• danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    So in your opinion it’s an all or nothing thing? Like, you can’t question one area without going full bigot?

    • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      In many ways it is. The actual science on trans athletics supports policies like those sports agencies have typically used - allowing people to compete if they’ve been on certain hormonal treatments for a specific period of time. Cis athletes also have advantages and disadvantages, relative to each other, based on testosterone level. Trans women on HRT are well within that range of performance. In many sports, trans women are actually at a disadvantage to cis women, due to the fact that trans women tend to have lower testosterone levels than cis women.

      In other words, the science is completely against sports bans. There is no logical reason to do them. The truly scientific solution is to consider sports on an individual basis, and let the sport figure out what advantage/disadvantage trans folks might have. Then, if that advantage/disadvantage is well within normal player ranges, then competing is fine. If not, if it’s an individual sport, maybe a handicap system. If it’s a group sport, well maybe rules about how many trans people can be on any one team. Etc. You start at a position of aiming for fairness. Then you only prevent people from competing if a clear advantage can be justified. In other words, the complete opposite of blanket sports bans.

      With sports bans, you’re not meeting someone halfway on an issue of great scientific debate. You are simply caving to irrational bigotry. People think trans people are gross, so they want to hurt them. That’s really the root of this. And you can’t compromise with someone that isn’t actually trying to craft good public policy. Two people can compromise on tax rates or the generosity of government benefits. But how do you compromise with someone that just wants to hurt other people? Their desire to hurt others isn’t going to end. They’ll just want more. Compromising with bigots only emboldens them.

      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        Also for god fucking sake it’s fucking evil to harass individual athletes who are abiding by those rules and participating in a sport they love. The fact that I scroll past virulent hatefests against Lia Thomas on Facebook, or that Imane Khalif’s personal medical history is apparently everyone’s personal business is gross and evil.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I certainly agree that it should be up to the sports agencies to do what is most fair for the athletes. And congress should not get involved unless they are failing to do so.

        I just think that reasonable people have concerns about this specific issue, and it is not fair to treat somebody like a bigot for expressing concerns. If I had a daughter who was losing to a team with a 6 foot 2 trans female, or competing with that same person for scholarships or even a place on the team, I would absolutely be piss. No amount of studies would make me feel ok with this.

        And to act like Newsom is a bigot just for telling these people that he hears their concerns is a sure fire way of losing support from people that would otherwise be right on your side. This is how Trump Jr gets elected in 2028.

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          If I had a daughter who was losing to a team with a 6 foot 2 trans female

          How many transgender girls play in any high school sport in your state? Or I guess, played last year because I think they’ve all been banned.

          I had a student on puberty blockers. She was tiny. No “advantages” I could see.

          Ultimately, it should be case by case, working with the doctors and individuals.

    • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      No.
      If you fall back in front of the far right they will take that ground and demand more, as they always have done, and as they always will do. It’s how they win, it’s how they are winning, on trans rights, on immigration, on racial supremacy. Do not give them an inch. It’s not “all or nothing” it’s “give the bigots nothing”.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Ok, but what if you are not giving into demands, but stating your feelings that just happen to align, in that one area, with the right?

        My point is that Trans issues have many different areas. Saying they’re wrong in one area does not mean you are abandoning trans people entirely and just as bad as the bigots that want harm done to them.

        Just want to say, I don’t know all of what Newson has said, just read some articles that had 2 or 3 quotes. It’s hard to know what his overall opinions are, though.

        • DimlyLitFlutteringMoth@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I honestly cannot fathom how you can be looking at the situation of the US currently and not realising how wedge issues based on lies and bigotry work and the absolutely deletrious effect it is having on minorities.

          I suppose you’ll still be equivocating and making excuses when it’s gone past travel bans (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/marco-rubio-state-transgender-visa-b2704734.html), erasure of LGBT literature (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/banned-books-lgbtq-transgender-black-people-of-color-pen-america-rcna193879), banning of social and medical transition (https://www.hrc.org/resources/attacks-on-gender-affirming-care-by-state-map, https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/texas-not-for-freedom-house-bill-could-ban-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-adults/ar-AA1AjTF5), the creation of specific crimes for the existence of transgender people (https://msmagazine.com/2025/03/03/montana-hb-446-criminalizes-trans-existence-social-contagion/), the removal of protections in law (https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/01/23/trump-administration-moves-reject-transgender-identity-rights) and we’re in camps waiting to be “purified”.

          Why are you falling for wedge issues that are designed to wipe out a group of people in a way that absolutely parallels actions taken by Nazis? Is a discussion about 10 athletes out of hundreds of thousands that important?

          • danc4498@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            My entire point is that it is not “all or nothing”. You can say the debate on male/female athletics is a complicated one where both sides have valid point and also think literally everything else you posted is disgusting and should never be considered.

            If we’re being honest, this sounds very reminiscent of how republicans in the early 2000s would take objections to the war as “not supporting the troops”. Or the way people that criticize Israel for their treatment of Palestine are called antisemitic when they fully support the Jewish people.

            You can believe different things about each debate without being a full on bigot that wants to open concentration camps for trans children.

        • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          The thing is you don’t align with the far right. At least I hope you don’t anyway. The far right either hate trans people, or they do not give a shit about them either way. They are using trans people as a political football to sow exactly this type of division. Yes, trans people in sport is an unresolved problem. No, I do not want the right wing to be the ones to resolve it. If you align superficially, you still don’t want to cede to them. Bear in mind “align” only goes as far as saying “we can agree about this one sentence”, not this whole issue.
          Godwin’s law is fucked these days so let’s just use the third Reich as an analogy. You may agree that Germany has a legitimate territorial claim on Alsace-Lorraine. Does that mean you should let the Nazis take it? No, you fight them and then resolve it when someone more reasonable is asking. The reasons why should be obvious, and so should the analogy. It’s not about whether the extremely superficial claim is “correct”, it’s about why they are saying it and what they plan to do if they get enough people to agree with them.
          In this case, where the war is one of ideas, you’re not a bigot if you agree in a very superficial way, but it’s completely redundant to be talking about trans women in sport when all trans people are being stripped of their rights and it looks like things are getting worse. A year ago we were hoping (again) for the first female president; long overdue. That’s not an issue anymore, as women are now being erased from history.

          • DimlyLitFlutteringMoth@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            Thank you for making this post.

            You’ve outlined exactly why allowing the far right to resolve perceived social issues isn’t the way forward, especially when it comes to any sort of “minority” (which seems to be anything that isn’t non-immigrant white Christian cis straight men) issues.

          • danc4498@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Here’s what happens. A republican says 100 things, and 90 of which are batshit crazy and undeniable bullshit, but 10 of them are reasonable.

            If we completely ignore the 10 reasonable things, then we lose all credibility in the argument when pointing the bullshit of the other 90 things.

            I genuinely believe there are people out there that only hear the 10 reasonable things the republicans say and then see somebody like you completely dismiss those things and conclude that YOU are the unreasonable one. These people don’t pay attention the way you and I do, but still have the same voting power (if not more depending on the state they live in).

            Your unwillingness to partition issues and treat them based on their individual merits will only lead to the opposition gaining more support and power.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Sure, but your comment is implying it’s an all or nothing situation. Walking back is walking back and nothing else matters.

        There’s are multitudes of trans issues, and questioning one does not mean you are questioning all of them.

        If somebody thinks people born male shouldn’t be competing in non rec league sports against people born female, that doesn’t mean they should be treated the same as people that want to ban drag shows and ban accepting lgbt children and all the other blatant bigotry coming from the MAGA cult.

        If you can’t accept the nuance in the conversations then there will be no conversation.

        • DimlyLitFlutteringMoth@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          What conversation do you want exactly?

          If you want to pretend there is nuance you will be fully aware that the evidence that supposedly supports banning trans athletes, which is an initial step of control used to further limit transgender people by e.g. preventing them for entering the country, are meta studies based on comparisons of cisgender men and cisgender women, right?

          There isn’t a nuanced debate to be had and I’m sick of pretending that people like myself who just want to live our lives are a subject for debate.

          So yes, worrying about tens out of hundreds of thousands of athletes when there isn’t clear evidence of an advantage is bigoted and not calling that out leads to situations where conservatives and the far right try to introduce bills like that which was recently struck down (thankfully) in Montana.

          Now, question for you - why is it so important to you that a minority of people should have their basic humanity and ability to participate in society be questioned in the way that transgender people are? Why do you support that? Why do you consider that to be an okay thing to do, when the consequences of allowing it are so plain to see?

          • danc4498@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Well, this is a conversation for sure. Brushing somebody off that doesn’t have the same experience as you is no way to keep people on your side.

            I honestly have never heard of a study on trans athletes, so I don’t even know what you’re referring to. And if you’re saying there are biological differences between cisgender people and trans people, this is not an argument I have ever heard and is the exact example of nuance in the conversation I was referring to.

            So, here’s my thinking if you are open to hearing it. I am a very liberal and compassionate person. I have always been. I absolutely support trans people, and if one of my children came out as trans I would be happy for them and support them. The hate that comes from republicans towards trans people (even children) disgusts me. But I have never understood the debate on athletics.

            First, if you’re saying that legislation is largely unnecessary because the governing bodies of the sports leagues are already handling it, I totally agree. Those legislations are more about pointing a finger at trans people and shaming them than it is about protecting young athletes.

            Second, you phrase it as “banning trans athletes”. This sounds different than the debate I have heard. There are plenty of rec leagues or clubs where your sex/gender shouldn’t come into play. And other leagues just depend on sex, not gender identification. Nobody should be saying a trans woman can’t play in a “male” league.

            Now, it seems like you’re saying people born male should be allowed to compete in any competitive league according to their gender. This is where I disagree (and the governing bodies of the leagues should enforce this).

            It seems like there are thousands of years of evidence that people born male have an athletic advantage over people born female. This is the entire reason male and female sports have always been separated. For you to say there is no evidence of an advantage goes counter to what seems obvious.

            If I had a daughter that was in a competitive sport, I would be upset if she was losing to somebody that had obvious biological advantages of being born male (size, strength, etc).

            With all that said, when I hear somebody like Newsom bring up the athletics debate then I hear somebody say liberals are “walking back any support for trans folk”, I feel like this is just throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don’t know if Newsom had other negative things to say about Trans people, which is mostly why I asked the question initially.

            • nicky7@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              My understanding of HRT is that it it changes your muscle density, among other things. Although studies have shown they may still retain higher levels of muscle mass and strength. Anecdotally, a friend of mine is no where near as strong as they were before HRT. I know they were quite shocked when they realized they could no longer lift things they were once able to carry before transitioning.

        • DimlyLitFlutteringMoth@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          It’s honestly disappointing to see these sorts of expressions stated here on Lemmy. It was the shitty, uninformed, “I don’t care for the science or data”, reactionary right wing views that contributed to me leaving Reddit and here we are again.

          I suppose continuing to dehumanise trans folk with the most important issue being a tiny number of trans people competing in a subset of activities, that are inherently unfair, is so much more important than avoiding demicide.

          Got to placate the far right! They are really well known for being reasonable, not demanding more and having positions based wholly on logic without an ounce of hatred slipping through.

          • nicky7@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            I hear you, and I appreciate the way you’ve articulated this. It’s beyond disheartening to see how science and rational discussion are being undermined, often for political gain. For over 30 years, Fox News has manipulated large swaths of the American population into rejecting science, common sense, and even empathy for their own neighbors, friends, and family. It’s frustrating to see so much energy spent on manufactured outrage while real issues are ignored. Just wanted to send my support and appreciation for your perspective.

            e: oof. Mods removed my “You’ve perfectly articulated my thoughts as well.” comment which ended up getting -7 points. They’ve also removed a lot of other comments in our conversations, I’m assuming because they violated rule #4, #5, or #6. I’m assuming they thought mine was low effort posting, but I’m not sure. Either way, as was my intent with the first comment, I’m very impressed with your ability to articulate your perspective.

            e2: I was banned for Transphobia! I can’t articulate how absurd that is. 🥚