell curve, it's different. 1/3 of the population is above +1sd. 2/3 are above -1sd.
So, a right shift of 2sd gets you 1/3 of the main population and 2/3 of the subpopulation. (0.2% of the total. Not important.)
This is why it is an issue for YNT, but it isn't an issue for rec. YNT collects from +5sd. Rec is more like +1sd.
His argument, though, in particular is especially funny. Because he's arguing all these other things are fine and well for flight 1, but ECNL is somehow serious soccer where the competition actually matters, despite the incessant harping (not necessarily by him) on these forums by people that so and so doesn't deserve to be in ECNL and ECNL has so watered down the competition. Having seen how the academy boys train, trust me, it ain't nothing like the academy ball....night and day....not even close.His use of XX and XY terminology is just a distraction to avoid the fact that leagues and organizations like CIF and ECNL understand there is far more to children's sports than making sure that his daughter wins a trophy. These transphobes have spent years proclaiming that youth sports isn't about winning and losing, but about "development" and, more importantly, teaching our children valuable life lessons and skills like leadership, teamwork, sportsmanship (aka not treating other people like shit), diversity and inclusion of others, etc. But the second a trans player shows up on another team who might be "athletically superior" to some of the kids on the team, it's no longer about development. Now it's all about winning and losing and completely "unfair" that their daughter might be challenged by a trans girl although none of them even seem to believe that their own daughters aren't good enough to compete against. Suddenly all their proclamations about how youth sports is all about turning kids into good and productive members of society is instantly exposed as bs the second they learn that "good and productive member of society" includes not treating trans children poorly. Suddenly, the "sanctity" of children's sports is now so important that we must exclude every single "non-sports" reason that youth sports exist and are important.
Don't be silly. I use XY and XX because we have been unable to agree on definitions for "boy" and "girl".His use of XX and XY terminology is just a distraction to avoid the fact that leagues and organizations like CIF and ECNL understand there is far more to children's sports than making sure that his daughter wins a trophy. These transphobes have spent years proclaiming that youth sports isn't about winning and losing, but about "development" and, more importantly, teaching our children valuable life lessons and skills like leadership, teamwork, sportsmanship (aka not treating other people like shit), diversity and inclusion of others, etc. But the second a trans player shows up on another team who might be "athletically superior" to some of the kids on the team, it's no longer about development. Now it's all about winning and losing and completely "unfair" that their daughter might be challenged by a trans girl although none of them even seem to believe that their own daughters aren't good enough to compete against. Suddenly all their proclamations about how youth sports is all about turning kids into good and productive members of society is instantly exposed as bs the second they learn that "good and productive member of society" includes not treating trans children poorly. Suddenly, the "sanctity" of children's sports is now so important that we must exclude every single "non-sports" reason that youth sports exist and are important.
So don't bring up bell curves if you can't wrap your head around what they mean.This seems like a familiar dance? Where have I seen the math magic before? Let me think? It's escaping me right now, but the tune sounds familiar
As always, the problem with your model is the assumptions you make it constructing the model, not in the execution of it. Hence, the familiar dance. Ahh the good old days.....I'll remind you it's why no one hires the mathematicians to make those assumptions and you have the normies checking your work.So don't bring up bell curves if you can't wrap your head around what they mean.
None of what I just said was unique to this topic. If you take any non-trivial subgroup and shift it two standard deviations to the right, the top end of the distribution will come from the subgroup. It's a standard question in a class you never took.
Don't be silly. I use XY and XX because we have been unable to agree on definitions for "boy" and "girl".
If the left will stop abusing the definitions of these terms, we can go back to talking normally. Until then, XY and XX are the best available terms for the concept.