Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.

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.

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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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

 
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.

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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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 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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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

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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top