OT "I'm Dealing With A Few Transgender Issues"

If you track the quotes up you can see that was the wrong interpretation.

It's all good though. I understand things can get heated in these conversations and I don't take honest misunderstandings personally.

 

Point taken.

Though, I would point out that screening is recommended to know if men should have a breast exam or not. Breast cancer is 100 times more common in women than in men. Hernias are 6-8x more common in men than women. But hernias are more often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed in women as well.

It doesn't appear that they do the "turn your head and cough" hernia check in most states on men any longer anyway. And women are about 100% more likely to have their sport impacted by allowing a physically dominant sex to play down into their division than men.

We can certainly agree that males and females are biologically and physically different.

And that the medical world is waking up to this very fact. Women are up to 8x more likely to have knee injuries, hip injuries, etc. Cis-women have to contend with the menstrual cycle during training. The sexes are born with significantly different physical abilities.

Some of these differences can give people who were born male advantages that should exclude them from competing down into "cis-women only" leagues, IMO.

I am also not in favor of eliminating "cis-women only" leagues for reasons stated above in this thread.

However, if a league doesn't think allowing other sexes would hurt their league, I am 100% opposed to prohibiting them from opening it up.

I simply support the idea of a policy in which physicians verify physically who qualifies without regard to feelings and opinions. But I would advocate for the policy to include the least invasive method to verify, and that a league is only allowed to institute a restriction if all competitors are subject to the same process to prevent any person from being singled out during or after a competition.

Again, I understand that this is a touchy subject, and I'm trying to be sensitive to that without avoiding the conversation altogether, because I think it's important. I apologize if I say something which offends anybody. That is not my intention.

 

Again, all this who gets to play what sport where and when misses the point.

 

Can you please explain this a bit further?

The reason I engage in the discussion is that I have three daughters who are competitive athletes and over the years have had many discussions with various people involved in women's sports about the impact of these movements on women's sports.

It seems to me women's sports is the only legitimate classification issue. From my perspective, coming up with an elegant solution here gives those trying to target the trans community less ammunition.

I don't think ignoring this issue is a good thing. I think that exasperates the problem.

 

Yes, sports are important to many people. But trans people have been around for a while. Yet in just the past few years there has been a mad rush to ban specifically trans girls and women from sports. That trans boys and men are rarely mentioned tells me it's not about privacy or integrity of sports. And many promoting anti trans laws have regarded women's sports with contempt.

As I said, it's a wedge issue to drive home that some people are not entitled to civil rights.

 

The concern I'm addressing is about an unfair advantage. Which is the whole reason we have women's sports anyway. Otherwise women would just compete with men.

Trans boys and men don't have an unfair advantage against anybody, so I assume that's why nobody is complaining about them. There is nothing to be concerned about.

 

That is not the case.

I fully recognize and celebrate that there are many kinds of people, and wish all of them well.

My position is that cis-women should not be forced to compete against anything other than sis-women in athletic competition. Because none of the other kinds of people deal with close to the same physical and biological disadvantages that cis-women have to overcome to compete and remain competitive.

I welcome and encourage all of the other kinds of people to compete in all of the other leagues.

I'm not opposed to unfair competition in general. But if we weren't interested in protecting cis-women's rights to compete amongst themselves we wouldn't have women's leagues or women's divisions in the Olympics.

Expecting healthy competition between sis-women and non-cis-women in all athletic competitions is simply unreasonable. And so protecting the league's ability to make that decision themselves is important to the health of women's sports.

Having an elegant routine method for a neutral medical professional to classify who qualifies to compete with cis-women would be a step toward removing the opportunity of those who would target trans athletes.

If it's about competition, everything we know tells us cis-women cannot reasonably be expected to consistently compete against non-cis-women.

If it's not about competition then there is no reason to place non-cis-women in divisions against cis-women. There are unlimited other divisions for them to compete in.

 

Did something change? I've never seen anyone say sis-women or sisgender.

 

Well if Yam has tapped out of this thread I think I'll take it off my checklist.

 

Just trying to be as accurate as possible.

 

Why aren't you using cis?