569
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
569 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29987 readers
2814 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's sad you got so downvoted and only had one reasonable reply. Trans people should be free to do what they want of course but I find it hard to disagree with you in that they would have a biological advantage in certain sports. But I'm sure it can work both ways, a trans man could have a biological advantage in other areas. But like the other person said, no one really cares about those things except the media.
In Alabama, when they were considering bans on youth transgender therapy, one of the GOP senators made them do a study. It turned out that over the past decade there were, on average, something like 5 minors undergoing any kind of gender-affirming treatment. 5. In the whole state of Alabama. They decided it wasn't worth implementing a whole government oversight system to oppress that few people.
Now think about how many of the people, under 18, are both self-aware enough to realize they're trans-fem (because no one raises a fuss about trans-masc athletes) and super excited about competing in women's sports. We are talking about a handful of people across the whole country.
And that's what makes them such a great wedge issue for the right. Essentially no one has personally encountered a transgender youth athlete, so they can make up whatever stories they like, based on "sounds reasonable."
Meanwhile, competitive sport is essentially all about rewarding genetic freaks. People with some gene mutation that lets their muscles work faster, lets their blood carry more oxygen, lets the build mass faster. If you worry about the biological advantage that a chemically suppressed hormone might have, you're starting down a path where you have to police what other biological traits might give someone advantage. It'll be "too tall to compete in basketball."
just want to note that trans masc athletes are de facto banned from all competitive sports because they take testosterone, a performance enhancing substance that disqualifies them from competing. thats why no one talks about them. as soon as you think about including trans mascs in mens sports you open up a whole messy can of worms about policing hormone levels, which spills over into womens sports and leads to a fundamental reexamination of sport as a whole, leading back to your point about sports rewarding inherent genetic advantages.
honestly i think sports and structured competition in general is fundamentally flawed. taken to its logical conclusion it becomes a technological competition, which people introduce more and more convoluted rules to prevent, ultimately undermining and corrupting the original purpose of the competition. you can see it in every single sport; swimming banning fancy suits and swimming underwater too far, cycling banning aerodynamic optimization, running banning fancy shoes, vehicle racing banning all kinds of technology, etc. every sport runs into it eventually, and our bodies are just the next untapped frontier for technological improvement. taken to its logical conclusion one questions why we bother with sports at all, if we aren't going to seek ever greater improvements.
Reality is non consistent with your claims of biological advantage.
Thank you.