Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Are there legitimate safety issues that need to be addressed in team sports at the pro and NCAA level? Sure. Are there with 10 year old girls? FFS, no. I also disagree with your opinion that 13 year old should be a cut-off for transgender participation in comp soccer, but at least that's a rational opinion. My daughter played trans girls all the way through club, and maybe even in college, with no problems. Not a single GDA or ECNL trans girl ever caused a safety issue, and there are more than adequate guardrails in place to ensure that it doesn't happen. There are rules that obviously prohibit dangerous play, there are three refs, two coaches, and a lot of thought that was put in by ECNL before letting it happen. There is the fact that trans girls are incredibly rare and that I have yet to ever witness a trans girl who was out to hurt someone or play in a way that was physically dangerous. It is a phantom fear. It is far more likely that any girl hurt your kid than a trans girl who has been living in fear her entire life that even the slightest mis-step could ruin her life or get her killed.
 
[QUOTE="Code said:
I don't disagree with anything you are saying in this comment. Trans-players in childrens age brackets should be of no concern, and therefore its pointless to continue to debate or reference trans-children in the discussion. Adolescent age brackets are a relevent discussion in the subject of trans-athletes, because Testosterone is a part of adolescence, and Testosterone also happens to be a big deal in Sports performance.
Click to expand...
Code said:
Not sure why you have decided to focus on a specific age group in your position. Prior to puberty the difference between male and female size, strength, and performance is pretty much irrelevent. So, why even have a girls and boys distinction prior to U13? Let's just have soccer teams, and the individual Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities will determine which level you play.

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

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

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

My only point is systems which ends in "kick out the trans kid" but leaves in place the other obvious targets has no other end than we don't want the trans kid to play. If it's not important to take out the surrounding concerns, it's not important enough to kick out the trans kid. Besides, we want a policy in place that encourages kids to take the steps to make sure they are 100% sure of their choice before undertaking drastic measures and we don't want to rush them into transitioning because they want the opportunity to do something as stupid as play competitive sports. Once they hit college, sure use greater scrutiny (I don't believe Lia Thomas should have been given such a pass)...in individual sports sure use greater scrutiny (I also think if we are talking records and state championships, though, individual sports should have to steroid test).
 
Happened again said:
As usual you are being an idiot and stovepiping a rather complext argument. I would go out on a limb and say that not one person on this this site is against coed sports at young ages.. You weakly wrap yourself in culural/societal mumbo jumbo. This is a CA forum, I doubt anyone is a "transphobe". Idiotphobe maybe, but transphobe...come on sweetie, that's really not a thing here even though you would love that to be thing. Your culture war schtick is a bit tiresome but cute at the same time. I detect sincere passion in your spirited defense of the trans community, especially with teens. It's hard being a trans kid - physically and mentally...it usually goes hand in hand.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sad little guy is just so depressed that the U20 WNT lost a soccer game. Surely it means the end of the United States unless we immediately ban trans girls from being able to play on girls teams, right? Do you think there is still time to save America?
 
Can one of you transphobes explain to me why a 10 year old trans girl is a safety risk, but it's totally fine for one girl to play on a boys team and against 11 boys?
 
Can one of you transphobes explain to me how you reconcile your argument that "biology" mandates that girls should only be allowed to play girls, but co-ed soccer is ok? Are you saying that biological girls should only be biological girls when you say so, but it's ok to mix boys and girls when you say so?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top