Vaccine

[EvilGoalie 21]

sure, but good try. Klinefelters is a completely different topic that involves a mulit faceted treatment approach, if diagnozed early. Often times a boy/man is unaware of having an extra X. Boys/men with Klinefelter are still genetically male. The X chromosome isn't neccessarily the "female" chromosome, it's present in everyone (but you already knew that). The presence of the Y chromosome is what denotes sex, and that is something you can't change. There are studies suggesting the Y chromome see to be decaying over time and may one day become extinct...if that pans out, then we are f'd anyway.

You were the one that brought up biology. I'm not trying to say it weighs in one way or another in whatever argument is going on regarding the NCAA, gender identity, whatever. Genotypically male and phenotypically male aren't the same (ask most KFs who have ever wanted to have kids for example, most are phenotypically sterile). The only point I'd make regarding using genetics as a sine qua non underpinning fairness in sport is how granular do you want to go? If one starts teasing apart the Matthew effect for example (easier in high jump, much harder in soccer) the aphorisms that plague youth sports start meaning even less.

 

[GoldenGate]

No…it’s just easier to slap a derogatory label on someone than to try and understand where they are coming from.

This way you elicit an emotional response rather than an intelligent one that you can’t refute.

I see, so you and your friends are trying to understand where transgender women, the NCAA, and the IOC are coming from in allowing transgender participation in women's sports for over a decade? Is that what you think you and your friends are doing when you refer to a trans woman as "he", or mock someone for using the bathroom, or claim the dictionary is a sports rulebook?

Go ahead, identify all of the legitimate reasons that the NCAA has listed in support of transgender participation in women's sports if you're really interested in understanding where they are coming from.

 

[what-happened]

You were the one that brought up biology. I'm not trying to say it weighs in one way or another in whatever argument is going on regarding the NCAA, gender identity, whatever. Genotypically male and phenotypically male aren't the same (ask most KFs who have ever wanted to have kids for example, most are phenotypically sterile). The only point I'd make regarding using genetics as a sine qua non underpinning fairness in sport is how granular do you want to go? If one starts teasing apart the Matthew effect for example (easier in high jump, much harder in soccer) the aphorisms that plague youth sports start meaning even less.

certainly going down a rabbit hole. The biology discussion simply makes reference as to what happens to a male/female after puberty. Once that happens, it cannot be reversed - ligaments/bones/muscles are set - not something that can be denied.

A post pubescent transwoman has distinct physical attributions that are XY and not XX, just the way it is. The idea that this doesn't, will, has, led to a general advantage in a physical compeition is comical. A biological male who has trained at a high level post puberty then chooses to identy as a trans women is likely to see an advantage. The argument isn't whether to be inclusive of trans gender people in society, it's about fairness in elite level competition. If biology is to be completely disregarded, then rename Men's and Women's sports to just sports. If there isn't a rule that says only women can be on women sports teams, then what's the pointof having women's sports?

The politics is comical

 

[Hüsker Dü]

https://www.facebook.com/1790169267976508/photos/a.2739983162995109/3195901094069978

 

[Kicker 2.0]

0-3 on your targeted accusations.

Thirsty much little man?

 

[dad4]

I feel it’s the non wavering, “I won’t even discuss the reasoning because it’s wrong!”, sticking to the binary ideal, coupled with the occasional snarky put down or slight that draws the “transphobic” label (I would simply say “change phobic” or simply “intolerant of evolved information” aka science). This all seems apart of the anti-science movement so prevalent in rightwing circles.

Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia

Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary

blogs.scientificamerican.com

It's hard to make any scientific claims around LGBT issues.

Suppose a university scientist published a paper that claimed MTF trans athletes have a significant advantage in sports.

More likely than not, the HRC/GG types would immediately brand him/her as transphobic. At a minimum, they'd have to worry about future grant funding. At worst, they'd be quietly dismissed and have difficulty finding employment.

Therefore, most researchers will avoid this topic. It is both relatively unimportant and a career risk to the author.

That does not mean any scientist thinks Lia Thomas' athletic performance is unrelated to 20 years of testosterone enhanced growth. It just means not many people will sacrifice their career to say something that obvious.

 

[dad4]

You were the one that brought up biology. I'm not trying to say it weighs in one way or another in whatever argument is going on regarding the NCAA, gender identity, whatever. Genotypically male and phenotypically male aren't the same (ask most KFs who have ever wanted to have kids for example, most are phenotypically sterile). The only point I'd make regarding using genetics as a sine qua non underpinning fairness in sport is how granular do you want to go? If one starts teasing apart the Matthew effect for example (easier in high jump, much harder in soccer) the aphorisms that plague youth sports start meaning even less.

I believe we are talking about chromosomally normal XY athletes competing in contests otherwise reserved for XX athletes.

Kleinfelter's and 46XY are an interesting question, but not one which applies to the topic at hand.

 

[GoldenGate]

certainly going down a rabbit hole. The biology discussion simply makes reference as to what happens to a male/female after puberty. Once that happens, it cannot be reversed - ligaments/bones/muscles are set - not something that can be denied.

A post pubescent transwoman has distinct physical attributions that are XY and not XX, just the way it is. The idea that this doesn't, will, has, led to a general advantage in a physical compeition is comical. A biological male who has trained at a high level post puberty then chooses to identy as a trans women is likely to see an advantage. The argument isn't whether to be inclusive of trans gender people in society, it's about fairness in elite level competition. If biology is to be completely disregarded, then rename Men's and Women's sports to just sports. If there isn't a rule that says only women can be on women sports teams, then what's the pointof having women's sports?

The politics is comical

Yes, women's sports has been destroyed in the more than a decade since the NCAA has allowed transgender participation in women's sports, and two decades by the IOC. It is completely pointless to have women's sports.

As the NCAA, the IOC and many others see it, a minor "advantage" in a swimming pool outweighs the horrible, abysmal manner in which people treat transgender women outside of it. If that means one woman on a full ride to the University of Virginia has hurt feelings, well, we can't all have everything and she still has a lot more than virtually every transgender woman. Sports is not sacred and "equality" is not something that comes on an a la carte basis. Because you and others aren't willing to treat transgender women with equality overall, you don't get to have "equality" in the one thing you think is important in life and then turn a blind eye to the other 100 things that aren't even remotely equal. If you actually want equality, maybe you should start referring to trans women by their preferred gender pronoun and get upset with the other people here who treat transgender women even worse than you.

What is really comical is you claiming that college sports is some sacred cow that everyone else needs to revere. It was just one race in a pool in compliance with rules that have been in effect for a decade.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

I believe we are talking about chromosomally normal XY athletes competing in contests otherwise reserved for XX athletes.

Kleinfelter's and 46XY are an interesting question, but not one which applies to the topic at hand.

The original claim was that human sexual characteristics are binary. The reality is there are exceptions that reveal the plasticity of the biology. It's a fact that the X can impact the phenotypic penetrance of the Y. In genetics, the exceptions almost always prove the rule. That was my original point.

So it moves, somewhat predictably, to "chromosomally normal", by which I imagine you mean chromosome copy number. Does that provide a clean cut bracketing of "fairness" in sport competition? Well, if you want it to, but that is strictly user defined. Not all X's not all Y's, not all autosomes, are created equal with respect to their contribution to a given trait. Take any metric you want. Height for instance-well studied example. Studies of monozygotic twins raised apart, etc, indicate about ~85% of human height is genetically determined, nurture be damned. Youth soccer coaches are intuitive population geneticists. Little U8 Jr. walks up with mom and dad to the tryout and coach places mom and dad on a percentile, halves the difference. Depending on the values of the coach, Little Jr. makes the cut or not, even if they had good moments on the pitch. To the extent that variance in a distribution for an individual trait can be attributed to genetics the overall message is that life is not fair. Take individuals close to the median. Give them their 10,000 hrs. Do they become outliers? Youth sports, sure, but don't go complaining about it to Li-Fraumeni families.

So it seems ironic to me to try and adopt a genetic parameter as a criterion of fairness, when ithe overall message of genetics is that, from a human value standpoint, competitive advantage is intrinsically unfair. That's not a rabbit hole. It is a direct, and, from my perspective, important, extension of the argument. Perhaps that is why sport actually exists in the first place, to provide a means to show that chance and pluck matter despite it all.

Look, I read what you wrote about Alan Turing. I know your heart is in the right place. But dragging genetics into human value framing issues with adjectives like normal and elite (OK that was the other post) leads PDQ to some historically dark terrain.

 

[met61]

The original claim was that human sexual characteristics are binary. The reality is there are exceptions that reveal the plasticity of the biology. It's a fact that the X can impact the phenotypic penetrance of the Y. In genetics, the exceptions almost always prove the rule. That was my original point.

So it moves, somewhat predictably, to "chromosomally normal", by which I imagine you mean chromosome copy number. Does that provide a clean cut bracketing of "fairness" in sport competition? Well, if you want it to, but that is strictly user defined. Not all X's not all Y's, not all autosomes, are created equal with respect to their contribution to a given trait. Take any metric you want. Height for instance-well studied example. Studies of monozygotic twins raised apart, etc, indicate about ~85% of human height is genetically determined, nurture be damned. Youth soccer coaches are intuitive population geneticists. Little U8 Jr. walks up with mom and dad to the tryout and coach places mom and dad on a percentile, halves the difference. Depending on the values of the coach, Little Jr. makes the cut or not, even if they had good moments on the pitch. To the extent that variance in a distribution for an individual trait can be attributed to genetics the overall message is that life is not fair. Take individuals close to the median. Give them their 10,000 hrs. Do they become outliers? Youth sports, sure, but don't go complaining about it to Li-Fraumeni families.

So it seems ironic to me to try and adopt a genetic parameter as a criterion of fairness, when ithe overall message of genetics is that, from a human value standpoint, competitive advantage is intrinsically unfair. That's not a rabbit hole. It is a direct, and, from my perspective, important, extension of the argument. Perhaps that is why sport actually exists in the first place, to provide a means to show that chance and pluck matter despite it all.

Look, I read what you wrote about Alan Turing. I know your heart is in the right place. But dragging genetics into human value framing issues with adjectives like normal and elite (OK that was the other post) leads PDQ to some historically dark terrain.

...lies require yards of BS.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

...lies require yards of BS.

It's amazing what the human mind can rationalize if the desire is strong enough. Mid-terms are going to be even more interesting if this board is truly representative of our population and there really are that many people who buy into this gaslighting narrative and say it out loud. I can't wait to hear candidates define what a "woman" is. I'm thinking with the right definition, we may find they are over-represented in areas we thought that they were under-represented. We have so much to learn. Hahahaha!

 

[what-happened]

Yes, women's sports has been destroyed in the more than a decade since the NCAA has allowed transgender participation in women's sports, and two decades by the IOC. It is completely pointless to have women's sports.

As the NCAA, the IOC and many others see it, a minor "advantage" in a swimming pool outweighs the horrible, abysmal manner in which people treat transgender women outside of it. If that means one woman on a full ride to the University of Virginia has hurt feelings, well, we can't all have everything and she still has a lot more than virtually every transgender woman. Sports is not sacred and "equality" is not something that comes on an a la carte basis. Because you and others aren't willing to treat transgender women with equality overall, you don't get to have "equality" in the one thing you think is important in life and then turn a blind eye to the other 100 things that aren't even remotely equal. If you actually want equality, maybe you should start referring to trans women by their preferred gender pronoun and get upset with the other people here who treat transgender women even worse than you.

What is really comical is you claiming that college sports is some sacred cow that everyone else needs to revere. It was just one race in a pool in compliance with rules that have been in effect for a decade.

Your zig zag skills are amazing. Why are you insisting that transwomen aren't being treated fairly? I see that my use of he in reference to the time period when she trained and competed as a he offends you. Get over it, it's fact that she was a he before she was a she. Biologically she is still a he. Why are you so afraid of that? Interesting. She can identify however she wants, not opposed to it, could really care less. But the willfull avoidance of science and your continued ridiculous accusations creates such a clownlike environment that you can hardly be taken serious.

 

[crush]

 

[crush]

It's amazing what the human mind can rationalize if the desire is strong enough. Mid-terms are going to be even more interesting if this board is truly representative of our population and there really are that many people who buy into this gaslighting narrative and say it out loud. I can't wait to hear candidates define what a "woman" is. I'm thinking with the right definition, we may find they are over-represented in areas we thought that they were under-represented. We have so much to learn. Hahahaha!

Hahahahahaha!!!! The mind is here to create brother and boy have we seen some folks create some big lies and the life they want ((have planned for us before our birth)) for all of us. I believe we were all brought here to be co-creators with the creator, moo. We can for sure see what one side likes to create, right? Endless Wars ((Won't send their Elitist kids, only our stupid kids we will send to fight our wars that make us money)), destruction, jab or get fired, spies who lie, lot's of division with a mind that is brainwashed with "Us vs Them 24/7" with all kinds of hate and so much more crazy stuff that has taken over this thread. No more Jab talk? My nephew just got out of ICU with a Window Attack. No joke and he shall make a full recovery. Dude is now a vegan, go figure. I now know 5 people who have had blood clot attacks of the heart from the clotting of their blood. I know 4 people who have died of "natural causes" and all were under 50. That was what we said when folks died of old age, no? I never met anyone who had one blood clot and now I know 5. Insane bro. I know 7 people who got fired for not submitting to these liars. Love is the only way out of this mess and some divine help K&S, moo I know you don't agree with me on anything but you like the fact that I am real. I am as real as they come. Rent was $2300 before this mess and heist on our freedom two years ago and now the same place is going for $3800. Gas was $2, now $6.89 and climbing. I know I should pay my fair share and help support Ukraine but I am broke and if this keeps going the way it is, I will have to leave the State and live off the grid. I want to stay and help humanity but I can;t afford to help and live in Socal. I pray for our men and women who are being asked to deal with Joe and Hunters mess as well as all the other Senators children in the Ukraine. It's bad dude. Seriously, only the elitist who have lot's of rainy day funds still available can ride this out. "What's an extra $5 a gallon of gas to spend" they say. Rent doubles? "Who cares, pay up and help Ukraine take out Vlad." "Send the troops" my elitist pal told me yesterday. I told him he best be prepared to send his son first if he wants to talk like that. Brother Kickingandscreaming we don;t see eye to eye on anything but we both respect each other because were both trying to raise a teenage daughter the best we can and try and help them both play soccer at the highest level. I love you man

 

[Kicker 2.0]

Well…it was good while it lasted……

 

[dad4]

The original claim was that human sexual characteristics are binary. The reality is there are exceptions that reveal the plasticity of the biology. It's a fact that the X can impact the phenotypic penetrance of the Y. In genetics, the exceptions almost always prove the rule. That was my original point.

So it moves, somewhat predictably, to "chromosomally normal", by which I imagine you mean chromosome copy number. Does that provide a clean cut bracketing of "fairness" in sport competition? Well, if you want it to, but that is strictly user defined. Not all X's not all Y's, not all autosomes, are created equal with respect to their contribution to a given trait. Take any metric you want. Height for instance-well studied example. Studies of monozygotic twins raised apart, etc, indicate about ~85% of human height is genetically determined, nurture be damned. Youth soccer coaches are intuitive population geneticists. Little U8 Jr. walks up with mom and dad to the tryout and coach places mom and dad on a percentile, halves the difference. Depending on the values of the coach, Little Jr. makes the cut or not, even if they had good moments on the pitch. To the extent that variance in a distribution for an individual trait can be attributed to genetics the overall message is that life is not fair. Take individuals close to the median. Give them their 10,000 hrs. Do they become outliers? Youth sports, sure, but don't go complaining about it to Li-Fraumeni families.

So it seems ironic to me to try and adopt a genetic parameter as a criterion of fairness, when ithe overall message of genetics is that, from a human value standpoint, competitive advantage is intrinsically unfair. That's not a rabbit hole. It is a direct, and, from my perspective, important, extension of the argument. Perhaps that is why sport actually exists in the first place, to provide a means to show that chance and pluck matter despite it all.

Look, I read what you wrote about Alan Turing. I know your heart is in the right place. But dragging genetics into human value framing issues with adjectives like normal and elite (OK that was the other post) leads PDQ to some historically dark terrain.

Mostly, I just want my kids to be able to have a fun experience with sports, and I want the same for other people’s kids.

At the rec level, a trans kid on a youth sports team, like any other kid on a sports team, is a good thing.

As you get closer to college sports, it gets different. All of a sudden, you have tryouts and cuts. It becomes a zero sum game. If Emma has a place, it means that Susie does not.

And, once you make it a zero sum game, fairness really matters. Placing mtf trans athletes in the women’s events is not a fair solution.

 

[Emma]

The "conflicts" have been resolved in favor of allowing transgender participation in women's sports. This was resolved 20 years ago with the IOC and more than a decade ago with the NCAA.

Yes, I can use the word transphobic when it is appropriate, and it is appropriate when someone cannot even accept the legitimacy of the arguments in support of transgender participation in women's sports. It is also transphobic when people make fake and irrational arguments to oppose transgender participation, such as "it's dangerous" when we're talking about someone swimming in a pool and no one in NCAA history has ever been injured in over a decade because a transgender woman participated in college sports or how the 19th century definition of "woman" is a sports rulebook, or how a transgender woman in the restroom means the end of the world. The problem here has nothing to do with me being "unwilling" to understand and accept the arguments against transgender participation in women's sports. I understand them quite well. The problem is that people like you and your more obviously transphobic friends cannot understand and accept the arguments against transgender participation in women's sports. I've weighed the pros and cons and picked one side, but you and your friends aren't willing to weigh anything. You can't even muster the willingness to accept that there are legitimate arguments on the other side of the debate. Instead, you're making ridiculous claims that "no one wants to stop transgenders from enjoying their lives or living their best lives", which is utter rubbish and you know it. You and your friends obviously want them out of sports. You want them out of the women's restroom. You want them out of being able to get married if they're in love with someone of the same biological gender, which also means you want them out of the favorable tax and intestate succession laws you enjoy. You want them out of any business that doesn't want to sell services or products to them. You want to be able to keep mocking them like micpapa because you think it's funny. It isn't funny for the reasons the Utah governor tried to veto the law.

There you go making assumptions about me and my friends, again.

Are you saying Caitlyn Jenner is transphobic? She has the same view I do regarding women's high level competitive sports.

None of the positions you spoke above reflect me and my friends. I probably have one or two but they've been childhood friends I can't remove from my life because they add a lot of humor to it.

The NCAA has realized they need to change the old rules too. They are going to let each sport decide how to manage the situation.

I support people living their lives the way they want to.

You seem to be having a problem with understanding that two working minds can have differing positions, and that's very closed minded of you.

Everyday, I have to balance out my desires and needs vs society (other human beings in the world). The problem with your position is, you're asking people to not balance any of society's needs with transgender needs. You're asking society to just give in to transgender desires regardless of how it may affect others. While I do support most of what my transgender fellow human beings want, I also support women competing at a high level and scientifically, they can't compete against biological male at the highest level.

I have read a lot of information and taken a lot of time to consider my position. As a society we are pushing each other to create a solution that will work out, as the IOC and NCAA and currently figuring it out too and changing their rules constantly.

The restroom thing - most people are not concerned about transgenders, but they were concerned about the straight jerks, child molesters, or perverts, who would abuse the rule and go into the girl's restrooms. Unisex bathrooms, family bathrooms and single stalls were a good solution.

 

[GoldenGate]

Your zig zag skills are amazing. Why are you insisting that transwomen aren't being treated fairly? I see that my use of he in reference to the time period when she trained and competed as a he offends you. Get over it, it's fact that she was a he before she was a she. Biologically she is still a he. Why are you so afraid of that? Interesting. She can identify however she wants, not opposed to it, could really care less. But the willfull avoidance of science and your continued ridiculous accusations creates such a clownlike environment that you can hardly be taken serious.

You clearly care very much. Why does it bother you so much to refer to a transgender woman as "she"? Language and grammar is not "biology", and many languages don't even use different gender pronouns. Man, it must drive you nuts when people identify their preferred gender pronouns on their email signature lines.

Can you explain again why "science' makes it impossible for a transgender woman to swim in a race against biological women? I'm having a hard time believing that given that we have all seen it actually happen. That, of course, stands in contrast to an all powerful invisible man in the sky who told everyone to kill trans women up until he changed his mind. Can you please explain the "science" behind that while you're at it.

 

[GoldenGate]

Mostly, I just want my kids to be able to have a fun experience with sports, and I want the same for other people’s kids.

At the rec level, a trans kid on a youth sports team, like any other kid on a sports team, is a good thing.

As you get closer to college sports, it gets different. All of a sudden, you have tryouts and cuts. It becomes a zero sum game. If Emma has a place, it means that Susie does not.

And, once you make it a zero sum game, fairness really matters. Placing mtf trans athletes in the women’s events is not a fair solution.

No one was cut from the Penn swim team to make room for Lia Thomas. Regardless, if you're the worst swimmer on Penn's swim team of more than 40, it is time to move on in life.

If you want your kids to have fun in sports, rec puts a real premium on that, so feel free to steer your kid in that direction. I know it's getting hard to for biological women to find college soccer teams now that trans women have taken over the game and all, so it's beginning to sound like that's the best place for snowflakes anyway.

 

[GoldenGate]

There you go making assumptions about me and my friends, again.

Are you saying Caitlyn Jenner is transphobic? She has the same view I do regarding women's high level competitive sports.

None of the positions you spoke above reflect me and my friends. I probably have one or two but they've been childhood friends I can't remove from my life because they add a lot of humor to it.

The NCAA has realized they need to change the old rules too. They are going to let each sport decide how to manage the situation.

I support people living their lives the way they want to.

You seem to be having a problem with understanding that two working minds can have differing positions, and that's very closed minded of you.

Everyday, I have to balance out my desires and needs vs society (other human beings in the world). The problem with your position is, you're asking people to not balance any of society's needs with transgender needs. You're asking society to just give in to transgender desires regardless of how it may affect others. While I do support most of what my transgender fellow human beings want, I also support women competing at a high level and scientifically, they can't compete against biological male at the highest level.

I have read a lot of information and taken a lot of time to consider my position. As a society we are pushing each other to create a solution that will work out, as the IOC and NCAA and currently figuring it out too and changing their rules constantly.

The restroom thing - most people are not concerned about transgenders, but they were concerned about the straight jerks, child molesters, or perverts, who would abuse the rule and go into the girl's restrooms. Unisex bathrooms, family bathrooms and single stalls were a good solution.

The IOC, NCAA and I have all balanced out society's needs with transgender needs, unlike you. We have decided that a swim meet in a pool is not important compared to the need to overcome the shitty way you and your friends have treated transgender women. Again, "equality" is not a la carte. I do like how you relabel "constant abuse of transgender women" as "giving in to transgender desires". That's really high level transphobia.

Enjoy rec soccer. I'd recommend swimming as an alternative, but it looks like the trans women beat you there also.