• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Transgender Athletes

IDGAF what transgendered people do, but genetic males don't belong in women's sports. Full stop. The ridiculous assertions thrown around in this thread are just a bunch of strawmen and red herrings.

You know damn good and well that Lia Thomas benefitted from being a genetic male, and women athletes bore the brunt of her arrogance and the cowardice of the NCAA, but your leftist orthodoxy won't let you be honest with yourself.
 
again, the between the lines assertion/fear here is that "genetic males" are choosing to transition specifically to beat women at sports, or something
 
Biff Tannen said:
IDGAF what transgendered people do,
Click to expand...
Literally a post ago you didn’t want trans women using women’s facilities. Your inability or refusal to stick to a single line of questioning discourages any good faith you believe you deserve on this. Athletic fairness is a topic regarding how physiology affects sports performance - it has -zero- to do with transwoman using the restroom or changing clothes.
 
Biff Tannen said:
IDGAF what transgendered people do, but genetic males don't belong in women's sports. Full stop. The ridiculous assertions thrown around in this thread are just a bunch of strawmen and red herrings.
Click to expand...
Your entire fake cause is a red herring. It's not a real problem. It's a red meat problem for neanderthals who exist to hate the other because of their own insecurities.

Things that are not red herrings or strawmen are death threats, violence and other hate crimes, legislative restrictions on medical care for trans people (mostly in dumbass red MAGA states), mental health issues associated with the hate/discrimination, etc. All of these issues are vastly more important and prevalent than your little bullshit red herring.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/epidemic-...nce-highlighted-new-report/story?id=105036934
 
Biff Tannen said:
IDGAF what transgendered people do, but genetic males don't belong in women's sports. Full stop. The ridiculous assertions thrown around in this thread are just a bunch of strawmen and red herrings.

You know damn good and well that Lia Thomas benefitted from being a genetic male, and women athletes bore the brunt of her arrogance and the cowardice of the NCAA, but your leftist orthodoxy won't let you be honest with yourself.
Click to expand...
I will be honest, I really don't give a shit about sports when it comes to this issue. I think we place too much societal emphasis on sports, especially when it comes to marginalized populations. I'm concerned about the safety and inclusion of trans folks on a larger societal scale and if sports must be sacrificed for that end, I'm cool with it.

But if we must talk about sports.

A better discussion is about the how and parameters of inclusion of trans women in sports. Forget talk of "genetic males," "used to be a male," "chicks with dicks" etc. The question at hand is concerning competitive advantage*, testosterone level and whether a person has undergone male puberty (which opens a much more important and larger conversation about access to gender affirming care, but we'll put that aside for a moment).

It may be that Lia Thomas had a competitive advantage due to testosterone levels through the course of her life. But the conclusion shouldn't be "ban trans women from competitive sports" and villainizing her (she competed fairly by the rules as written). It also shouldn't be dredging up Juwanna Man as an fear-mongering argument against trans women participation. There is a discussion to be had as to how long a person who has undergone male/female puberty should be on HRT before competing. There isn't a consensus among studies, but most identify that period as between 1-4 years where all competitive advantage from increased testosterone has been mitigated. Current NCAA guidelines suggest 1 year. As we have more trans women competing, it may show that that time period should be longer. Adjusting that requirement is about competitive advantage, not about the identity of trans women.

However, much of the rhetoric is not about finding a solution to competitive advantage, but that trans women are "dishonest," "ego-driven," "men pretending to be women," etc. And that rhetoric is extremely harmful to the trans community.

*But the question at hand, and what's driving the conversation, ISN'T competitive advantage. That is the one foothold that people can grab to voice their opposition to trans women being women and opening up medical rights and access. All of it is a bid against the normalization of trans folks - and mostly about finding a scapegoat that many don't consciously know or can't quite empathize with to maintain power.
 
Last edited:
FWIW "trans woman" (trans is the adjective, woman is the noun) is vastly preferred to "transwoman" (implying they are entire separate from women by creating a new noun)*. The latter is sometimes a dogwhistle (along with "transgenderism", "transgendered people", and the ultra obvious "trans-identified [assigned gender at birth]")

*obviously same deal for trans men
 
IamThunderbolt said:
I will be honest, I really don't give a shit about sports when it comes to this issue. I think we place too much societal emphasis on sports, especially when it comes to marginalized populations. I'm concerned about the safety and inclusion of trans folks on a larger societal scale and if sports must be sacrificed for that end, I'm cool with it.

But if we must talk about sports.

A better discussion is about the how and parameters of inclusion of transwomen in sports. Forget talk of "genetic males," "used to be a male," "chicks with dicks" etc. The question at hand is concerning competitive advantage*, testosterone level and whether a person has undergone male puberty (which opens a much more important and larger conversation about access to gender affirming care, but we'll put that aside for a moment).

It may be that Lia Thomas had a competitive advantage due to testosterone levels through the course of her life. But the conclusion shouldn't be "ban trans women from competitive sports" and villainizing her (she competed fairly by the rules as written). It also shouldn't be dredging up Juwanna Man as an fear-mongering argument against transwomen participation. There is a discussion to be had as to how long a person who has undergone male/female puberty should be on HRT before competing. There isn't a consensus among studies, but most identify that period as between 1-4 years where all competitive advantage from increased testosterone has been mitigated. Current NCAA guidelines suggest 1 year. As we have more trans women competing, it may show that that time period should be longer. Adjusting that requirement is about competitive advantage, not about the identity of trans women.

However, much of the rhetoric is not about finding a solution to competitive advantage, but that transwomen are "dishonest," "ego-driven," "men pretending to be women," etc. And that rhetoric is extremely harmful to the trans community.

*But the question at hand, and what's driving the conversation, ISN'T competitive advantage. That is the one foothold that people can grab to voice their opposition to transwomen being women and opening up medical rights and access. All of it is a bid against the normalization of trans folks - and mostly about finding a scapegoat that many don't consciously know or can't quite empathize with to maintain power.
Click to expand...
Wake grads are smart people.
 
this entire debate is such a waste of time. We could go on and on for weeks making logical arguments, appealing to morality and empathy, but ultimately it comes back to a few hardheaded conservatives insisting that that gender and sex are the same. If Reff and Biff aren’t even willing to acknowledge the legitimacy of transgenderism/transsexualism then this entire discussion is moot.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
this entire debate is such a waste of time. We could go on and on for weeks making logical arguments, appealing to morality and empathy, but ultimately it comes back to a few hardheaded conservatives insisting that that gender and sex are the same. If Reff and Biff aren’t even willing to acknowledge the legitimacy of transgenderism/transsexualism then this entire discussion is moot.
Click to expand...
Are they insisting that? Or are they insisting that sex should determine what sports league you should be in, not gender?
 
Everyone participating here is welcome to limit their comments to sports, but there are a predictable few who are fixated on discussing dicks in dressing rooms. That’s their choice to talk about, and my choice to draw conclusions about them.
 
Reff thinks about dicks all the fucking time, mostly because it’s was the late 90s since the last time his chub was touched by anyone.
 
I don't think reducing the discussion to dicks is helping trans people, but I could be wrong.
 
I'll just ask @Biff Tannen what they are afraid of. How many titles did Lia steal from you?

Trans folk are really taking over our world, so we should totally keep going with these fucking hateful and disparaging takes.... amiright?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top