Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.

[Soccer Dad & Ref]

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

Piece of sh*t. That is how Nazis got their start. F'ing fascist

 

[dad4]

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.

 

[SurFutbol]

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 what you meant to say is that a trans girl without hormone reduction has all the biological advantages of being a boy, but none of the biological disadvantages of being a girl. You completely ignore, however, that trans girls have all the other disadvantages of being trans.

No matter how much all of you try to completely ignore the legitimate interests of trans children, they exist and are the reason all of you keep whining like babies that leagues like CIF and ECNL allow them to participate. They don't give two f**ks about your whiny concerns that your little princess might lose a soccer game because maybe some transgender child has slightly higher lung capacity and "muscle nuclei" than if she had been born a biological female (but still has less of both than many of her teammates), because they realize this is inconsequential to more important societal considerations.

Keep on whining. No trans child is going to rape your daughter in the bathroom. She'll never see a trans girls' pee pee in a group shower. She'll never get hurt because of trans' girl's "physical advantages." Given that neither you nor anyone else has admitted that your daughter's can't compete athletically against trans girls, it also seems pretty clear that no trans girl will ever have a meaningful impact on the result of a game in which she plays. But she might actually learn some valuable lessons in inclusivity and, unlike her transphobic daddy, that trans children aren't scary and children's games are just children's games no matter how much her dad's self-esteem depends on her winning trophies. Allowing trans participation is likely to cause children like your daughter to learn some perspective in life. Is this what you're really afraid of? That she won't hate trans people like you? That she will put kiddie sports in a more appropriate context in society? Are you really just terrified that this will be what causes her to call b.s. on a transphobic god that you hold dear?

 

[SurFutbol]

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.

Wow, that is some serious mental gymnastics to rationalize the irrational. I think you forgot the part about how winning and lo

View attachment 15540

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.

 

[Grace T.]

r

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.
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.

 

[Grace T.]

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.

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.

 

[dad4]

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.

 

[Grace T.]

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.

I've outlined above step by step and in what ways girls sports are inferior to boys sports. They are inferior in a very limited way. They are not inferior in a participatory way giving every athlete a chance to compete. And again, I'm not the one here who has levelled the criticism of ECNL ball....these forums are full of them.

The problem with your stance, and where your outright bigotry lies, is that it's been shown to you scientifically why MTFs cannot compete with cis males. Testosterone is a performance enhancing drug and if you remove some of it, performance will be compromised. So the participation of cis Fs is important to you, but the trans (whether moving from FTM or MTF) under any solution proposed to you, however imperfect, is always they just lose. You don't give a f. And that's the difference between us: I acknowledge it's a balancing act and give a f about all of them (including the cis girl like the Utah girl that is called out and accused of being trans, which you are prepared to sacrifice in the name of your crusade).

As for boys soccer, I've been very clear as well in my criticism of club ball that outside the Academy systems (in both Europe and the US), boys youth soccer is also just kiddie ball. I've gone so far as to say that you cannot consider all MLS Next to be the same tier: the MLS academies are a very different kettle of fish. And my criticism of PED has been expressly levelled on the boys end as well, where the problem is much more vast.

It is also the height of irony that you a straight male are calling me an LGBTQ female "misogyny". From a feminist perspective, I'd actually argue your desire to keep women isolated and protected, and to think of them as frail creatures that need to be protected, is actually not only misogyny but coming from a straight male outright patriarchal.

You have said quite a few things that are over the line here. I'm frankly shocked considering you are an educator in California and that you've said your kids have friends that identify as trans. Or did COVID eventually drive you out of the profession? Because if not, given the soft bigotry behind your views, I'm surprised in this day and age you can do it, at least in a blue state like California.

 

[dad4]

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.

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.

 

[SurFutbol]

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.

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.

 

[Grace T.]

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.

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.

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

 

[Grace T.]

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.

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.

In the end it's all about money, as most human conflicts are (besides the prejudices and tribalism we all have and foster). I still think it's funny everyone was harping about "oh have them compete by themselves" until it was pointed out to them that it likely means scholarships will have to be taken away from others to fund these new levels of competition.

And the cherry on top of the Sunday is the mansplaining about misogyny.

 

[dad4]

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".

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.

 

[dad4]

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

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.

 

[Grace T.]

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.

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.

p.s. it's also why I said two bell curves. Your model is flawed in the assumption of a subgroup instead of a unique group with its own distribution.

 

[SurFutbol]

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.

Does it just make you so angry that Webster's Dictionary defines girl as "a person whose gender identity is female"? Are you sad that you don't get to define the word "fair" however you want?

No, you're just referring to chromosomes to avoid exposing using pronouns that would expose your incredible hostility toward trans children, but also to give the illusion that your blathering is based in science when the reality is that kiddie sports participation rules are (and should be) based on a combination of factors that include science but also include not being a shitbag. So can your daughter compete against trans girls, or is she terrible at soccer and should consider something more in conformity with the traditional gender roles that you expect?

 

[dk_b]

Just reading comments from the women who competed against Lia Thomas and came in 2d, 3d and 4th in the 500 yard race won by Thomas. They were commenting how the photo of the 3 of them - apparently "protesting" Thomas - was taken out of context and that they supported her inclusion in the competition. Then I read this article which presents an analysis of Thomas as a swimmer - pre- and post-transition. It also makes a great point that none of us probably realizes who the actual superstar of that NCAA championship was and just how many records were set (none by Thomas; Thomas was no where close to Ledecky's existing record in the 500 yard free, fwiw, and also failed to make the finals in several events). The article is here for those who wish to read it: Lia Thomas: Trans swimmer didn’t have unfair advantage, data shows | The Independent

I tend to the side of inclusion. As I noted, I have 3 daughters who compete in sports (one at a very high level, 2 who hope to get there). I don't see this ever being a big problem because, as I have stated, I don't see a rush of adolescent or post-adolescent boys/young men "acting trans" in order to compete and I don't see the idea of a "super team" of trans girls/trans women existing anywhere other than in the efforts to create a bogeyman. As society tends toward more acceptance, I still don't see the numbers increasing all that much - after all, as the stigma around being out of the closet has reduced over the decades, the percentage of out gay people has remained pretty constant. Being outwardly trans and able to compete - basically being able to live a full life like my daughters are able to do - does not threaten me and I don't believe it threatens them. They have played against bigger, stronger, players and have been the bigger, stronger, players (less so with my 2 younger daughters). And they will continue to do so. If they compete against a trans player or lose their spots to trans players, that's how it goes because, to me (and to them), they'd be losing their spots to another girl/woman who could perform better.

It is funny/interesting to me that this thread is continuing as everyone's position is well-established, the memes continue (and are consistently offensive or funny, depending on where one sits - they certainly are not opinion-changing), and the insults don't really change. I consider myself the fool b/c I keep reading messages as if I'm going to see something new (instead of agreeing with the ones posted by X while disagreeing with the ones posted by Y, each and every time).

 

[SurFutbol]

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.

In the end it's all about money, as most human conflicts are (besides the prejudices and tribalism we all have and foster). I still think it's funny everyone was harping about "oh have them compete by themselves" until it was pointed out to them that it likely means scholarships will have to be taken away from others to fund these new levels of competition.

And the cherry on top of the Sunday is the mansplaining about misogyny.

"Mansplaining" is exactly right. If anything, his proclamations that biological girls can't compete against a team with one trans girl (other than every single daughter of every single transphobe here apparently) and that all biological females are uniformly opposed to doing so, are the misogynistic ones. His inaccurate assumption that girls can't possibly look at trans participation as an opportunity to support trans children is misogynistic. His assumption that girls won't look at the opportunity to train with or play against an "athletically superior" trans girl as a development opportunity and not self-pity that they might not win a trophy or might lose a few minutes of playing time is the misogynistic one. This whole bs paternalistic notion that they need to protect girls even when there is no legitimate safety risk is the misognynistic one. Their assumption that girls are so emotionally fragile that their self-esteem will be ruined forever if they lose a game or a trophy to a team that has a trans player is the misogynistic one.

 

[SurFutbol]

Just reading comments from the women who competed against Lia Thomas and came in 2d, 3d and 4th in the 500 yard race won by Thomas. They were commenting how the photo of the 3 of them - apparently "protesting" Thomas - was taken out of context and that they supported her inclusion in the competition. Then I read this article which presents an analysis of Thomas as a swimmer - pre- and post-transition. It also makes a great point that none of us probably realizes who the actual superstar of that NCAA championship was and just how many records were set (none by Thomas; Thomas was no where close to Ledecky's existing record in the 500 yard free, fwiw, and also failed to make the finals in several events). The article is here for those who wish to read it: Lia Thomas: Trans swimmer didn’t have unfair advantage, data shows | The Independent

I tend to the side of inclusion. As I noted, I have 3 daughters who compete in sports (one at a very high level, 2 who hope to get there). I don't see this ever being a big problem because, as I have stated, I don't see a rush of adolescent or post-adolescent boys/young men "acting trans" in order to compete and I don't see the idea of a "super team" of trans girls/trans women existing anywhere other than in the efforts to create a bogeyman. As society tends toward more acceptance, I still don't see the numbers increasing all that much - after all, as the stigma around being out of the closet has reduced over the decades, the percentage of out gay people has remained pretty constant. Being outwardly trans and able to compete - basically being able to live a full life like my daughters are able to do - does not threaten me and I don't believe it threatens them. They have played against bigger, stronger, players and have been the bigger, stronger, players (less so with my 2 younger daughters). And they will continue to do so. If they compete against a trans player or lose their spots to trans players, that's how it goes because, to me (and to them), they'd be losing their spots to another girl/woman who could perform better.

It is funny/interesting to me that this thread is continuing as everyone's position is well-established, the memes continue (and are consistently offensive or funny, depending on where one sits - they certainly are not opinion-changing), and the insults don't really change. I consider myself the fool b/c I keep reading messages as if I'm going to see something new (instead of agreeing with the ones posted by X while disagreeing with the ones posted by Y, each and every time).

The biggest tragedy of the Lia Thomas situation, IMO, is that transphobes keep using it as their main excuse to treat 13 year old girls like shit. At least Ms. Thomas is an adult at an Ivy League school with a bright future, and therefore better positioned to deal with the abuse that is dumped on her. She was also surely aware what was coming when she made the decision to participate. At least the NCAA finals have some relative importance, unlike any U14 soccer game ever played.

 

[Soccer Dad & Ref]

Just reading comments from the women who competed against Lia Thomas and came in 2d, 3d and 4th in the 500 yard race won by Thomas. They were commenting how the photo of the 3 of them - apparently "protesting" Thomas - was taken out of context and that they supported her inclusion in the competition. Then I read this article which presents an analysis of Thomas as a swimmer - pre- and post-transition. It also makes a great point that none of us probably realizes who the actual superstar of that NCAA championship was and just how many records were set (none by Thomas; Thomas was no where close to Ledecky's existing record in the 500 yard free, fwiw, and also failed to make the finals in several events). The article is here for those who wish to read it: Lia Thomas: Trans swimmer didn’t have unfair advantage, data shows | The Independent

I tend to the side of inclusion. As I noted, I have 3 daughters who compete in sports (one at a very high level, 2 who hope to get there). I don't see this ever being a big problem because, as I have stated, I don't see a rush of adolescent or post-adolescent boys/young men "acting trans" in order to compete and I don't see the idea of a "super team" of trans girls/trans women existing anywhere other than in the efforts to create a bogeyman. As society tends toward more acceptance, I still don't see the numbers increasing all that much - after all, as the stigma around being out of the closet has reduced over the decades, the percentage of out gay people has remained pretty constant. Being outwardly trans and able to compete - basically being able to live a full life like my daughters are able to do - does not threaten me and I don't believe it threatens them. They have played against bigger, stronger, players and have been the bigger, stronger, players (less so with my 2 younger daughters). And they will continue to do so. If they compete against a trans player or lose their spots to trans players, that's how it goes because, to me (and to them), they'd be losing their spots to another girl/woman who could perform better.

It is funny/interesting to me that this thread is continuing as everyone's position is well-established, the memes continue (and are consistently offensive or funny, depending on where one sits - they certainly are not opinion-changing), and the insults don't really change. I consider myself the fool b/c I keep reading messages as if I'm going to see something new (instead of agreeing with the ones posted by X while disagreeing with the ones posted by Y, each and every time).

Very well put, thanks for this thoughtful insight.

Shame on me too for coming here and hoping something new comes out, or that the transphobes become enlightened. Neither has happened, but here I am, still hoping.