Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.

The proper way to look at this btw is not as a choice. The discussion has already established there is a biological basis for gender dysmorphia. The proper question is what accommodations, if any, can be fairly extended, given neither direction can compete with cis males. It’s the same question as you would analyze someone with an adhd or autism issue. It’s why we don’t for example require all bathrooms to have wheelchair access: there’s a balancing act that needs to be done.
 
I never said it was a choice. I think people are who they are, feel how they feel, and everyone should be treated with respect and kindness. People are free to do what they want, and live their life as long as they are not breaking laws and hurting others.

We disagree on meritocracy. You mostly win in sports based on skill and ability. Some people are taller, stronger, faster, smarter, can jump higher, throw further, kick further, etc. Those things are defined by their genetics, work ethic, and training. Life is not fair, every person is unique(DNA, Fingerprints...), not equal or the same, but should have equal opportunity to perform and succeed between the lines without unfair advantages. I wanted to be QB for the Cowboys, but I am just not talented enough. Should they change the rules or make exceptions so I can play? I would love to play in the NFL, make that $$$, but I'm just not good enough.

They penalize players for PED's when caught. Allowing participants with unfair advantages to play a fair game is not right.

I don't have any answers. All I know for sure is allowing Biological Males to compete against Biological Females in sport is unfair. You can genetically engineer, use hormone therapy to normalize and possibly "balance" body chemistry, but how do you adjust skeletal and muscularity diffefences between the sexes. Surgery? I don't see how this can be done to create parity.
 
Woobie06 said:
I never said it was a choice. I think people are who they are, feel how they feel, and everyone should be treated with respect and kindness. People are free to do what they want, and live their life as long as they are not breaking laws and hurting others.

We disagree on meritocracy. You mostly win in sports based on skill and ability. Some people are taller, stronger, faster, smarter, can jump higher, throw further, kick further, etc. Those things are defined by their genetics, work ethic, and training. Life is not fair, every person is unique(DNA, Fingerprints...), not equal or the same, but should have equal opportunity to perform and succeed between the lines without unfair advantages. I wanted to be QB for the Cowboys, but I am just not talented enough. Should they change the rules or make exceptions so I can play? I would love to play in the NFL, make that $$$, but I'm just not good enough.

They penalize players for PED's when caught. Allowing participants with unfair advantages to play a fair game is not right.

I don't have any answers. All I know for sure is allowing Biological Males to compete against Biological Females in sport is unfair. You can genetically engineer, use hormone therapy to normalize and possibly "balance" body chemistry, but how do you adjust skeletal and muscularity diffefences between the sexes. Surgery? I don't see how this can be done to create parity.
Click to expand...
They absolutely do not police peds on the youth level. Name me the last person that got caught in a regime where they don’t test. For example, I can tell you the problem is rife in the higher levels of boys high school football in Los Angeles and I suspect from having talked to families in that world nearly 1/5 is on peds. The studies have shown among boys all sports it could be as high as 10% by the time they graduate and girls 2%. Don’t talk to me about meritocracy until you sus out the cheaters

What even is a meritocracy in sports? My sons friend is a finer soccer player than most mls next players but was rejected by the teams because of his height and corresponding shooting power. That meritocratic? Freakonomics pointed out a majority of youth high level hockey players are January/February birthdays. That meritocratic that you are born in a month near the birth line? My kid was impaired early on by his adhd condition and coaches unwillingness to deal with it. Adhd kids mature slower than other boys and he’s near the age line anyway. That meritocratic he can’t play in the immediate year down? If he could he works hard enough and is skilled enough he’d likely be an academy player.

your argument basically amounts to it’s unfair because it feels that way to me. That just emotions it’s not logic. Facts don’t care about your feelings. The reasoned way to look at this is as a disability. The question we have to answer is are there accommodations we can give that are reasonable. Not the boys should play with boys and girls should play with girls because we are talking here about kids whose brains show physiological signs of the opposite gender…they are almost literally the opposite brain trapped in the wrong body.

for The youth level we don’t police peds and we don’t enforce a level meritocratic playing field. The answer is easy: let them play. As dad4 said, the hair bow is what is important, because they aren’t soccer robots. For the college level and higher the question is where can we put them: does treatment reduce at least a portion of athletes down so they can compete fairly with the women, is the change so slight they can compete with the men (this part has been answered already…for people moving in both directions the answer is generally no since being on testosterone is a ped) or is the difference between both so vast that you need to put them in separate leagues. For some individual sports like running wrestling and swimming the answer is we probably will need separate leagues but we aren’t there yet. The data isn’t fully in yet. For team sport the answer is likely the impact on a team (other than perhaps basketball) is so minimal that it doesn’t make a difference of performance is otherwise sufficiently reduced. The science will answer the question except for a few tough cases most notably women’s basketball, cycling and rowing.
 
Grace T. said:
They absolutely do not police peds on the youth level. Name me the last person that got caught in a regime where they don’t test. For example, I can tell you the problem is rife in the higher levels of boys high school football in Los Angeles and I suspect from having talked to families in that world nearly 1/5 is on peds. The studies have shown among boys all sports it could be as high as 10% by the time they graduate and girls 2%. Don’t talk to me about meritocracy until you sus out the cheaters

What even is a meritocracy in sports? My sons friend is a finer soccer player than most mls next players but was rejected by the teams because of his height and corresponding shooting power. That meritocratic? Freakonomics pointed out a majority of youth high level hockey players are January/February birthdays. That meritocratic that you are born in a month near the birth line? My kid was impaired early on by his adhd condition and coaches unwillingness to deal with it. Adhd kids mature slower than other boys and he’s near the age line anyway. That meritocratic he can’t play in the immediate year down? If he could he works hard enough and is skilled enough he’d likely be an academy player.

your argument basically amounts to it’s unfair because it feels that way to me. That just emotions it’s not logic. Facts don’t care about your feelings. The reasoned way to look at this is as a disability. The question we have to answer is are there accommodations we can give that are reasonable. Not the boys should play with boys and girls should play with girls because we are talking here about kids whose brains show physiological signs of the opposite gender…they are almost literally the opposite brain trapped in the wrong body.

for The youth level we don’t police peds and we don’t enforce a level meritocratic playing field. The answer is easy: let them play. As dad4 said, the hair bow is what is important, because they aren’t soccer robots. For the college level and higher the question is where can we put them: does treatment reduce at least a portion of athletes down so they can compete fairly with the women, is the change so slight they can compete with the men (this part has been answered already…for people moving in both directions the answer is generally no since being on testosterone is a ped) or is the difference between both so vast that you need to put them in separate leagues. For some individual sports like running wrestling and swimming the answer is we probably will need separate leagues but we aren’t there yet. The data isn’t fully in yet. For team sport the answer is likely the impact on a team (other than perhaps basketball) is so minimal that it doesn’t make a difference of performance is otherwise sufficiently reduced. The science will answer the question except for a few tough cases most notably women’s basketball, cycling and rowing.
Click to expand...
Grace T. said:
They absolutely do not police peds on the youth level. Name me the last person that got caught in a regime where they don’t test. For example, I can tell you the problem is rife in the higher levels of boys high school football in Los Angeles and I suspect from having talked to families in that world nearly 1/5 is on peds. The studies have shown among boys all sports it could be as high as 10% by the time they graduate and girls 2%. Don’t talk to me about meritocracy until you sus out the cheaters

What even is a meritocracy in sports? My sons friend is a finer soccer player than most mls next players but was rejected by the teams because of his height and corresponding shooting power. That meritocratic? Freakonomics pointed out a majority of youth high level hockey players are January/February birthdays. That meritocratic that you are born in a month near the birth line? My kid was impaired early on by his adhd condition and coaches unwillingness to deal with it. Adhd kids mature slower than other boys and he’s near the age line anyway. That meritocratic he can’t play in the immediate year down? If he could he works hard enough and is skilled enough he’d likely be an academy player.

your argument basically amounts to it’s unfair because it feels that way to me. That just emotions it’s not logic. Facts don’t care about your feelings. The reasoned way to look at this is as a disability. The question we have to answer is are there accommodations we can give that are reasonable. Not the boys should play with boys and girls should play with girls because we are talking here about kids whose brains show physiological signs of the opposite gender…they are almost literally the opposite brain trapped in the wrong body.

for The youth level we don’t police peds and we don’t enforce a level meritocratic playing field. The answer is easy: let them play. As dad4 said, the hair bow is what is important, because they aren’t soccer robots. For the college level and higher the question is where can we put them: does treatment reduce at least a portion of athletes down so they can compete fairly with the women, is the change so slight they can compete with the men (this part has been answered already…for people moving in both directions the answer is generally no since being on testosterone is a ped) or is the difference between both so vast that you need to put them in separate leagues. For some individual sports like running wrestling and swimming the answer is we probably will need separate leagues but we aren’t there yet. The data isn’t fully in yet. For team sport the answer is likely the impact on a team (other than perhaps basketball) is so minimal that it doesn’t make a difference of performance is otherwise sufficiently reduced. The science will answer the question except for a few tough cases most notably women’s basketball, cycling and rowing.
Click to expand...



1676764104470.png


YOUR GASLIGHTING.......

IT'S CHEATING PURE AND SIMPLE !!!
 
Grace T. said:
The proper way to look at this btw is not as a choice. The discussion has already established there is a biological basis for gender dysmorphia. The proper question is what accommodations, if any, can be fairly extended, given neither direction can compete with cis males. It’s the same question as you would analyze someone with an adhd or autism issue. It’s why we don’t for example require all bathrooms to have wheelchair access: there’s a balancing act that needs to be done.
Click to expand...
Why do you assume that a non-medicated mtf trans athlete cannot compete with cis males?

You've given no evidence for it. As far as I can tell, it simply is not true.

You're simply asserting, with no backing, that mtf trans athletes are slower and weaker as a way of justifying a rule to allow them to play down. But this is conclusion driven reasoning. You want to include mtf athlt
Grace T. said:
They absolutely do not police peds on the youth level. Name me the last person that got caught in a regime where they don’t test. For example, I can tell you the problem is rife in the higher levels of boys high school football in Los Angeles and I suspect from having talked to families in that world nearly 1/5 is on peds. The studies have shown among boys all sports it could be as high as 10% by the time they graduate and girls 2%. Don’t talk to me about meritocracy until you sus out the cheaters

What even is a meritocracy in sports? My sons friend is a finer soccer player than most mls next players but was rejected by the teams because of his height and corresponding shooting power. That meritocratic? Freakonomics pointed out a majority of youth high level hockey players are January/February birthdays. That meritocratic that you are born in a month near the birth line? My kid was impaired early on by his adhd condition and coaches unwillingness to deal with it. Adhd kids mature slower than other boys and he’s near the age line anyway. That meritocratic he can’t play in the immediate year down? If he could he works hard enough and is skilled enough he’d likely be an academy player.

your argument basically amounts to it’s unfair because it feels that way to me. That just emotions it’s not logic. Facts don’t care about your feelings. The reasoned way to look at this is as a disability. The question we have to answer is are there accommodations we can give that are reasonable. Not the boys should play with boys and girls should play with girls because we are talking here about kids whose brains show physiological signs of the opposite gender…they are almost literally the opposite brain trapped in the wrong body.

for The youth level we don’t police peds and we don’t enforce a level meritocratic playing field. The answer is easy: let them play. As dad4 said, the hair bow is what is important, because they aren’t soccer robots. For the college level and higher the question is where can we put them: does treatment reduce at least a portion of athletes down so they can compete fairly with the women, is the change so slight they can compete with the men (this part has been answered already…for people moving in both directions the answer is generally no since being on testosterone is a ped) or is the difference between both so vast that you need to put them in separate leagues. For some individual sports like running wrestling and swimming the answer is we probably will need separate leagues but we aren’t there yet. The data isn’t fully in yet. For team sport the answer is likely the impact on a team (other than perhaps basketball) is so minimal that it doesn’t make a difference of performance is otherwise sufficiently reduced. The science will answer the question except for a few tough cases most notably women’s basketball, cycling and rowing.
Click to expand...
Don’t invoke my name to justify your crazy.

Yes, it’s about the hair bow, and being the same. At U7.

We’re talking mostly about post puberty: U13 and above.
 
dad4 said:
Why do you assume that a non-medicated mtf trans athlete cannot compete with cis males?

You've given no evidence for it. As far as I can tell, it simply is not true.

You're simply asserting, with no backing, that mtf trans athletes are slower and weaker as a way of justifying a rule to allow them to play down. But this is conclusion driven reasoning. You want to include mtf athlt

Don’t invoke my name to justify your crazy.

Yes, it’s about the hair bow, and being the same. At U7.

We’re talking mostly about post puberty: U13 and above.
Click to expand...
The point under discussion in that particular exchange was mtf under treatment. It’s quite possible a mtf not under treatment bell curve to be curve v cis males is not identical. The drift wouldn’t however be particularly far and might be dependent on age. That’s why these discussions need to be targeted to age and course of treatment specifics. Thanks for making that very good point for me

as for the crazy, hey you were making the point and I don’t recall kicking Limited it to u7. In fact the ages under discussion were indeed early teens. Just because you regret falling on your face don’t come crying to me

as for crazy…I’m not the one who went into Covid panic, admired the Chinese and Australian responses, wanted neighbor to inform on neighbor, swore in your experts and st. Fauci on Covid but rejected them on this issue, wore an n95 to market post vaccine, swore to the effectiveness of masks even after the data crumbled around us, advocated severe restrictions then made a tournament exception for themselves, supported vax mandates even after it was clear they weren’t sterilizing, advocated for kids not to have sleepovers or indoor gatherings post vaccine, thought he was doing a public service with once weekly takeout while the plebs worked to make food for him, accused me of misogyny, accused me of not understanding the gay community, showed very little sympathy towards trans kids despite being an educator and your kids have trans friends, declared them all as obvious, and then backed yourself into corner with the admission that it’s all about the hair bow and not necessarily the training then tried to backtrack the egg on his face

my approach has been entirely centrist, not dogmatic and open to what the science might show us. Yours is all ideology. Yours has been frankly awful which is not surprising given your history on Covid which was also awful.
 
Grace T. said:
The point under discussion in that particular exchange was mtf under treatment. It’s quite possible a mtf not under treatment bell curve to be curve v cis males is not identical. The drift wouldn’t however be particularly far and might be dependent on age. That’s why these discussions need to be targeted to age and course of treatment specifics. Thanks for making that very good point for me

as for the crazy, hey you were making the point and I don’t recall kicking Limited it to u7. In fact the ages under discussion were indeed early teens. Just because you regret falling on your face don’t come crying to me

as for crazy…I’m not the one who went into Covid panic, admired the Chinese and Australian responses, wanted neighbor to inform on neighbor, swore in your experts and st. Fauci on Covid but rejected them on this issue, wore an n95 to market post vaccine, swore to the effectiveness of masks even after the data crumbled around us, advocated severe restrictions then made a tournament exception for themselves, supported vax mandates even after it was clear they weren’t sterilizing, advocated for kids not to have sleepovers or indoor gatherings post vaccine, thought he was doing a public service with once weekly takeout while the plebs worked to make food for him, accused me of misogyny, accused me of not understanding the gay community, showed very little sympathy towards trans kids despite being an educator and your kids have trans friends, declared them all as obvious, and then backed yourself into corner with the admission that it’s all about the hair bow and not necessarily the training then tried to backtrack the egg on his face

my approach has been entirely centrist, not dogmatic and open to what the science might show us. Yours is all ideology. Yours has been frankly awful which is not surprising given your history on Covid which was also awful.
Click to expand...
It's dishonest to restrict your argument to mtf who are on testosterone inhibitors.

You have been advocating a policy that allows all mtf athletes to compete in the girls youth leagues. You don't get to ignore 2/3 of them just because their data doesn't support your case.
 
dad4 said:
It's dishonest to restrict your argument to mtf who are on testosterone inhibitors.

You have been advocating a policy that allows all mtf athletes to compete in the girls youth leagues. You don't get to ignore 2/3 of them just because their data doesn't support your case.
Click to expand...
Again reading comprehension. The point under discussion was colleged aged young adults under treatments. My position on youth soccer which I reiterated not a page ago is it doesn’t matter (for the reasons which YOU outlined): it’s about the bow. Until you police the cheaters you don’t police the trans kids.
 
Happened again said:
you don't, you can't.
Click to expand...
That’s taking a generalization and applying it to specifics. We don’t know the specifics yet of the impact of various treatments on performance. It may also not be a question of identical but “close enough” if the drift from cis male is more severe than the distance from cis female. The studies aren’t in yet and it may be for some sports it’s good enough and for some it isn’t . if you have data you are welcome to present.it’s time to put up or shut up as they say.
 
Grace T. said:
Again reading comprehension. The point under discussion was colleged aged young adults under treatments. My position on youth soccer which I reiterated not a page ago is it doesn’t matter (for the reasons which YOU outlined): it’s about the bow. Until you police the cheaters you don’t police the trans kids.
Click to expand...
Before we can discuss "the point under discussion", please clarify your thesis.

You can support including all mtf trans athletes, or you can support including only the ones on treatment.

Either is fine. But you don't get to hop from one to the other based on whatever is convenient.
 
dad4 said:
Before we can discuss "the point under discussion", please clarify your thesis.

You can support including all mtf trans athletes, or you can support including only the ones on treatment.

Either is fine. But you don't get to hop from one to the other based on whatever is convenient.
Click to expand...
Sigh? You still really need clarification after 46 pages? Of course we need to hop around because the rationales and function of each is different.

My position has been consistent from the beginning. We JUST talked about it 5 pages back: sliding scale. No restrictions pre puberty full inclusion. Only slight restrictions on puberty involvement in youth sports: uswnt camps, certain individual sports championships, academies if the women ever get academies. Principle: if we don’t sus out the cheaters we don’t sus out the transkids. College and higher where we do sus out cheaters: it’s a question of science relative to the specific sport if an intervention can level the playing field so that’s it’s close enough…if the drift from the cis men is sufficiently large a new division needs to be called for then you must set up a new division and remove scholarships from the men and women to fund.

its not my fault you see the world in black and white and can’t understand nuance. That seems awfully familiar too.
 
Grace T. said:
Sigh? You still really need clarification after 46 pages? Of course we need to hop around because the rationales and function of each is different.

My position has been consistent from the beginning. We JUST talked about it 5 pages back: sliding scale. No restrictions pre puberty full inclusion. Only slight restrictions on puberty involvement in youth sports: uswnt camps, certain individual sports championships, academies if the women ever get academies. Principle: if we don’t sus out the cheaters we don’t sus out the transkids. College and higher where we do sus out cheaters: it’s a question of science relative to the specific sport if an intervention can level the playing field so that’s it’s close enough…if the drift from the cis men is sufficiently large a new division needs to be called for then you must set up a new division and remove scholarships from the men and women to fund.

its not my fault you see the world in black and white and can’t understand nuance. That seems awfully familiar too.
Click to expand...
That isn't so much nuance as a failed attempt to have it both ways.

In any case, it took you a paragraph to say "Yes, I support inclusion of unmedicated mtf athletes in teen girls youth soccer competitions."

In that case, your points regarding the statistical distribution of mtf athletes on testosterone inhibitors are irrelevant. The majority who actually make a team are likely to be the ones who did not take performance reducing medications. But those are the ones you pretend do not exist.
 
"A California school district being sued for allegedly violating parental rights by transitioning an 11-year-old's gender in secret is facing the wrath of local parents, who this week demanded transparency and for school officials not to keep them in the dark on matters of importance to their children's' lives."

It's ok little 11 year old. We won't tell your mommy. This will be our secret. We will support you.....
 
dad4 said:
That isn't so much nuance as a failed attempt to have it both ways.

In any case, it took you a paragraph to say "Yes, I support inclusion of unmedicated mtf athletes in teen girls youth soccer competitions."

In that case, your points regarding the statistical distribution of mtf athletes on testosterone inhibitors are irrelevant. The majority who actually make a team are likely to be the ones who did not take performance reducing medications. But those are the ones you pretend do not exist.
Click to expand...
Again it’s not my fault you have reading comprehension issues and can’t follow that we were discussing college aged athletes where we actually test. And it’s not my fault we care about some results and test and don’t care about others and don’t test. Don’t like the inconsistency? Very simple: test.

But for now on the youth level we don’t test and don’t care about the cheaters. And in any case you said it best: it’s about the hairbow, not the training. They are not soccer robots. It was after all YOUR POINT. Not my fault you want to backtrack now.
 
Grace T. said:
Again it’s not my fault you have reading comprehension issues and can’t follow that we were discussing college aged athletes where we actually test. And it’s not my fault we care about some results and test and don’t care about others and don’t test. Don’t like the inconsistency? Very simple: test.

But for now on the youth level we don’t test and don’t care about the cheaters. And in any case you said it best: it’s about the hairbow, not the training. They are not soccer robots. It was after all YOUR POINT. Not my fault you want to backtrack now.
Click to expand...
Dad was 100% wrong about the masks & jabs. Teachers have a very hard time to admit when their wrong, trust me. I wait for the day when dad says, "I was wrong." However, Dad is 100% on target regarding this subject. Grace, you're stuck in the middle again. Their is no middle on this. Have a wonderful Sunday with the boys. Peace to you all!
 
This Doc, Dr. Levine, wants the kids to have access to mutilate their body parts without mom and dad being a part of the conversation before they CHOP it off. Big $$$ in this business as well and it goes downstream. It's always about money....

1676816299418.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top