Trans eligibility rules for girls sports.

[Grace T.]

what ages are we talking about?

This goes way beyond sports...sports participation is such a small fraction of the overall population. With sports - fairness in competition at the highest levels should be a concern..safety etc. Very small population but still a concern...

I love it how people (not targeting you Grace) talk about adminstering puberty blockers and hormone treatment like they are giving out nerds to young, still developing kids. There is minimal research on long term effects. A lot to think about when making a decision to go down this path. Puberty blockers are reversible, hormone treatment not so much.

They are both dangerous and carry the risk of long term irreversible damage. The problem is there’s a trade off. For some cases it will be very very obvious from an early age what’s going on. But a portion of even those obvious cases will be wrongly diagnosed. The trade off is also really high….the pressure to diagnose early is because (as some have said) the effects of testosterone are drastic and irreversible…if the mtf is going to have the best shot at a normal life if they insist on doing it better do it early…on the other hand if they get the diagnosis wrong it’s tragic and also irreversible.

that’s why all other things being equal (such as we don’t go after the cheaters) we need to think hard about policies that encourage early transitions. My debate with dad4 has largely circulated with adolescents in youth sports. The standard in college athletics should be harsher and more strict. Presumably if testosterone is the issue, no one would have a problem with a mtf playing youth soccer that goes on hormone blockers before the full freight of puberty hits (if the answer is still no without a limiting principle there’s a possibility bigotry is in fact guiding the person). The question of whether we should allow such treatments is broader than the scope of a youth soccer forum and as I said complicated.

 

[GoldenGate]

No, I am not transphobic. No, I don't think youth trophies are all that important. Yes, I think calling out a 10 year old is a really, really sorry thing to do.

But shouldn't your vitriol be directed at the "tremendous abuse from boys teams?" Why are you giving them a complete pass for not treating a teammate or opponent with respect and dignity, but a women who has worked hard to, say, swim really fast just got left off the NCAA podium and thus has to be the one to pay the price in the name of "respect and dignity?"

Seems you should turn your turrets to the real problem (respect and dignity from male teammates) instead of sidestepping that with a solution that allows them onto female teams where post-puberty MTF teens and adults clearly have an unmatchable physical advantage that rails against the fundamental reasons of fairness that men and women were separated in sports in the first place.

If your primary reason a MTF athlete should be allowed to play on a women's team is so that the men don't make fun of her, then it seems you're shaking your fist at the wrong cloud and berating the wrong parents.

I see. So instead of the Civil Rights Act, we should have just told black children to get their shit together and sit at the front of the bus and at that lunch counter? Yes, it make a ton of sense to tell a 10 year old trans girls to just suck it up and play on a boy's team because making them endure what is likely to be an abusive environment is the best way to change the minds of other 10 year old transphobic shits. Dumping the responsibility for educating transphobes onto children is a really stupid idea. It would be one thing if you could count on every adult involved to treat children with dignity and respect, and to make their children do the same, but this thread alone has shown how much of a fantasy that is. Clearly, a lot of people hold trans children in contempt, so making the trans children suck it in the hope that maybe it will work out is not an acceptable solution. Your proposal also seems to incorrectly assume that gender identity is a bullshit concept.

I am not giving anyone a free pass. If you had any desire to have a legitimate conversation, you would have acknowledged what I've already said about the NCAA swimmer. Once again, whining that a trans child shouldn't be able to play on a soccer team because an adult trans swimmer won an NCAA title is a ridiculously stupid comparison for reasons already stated. If you think that it's fine to treat a 10 year old like shit because you're bitter an adult trans swimmer won a race in a pool, well, yes you are transphobic. If you are living in fear that a post-pubescent 14 year old trans girl will hurt other girls in a soccer game given all the other guardrails in place to prevent that from happening, yes you are transphobic. If you are unwilling to even consider that the unmatchable physical and emotional abuse that trans girls endure is a legitimate factor in determining the circumstances in which trans girls should be allowed to participate in girls sports, then you are transphobic. If you think kiddie trophies are so important that "fundamental fairness" mandates making trans children play with their biological gender without regard to the abuse that will likely result, and you refuse to understand the very simple concept that "fairness" also includes ensuring trans children have the opportunity to play a sport free from abuse, yes, you are transphobic.

 

[timmyh]

Your civil rights analogy is really irrelevant. That was a quest for fundamental equality. This subject is exploring whether enabling fundamental inequality serves a more noble purpose.

I clearly was not talking about 10 year olds. I think you're inclusive stance there is 100% spot on.

I was not talking about "hurting others." I agree that is a silly argument with the sole purpose of justifying exclusion.

I was not talking about kiddie trophies that are largely irrelevant.

I am most certainly willing to consider the abuse teams kids suffer and weigh that against a multitude of other factors.

I was clearly talking about post-pubescent teens and adults. And I think your flamethrowing lacks appropriate nuance in a complicated discussion.

This isn't even a real discussion, because you are so fired up about the obvious transphobes that you aren't reasonably engaging with anyone who might be trying to have a real conversation. You are instead lumping anyone who may not agree with your personal opinion together and trying to score rhetorical points, and it isn't really helping the discourse.

But maybe that's your agenda and I am being trolled by hoping I may learn something that helps refine or change my opinion here.

 

[Kicker 2.0]

But maybe that's your agenda and I am being trolled by hoping I may learn something that helps refine or change my opinion here.

This hits the nail on the head!

 

[dad4]

The question isn't really about youth rec sports. Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in. You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.

It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.

 

[Grace T.]

The question isn't really about youth rec sports. Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in. You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.

It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.

There are actually 3 groups here that have to be analyzed separately: preteens, adolescents, and adults. The rules for each will be different. The hardest case is the adolescents. They shouldn't be conflated with adults, because we also have to be mindful of the incentives we are creating.

Here's the reality, though. ECNL is really in the scheme of things not that important. It's not academy ball like the boy's program highest tier. There's no drug testing so we aren't bending over backwards to ensure a level playing field. There's nothing to stop the same balance you propose as for a rec program: play up a year.

Here are the tests with adolescents:
-if you think testosterone is a performance enhancing drug that unbalances the playing field, are you trying to catch the cheaters? Presumably you are also o.k. with those that went on puberty blockers (or more drastically, transitioning) before 12/13/14 playing on the girls side without restrictions?
-if you think it's a genetics thing, are you o.k. with FTM playing in the girls league, even if they are taking testosterone, until they are ready to shift?
-if it's a safety thing, are you in favor of size/weight restrictions on all players, and not just those because of their status?

Because otherwise there may be something motivating the person beyond just concerns about performance, safety or genetics.

 

[Woodwork]

The question isn't really about youth rec sports. Most trans kids in youth rec can play without destabilizing the game, though some might need to play up a year in order to fit in. You can probably leave it up to the director of the rec program to decide on a case by case basis.

It's becoming an issue for ECNL, and for college.

It really isn't becoming an issue of "destabilizing the game" in ECNL. This is made-up, chicken little, fear mongering.

You criticize Grace for arguing in circles but you keep saying the same thing when it just isn't the case.

Let them play where they feel most comfortable in competitive youth leagues. Only call it an issue if it becomes one.

 

[dad4]

There are actually 3 groups here that have to be analyzed separately: preteens, adolescents, and adults. The rules for each will be different. The hardest case is the adolescents. They shouldn't be conflated with adults, because we also have to be mindful of the incentives we are creating.

Here's the reality, though. ECNL is really in the scheme of things not that important. It's not academy ball like the boy's program highest tier. There's no drug testing so we aren't bending over backwards to ensure a level playing field. There's nothing to stop the same balance you propose as for a rec program: play up a year.

Here are the tests with adolescents:
-if you think testosterone is a performance enhancing drug that unbalances the playing field, are you trying to catch the cheaters? Presumably you are also o.k. with those that went on puberty blockers (or more drastically, transitioning) before 12/13/14 playing on the girls side without restrictions?
-if you think it's a genetics thing, are you o.k. with FTM playing in the girls league, even if they are taking testosterone, until they are ready to shift?
-if it's a safety thing, are you in favor of size/weight restrictions on all players, and not just those because of their status?

Because otherwise there may be something motivating the person beyond just concerns about performance, safety or genetics.

Ftm:
The answer for ftm is that ftm athletes on monitored hormone supplements have an unfair advantage. They should be welcome in a boys division.

Ftm athletes who are not on hormone supplements do not have an unfair advantage. They should be welcome in the division of their choice.

Ftm athletes who take unnecessarily large doses of hormone supplements are doping and should not be welcome in either division.

Hope that's clear.

Playing up:

Is a great solution for a pre pubescent girls league.

Playing up doesn't really do much for older girls leagues, because female puberty doesn't improve athletic performance. Take a look at track and field times. The boys are off like rockets from 13 to 18. The high school girls often still lose to 8th graders. The extra year isn't giving you as much.

 

[dad4]

It really isn't becoming an issue of "destabilizing the game" in ECNL. This is made-up, chicken little, fear mongering.

You criticize Grace for arguing in circles but you keep saying the same thing when it just isn't the case.

Let them play where they feel most comfortable in competitive youth leagues. Only call it an issue if it becomes one.

Suppose it becomes an issue. A team starts winning games they could never have won without the trans kid.

How do you propose people raise the issue without putting an unfair spotlight on the kid?

 

[Woodwork]

Suppose it becomes an issue. A team starts winning games they could never have won without the trans kid.

How do you propose people raise the issue without putting an unfair spotlight on the kid?

Don't act like you are protecting trans-gender people from getting hurt.

I don't waste time legislating problems that don't exist and may never exist. That is the province of fear mongers.

Ponder what it makes you if you put in all kinds of rules that just hurt people when it was never gonna be a problem. FYI, what you described isn't per se a problem. HEAVEN FORBID THE PLAYER CONTRIBUTE AND HELP THE TEAM WIN. My ECNL captain DD would welcome this kid on her team or the other team.

 

[Grace T.]

Ftm:
The answer for ftm is that ftm athletes on monitored hormone supplements have an unfair advantage. They should be welcome in a boys division.

Ftm athletes who are not on hormone supplements do not have an unfair advantage. They should be welcome in the division of their choice.

Ftm athletes who take unnecessarily large doses of hormone supplements are doping and should not be welcome in either division.

Hope that's clear.

Playing up:

Is a great solution for a pre pubescent girls league.

Playing up doesn't really do much for older girls leagues, because female puberty doesn't improve athletic performance. Take a look at track and field times. The boys are off like rockets from 13 to 18. The high school girls often still lose to 8th graders. The extra year isn't giving you as much.

Well, at least we finally are on clear ground. Performance it is. "Ftm athletes who take unnecessarily large doses of hormone supplements are doping and should not be welcome in either division." O.k., unless you want to go back to your witchhunt that you floated (which I welcome your disavowel even if you wouldn't come out and say it) and test only the trans kids, if you care about a level playing field so much, test for doping. You could limit it the ages, divisions, and particular contests you want to exclude the trans people from, you can do it randomly. If unusually high levelled testosterone girls get caught in it and they have to go on testosterone suppressants, too bad so sad...if she declines she can play with the boys. Presumably as well if the teen undergoes puberty blockers or has the operation before puberty kicks in (we can argue about the age specifics: 12/13/14), no problem with them playing in the girls league. It has the nasty side effect that you will be encouraging parents to take the risk of transitioning their kids earlier rather than wait, but collateral damage. It's more important, after all, that the highly competitive and sacrosanct nature of ECNL kiddie ball be preserved. While we are at it, why aren't the higher levels doing more to suss out the fake birth certificates we know are floating around out there?

BTW, I told you already solo sports need to be held to a different standard than teams sports. The impact of one athlete is going to be much more severe on the competition, particular if records or individual championships are at stake. The impact of one athlete on a team is much less severe (particularly soccer, less so basketball).

 

[dad4]

Don't act like you are protecting trans-gender people from getting hurt.

I don't waste time legislating problems that don't exist and may never exist. That is the province of fear mongers.

Ponder what it makes you if you put in all kinds of rules that just hurt people when it was never gonna be a problem. FYI, what you described isn't per se a problem. HEAVEN FORBID THE PLAYER CONTRIBUTE AND HELP THE TEAM WIN. My ECNL captain DD would welcome this kid on her team or the other team.

Sure. Your kid is captain, and would be happy to have the former boy as a teammate. No sweat off her back. She still has her spot.

Tell me how she would feel if she was the one who got bumped down to ECRL to make room for the same player.

 

[Soccer Dad & Ref]

Sure. Your kid is captain, and would be happy to have the former boy as a teammate. No sweat off her back. She still has her spot.

Tell me how she would feel if she was the one who got bumped down to ECRL to make room for the same player.

And there it is. Transphobia in all its wonders. Is there a difference if your kid gets dropped because of a better player that was born female?

 

[Woodwork]

Sure. Your kid is captain, and would be happy to have the former boy as a teammate. No sweat off her back. She still has her spot.

Tell me how she would feel if she was the one who got bumped down to ECRL to make room for the same player.

Same as if there were 21 other players on the team that weren't trans.

If the trans player earned the right to be Captain and my daughter stepped away from it with class, I'll know I've raised a strong and resilient adult. Also, we've got our personal statement with guaranteed admission to Harvard! YES!!!

 

[dad4]

And there it is. Transphobia in all its wonders. Is there a difference if your kid gets dropped because of a better player that was born female?

Dropped for a better female athlete? Part of sports. Learn from it.

Dropped for a genetically male athlete who is playing in a female league? Unfair advantage, and not at all ok. As bad as putting a U15 kid in a U14 league.

Now add one. Suppose my son is dropped from the team to make space for a trans girl, or for a trans boy who takes supplements. That's also just fine.

I see you're back to the name calling. Go play with Golden Gate.

 

[Woodwork]

Dropped for a better female athlete? Part of sports. Learn from it.

Dropped for a genetically male athlete who is playing in a female league? Unfair advantage, and not at all ok. As bad as putting a U15 kid in a U14 league.

Now add one. Suppose my son is dropped from the team to make space for a trans girl, or for a trans boy who takes supplements. That's also just fine.

I see you're back to the name calling. Go play with Golden Gate.

Please explain how a trans athlete who merely manages to push the 22nd player off the bench is "unfairly superior." Sounds like a good fit to me. Sounds like merely existing in the space is enough to trigger you.

 

[Grace T.]

Dropped for a better female athlete? Part of sports. Learn from it.

Dropped for a genetically male athlete who is playing in a female league? Unfair advantage, and not at all ok. As bad as putting a U15 kid in a U14 league.

Now add one. Suppose my son is dropped from the team to make space for a trans girl, or for a trans boy who takes supplements. That's also just fine.

I see you're back to the name calling. Go play with Golden Gate.

The issue is that you aren't recognizing that all these limitations are arbitrary constructs. Why is it bad for a U15 kid to supplant a U14 kid in the league, but given we know about the vast differences in middle schools ages, it wasn't bad for my August birthday kid to lose his oldest designation and now have to play against January kids (plus he lost a year of soccer to boot)? Wasn't that unfair?

What if the girl that comes and bumps your daughter is an XXY or just a girl with an unusual testosterone count? What if she just happens to be unnaturally bigger and can bump the other kids off the ball? What if they are on steroids and you aren't testing and don't know it? It's all just arbitrary line drawing. "Fairness" doesn't really exist....it's just winners and losers.

BTW, what we are talking about too is "fairness" within an arbitrary construct: women's sports. In the fictional Federation we talked about, the only thing that matters is "being the best". Instinctively, that's why women's pro sports have such a low audience eyeballs. If it hadn't been for Title IX, we'd still have women's sports, but they wouldn't have proliferated as much as they did, and there certainly wouldn't be a level playing field. So it isn't about being the "best"....what's it ultimately about?.....well it was about participation and equality, which makes the lines you are trying to draw both ironic and ephemeral.

 

[Woodwork]

I find using ECNL as an example is hilarious anyway. As though being rostered on these teams reflects a true meritocracy to begin with. So many people on these teams that didn't really compete to get their spots, so many to complain about before I would land on a trans kid.

 

[espola]

There is a lot of talk about new players with physical advantages (however achieved) are "displanting" the weak end of the bench. I can't remember that any of the teams my kids played on didn't have room to add a player.

 

[GoldenGate]

Your civil rights analogy is really irrelevant. That was a quest for fundamental equality. This subject is exploring whether enabling fundamental inequality serves a more noble purpose.

I clearly was not talking about 10 year olds. I think you're inclusive stance there is 100% spot on.

I was not talking about "hurting others." I agree that is a silly argument with the sole purpose of justifying exclusion.

I was not talking about kiddie trophies that are largely irrelevant.

I am most certainly willing to consider the abuse teams kids suffer and weigh that against a multitude of other factors.

I was clearly talking about post-pubescent teens and adults. And I think your flamethrowing lacks appropriate nuance in a complicated discussion.

This isn't even a real discussion, because you are so fired up about the obvious transphobes that you aren't reasonably engaging with anyone who might be trying to have a real conversation. You are instead lumping anyone who may not agree with your personal opinion together and trying to score rhetorical points, and it isn't really helping the discourse.

But maybe that's your agenda and I am being trolled by hoping I may learn something that helps refine or change my opinion here.

I did not accuse you of arguing that trans children are going to hurt. I was speaking generally about those who did, and yes they're transphobic. In other words, not everything is about you even if I'm discussing something that happens to be following up on one of your posts. I have had plenty of real discussion about this, including that discussing post-pubescent arguments against are at least rational ones to make. In fact, despite my obvious penchant to rake transphobes over the coals, I'm one of few people here who have actually acknowledged merits on the other side. But yes, I flame throw against bigots because shooting fish in a barrel like that is kinda fun.