197
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] undystains@lemm.ee 17 points 3 days ago

Sounds like someone is preparing for Presidential run for office.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 7 points 3 days ago

Speaking as a Californian, unfortunately, he probably is.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 43 points 4 days ago

Yeah, we should totally focus on something so vanishingly rare and trivial it almost doesn't exist instead of the myriad of real world, life and death problems.

[-] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

It is trivial, but at the same time, this issue is a cultural flashpoint, extremely politicized, and also potentially a vote winner/loser. It's very unfortunate.

I'm not sure what the answer is, but the US just voted for a neo-fascist regime, and some of these cultural/identity issues may have played a role in that.

It's a tightrope, for sure.

All I can say for sure is that whatever the Dems were doing didn't and won't work moving forward. Whether it's true or not, the perception of the democratic party seems to be that they care more about identity than everyday issues. For everyone's sake, it might be time that they attempted to change that perception.

[-] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 3 days ago

We don’t need solutions for wealth inequality nor housing crisis nor cost of living issues nor the rise of fascism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

When you culture is so much about cOMpEtItiOn that you forget that sports are just a made up thing for witch we get to make whatever rules we like. Gender segregation in sports isn't that eternal either.

If you're that worried about different abilities competing, install a tiered system like the Special Olympics.

EDIT: Interesting read: https://daily.jstor.org/gender-incommensurability-in-sports/

What if the separation of competitions, “said to be a natural consequence of the differences between men and women,” is actually is “just a tool to create those differences”?

[-] shasta@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago

Maybe different brackets based on measured testosterone level? The highest tier can be super buff dudes on steroids. Sounds interesting.

[-] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 49 points 4 days ago

Do not engage with such bullshit. This is such a fucking non-issue, that is ultimately more about demonizing one of the most marginalized minorities in history, rather than "protecting" anyone.

[-] Gewoonmoi@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

Yes, but the problem is that the right engages with these issues. It allows them to score points. The left should have never been in a position where it was arguing in favor of trans women in women's sports. It allows the ghouls on the right to dodge the economic and social issues that really matter.

[-] electric_nan@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago

The left should focus on real problems that matter to people in material ways. The right wants to make major cultural battles over some tiny fraction of people. They don't "engage with these issues", they create them. If you feel the need yo constantly defend yourself from every manufactured right wing outrage, you have already lost. By engaging, you legitimize their narrative. Focus on improving peoples' lives in measurable ways.

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You cannot let the right's reactions control what you do. You'll never win if you let that happen.

That's the mistake that centrist triangulators like Newsom keep making.

[-] Gewoonmoi@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

When America shifts to the left on economic issues, that benefits all Americans, especially vulnerable groups like the trans community. The issue of trans athletes in women's sports helps no one. It doesn't help trans people. How does trans atletes in women's sports benefit trans people at large? It only causes hostility against the trans cause and against progressive politics.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WhatSay@slrpnk.net 40 points 4 days ago

You know what's more unfair? Targeting transgender kids.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 62 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Sports are games.

Games are supposed to be inclusive and fun.

Society taking games deathly serious (and equivocating it with academic merit, aka serious pursuits) is the problem.

People rioting and murdering if the game didn't work out for their team is the problem. Putting billion dollar stakes on games is the problem.

Trans people or any people wanting to play games with their friends should be what society fosters and nurtures as the entire fucking point of society's existence. Something something... planting trees something something knowing they'll never sit under...

Nope? let's bring on the climate change induced extinction then. If our values are hyper competitive, dog eat dog bullshit from labor to fucking games, we should go extinct.

[-] Makhno@lemmy.world 41 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Trans people or any people wanting to play games with their friends should be what society fosters and nurtures as the entire fucking point of society's existence. Something something... planting trees something something knowing they'll never sit under...

Coed teams exist. They're finding issue with mtf athletes playing against a league of individuals who didn't go through puberty as a male. That's clearly an advantage, and to say otherwise is to ignore science altogether.

Maybe the solution is non-gendered weight classes for sports, or just more coed teams. Idk

Edit: yall will convince yourselves of anything lol. Really wild the dumb shit some people will say

[-] EmilyIsTrans 18 points 5 days ago

What about trans women who transitioned before puberty? What about cis or intersex women with elevated levels of testosterone? What about sports where it has been shown that after a long enough period of medical transition trans people have no significant advantage over their cis counterparts?

You appeal to science yet fail to cite a single source, so let me do it for you:

An individual's sex does not determine their success or failure at any athletic event despite the high level of competition. This can be demonstrated when looking at not average outcomes, but the level of overlap among outcomes... While sex differences do develop following puberty, many of the sex differences are reduced, if not erased, over time by gender affirming hormone therapy.

[-] TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip 18 points 5 days ago

Ah, yes, let’s make laws specifically banning 2-5 children from ever having fun.

Like… what the fuck is wrong with you that you think a law targeting under 10 people in the entirety of the US is justified and not literally just bullying those kids on a national level to hope they fucking commit suicide? A law to tell 5 kids, specifically, that fuck them and they’re not allowed to have fun is god damn crazy.

https://www.newsweek.com/how-many-transgender-athletes-play-womens-sports-1796006

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] BeanGoblin 17 points 5 days ago

Please tell me what these "issues" are, with peer reviewed scientific sources. There are no significant advantages to a "male puberty" that are not countered by HRT. Furthermore, the same people touting trans kids for their supposed "advantages" are the same people forcing them to develop those "advantages" by restricting their access to healthcare before puberty begins.

The cruelty is the point.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 16 points 5 days ago

There are no significant advantages to a "male puberty" that are not countered by HRT.

Uh... Palm size? Heart and lung size? Height? Don't get me wrong I recognize this for the culture war bullshit it is, but there is some truth to this that needs to be addressed.

Edit: I only read the conclusion (and wouldn't be able to tell if the methodology is flawed anyway) but I found this.

[-] CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee 13 points 5 days ago

So shouldn't we eliminate all players who may have physical advantages? What about a woman from birth who grows to 6'5"? Seems like that'd be an unfair advantage when playing against other women who may be only 5'10".

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

They're finding issue with mtf athletes playing against a league of individuals who didn't go through puberty as a male. That's clearly an advantage, and to say otherwise is to ignore science altogether.

That would be an argument worth discussing if the Nazis weren't also trying to ban puberty blockers and frothing at the mouth claiming the trans agenda is coming for their kids. But no, right now, that's a garbage bad faith argument, because it already has an obvious answer. That's how they poison the discussion.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

Games are supposed to be fair. Unless you're going to completely desegregate men and women's sports, there's a real biological argument to be made here. To pretend otherwise is delusional.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 4 days ago

There is zero biological argument because you cannot make two categories based on sex which encompass everyone.

Example 1:

A cis woman with a genetic mutation which incrases her testosterone levels into the range of cis men. Should she be banned from female competitive sports?

Example 2:

A cis woman with XY gonadal dysgenesis. She has XY chromosomes but the Y chromosome is mutated and doesn't function as it should which causes a "female" phenotype. Should she be banned from female competitive sports?

Example 3:

A trans woman in the 95th percentile of men with regards to physical strength. She is in the 10th percentile of women after transitioning. Should she be banned from female competitive sports?

Example 4:

A trans woman with Klinefelter syndrome and XXY genes. She has naturally very low levels of testosterone and she doesn't require testosterone blockers after transitioning and taking estrogen. Even before transitioning she had less muscle mass, weaker bones and wider hips than the average man as a result of her low testosterone. Should she be banned from female competitive sports?

Example 5:

An African woman who would be in the 1st percentile of man if she were one, both in terms of physical attributes (size, muscle mass, heart size) and competitive results. Some "scientists" argue her race makes her less of a woman and more of a man. Should she be banned from female competitive sports?

There is zero risk of these people "replacing" cis women by the way. Yes, their performance may be greater than that of comparable cis women without any genetical mutations beyond a certajn point.

Yet risk is calculated as [severity] * [likelihood]. And due to the low likelihood stemming from their very low prevalence in the general population, there is no reason to ban them.

Women's sports is about representation of women. Trans women are part of that group, cis women with genetic mutations are part of that group, racial minorities are part of that group. You cannot exclude some women and claim this group is "fair" and representative.

[-] WolfLink@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 days ago

In some sports there are weight classes, because being a certain weight gives you an inherent biological advantage on average over people of a different weight. The weight classes allow anyone to find well-matched competition regardless of their biology.

Women’s sports vs Men’s sports is a similar idea. Separate people by some biological classification that’s often tied on average to an advantage at the sport, so that everybody has the chance to play against someone of a similar baseline.

That division doesn’t have to exclude trans people, but it does mean that a line gets drawn somewhere. And yes, that line might include some cis people with a genetic abnormality getting excluded as well, and some cis men with a genetic abnormality might be included.

If you want to draw the divisions by something like muscle mass or testosterone levels instead of trying to define sex and gender clearly enough for this purpose, that would probably be easier, although “low testosterone sports” doesn’t have the same marketability as “women’s sports” lol.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago

Make a trans league if there’s really such a demand for it. Problem solved.

A separate but equal league? Sure sounds appealing to many to segregate trans people into their own categories.

May as well apply it to bathrooms as well while we're at it.

[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago

What, the same way biological males and females are “segregated” in sports?

May as well just make bathrooms with individual stalls/rooms. Then everyone will shut up about this stupid crap.

I don’t care what you got going on down there at the end of the day, but you’re on some crazy shit if you think it’s fair to make trans women that have gone through puberty compete against other women. It’s just simple biology, nothing evil about that.

Do you believe segregating a minority group making up 1-2% of the population will not have discriminatory effects? That there will be equal access to funding, scholarships, competition and sport leagues?

You can't seriously believe this. Isn't it plainly obvious that this would be an excuse to ban trans people from doing any sports? That any sports club will just argue there aren't enough trans people to allow them to be members?

And I'd seriously like to know how it is unfair for cis women to have to compete against trans women in chess. Right now trans women are barred from competing in any women's leagues regardless of when they started transitioning by the way.

How do trans people have any advantage in hundreds of other sports, from gymnastics to ballet to competitive diving - all of which have a more or less significant artistic element?

By the way, there are already discriminatory regulations barring certain cis women in the name of "fairness":

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone_regulations_in_women%27s_athletics

Also, what a coincidence:

At the 2020 Olympics a number of athletes, all from African countries, were withdrawn from their events because they did not meet the eligibility regulations.

Sure sucks for these Africans that they "randomly" happened to not meet these criteria. It couldn't possibly be that certain ethnicities are more or less likely to have certain genetics.

[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

If there’s a demand for it it will happen. And chess isn’t a real sport lol It’s as much a sport as “competitive gaming”

[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago

Have you ever watched women’s sport vs. men’s..? Like cmon lmao.

Have you seen how big some NFL guys can get?? Imagine putting one of those guys in a women’s league? Put an NBA all-star in the women’s league? Imagine Mike Tyson in his prime fighting a woman. People would be hospitalized every minute

This crazy shit is what turned everyone off of Democrats this time around. All for like the maybe 10 trans athletes this would even apply to

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Sports are a pathetic institution when they're more about competition than fun.

Life is competitive enough.

[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago

That’s your opinion, which I completely respect. But a lot of people make a living from sports and allow themselves to pull their families out of poverty because of it. Are you going to take that away from them because there’s a double digit number of trans people that this even applies to?

You sound like you don’t watch professional sports enough in a way to understand what I’m saying, which is fine but also why I’m trying to make this point

[-] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 32 points 5 days ago

Yeah I'm not touching this with a ten foot pole. This is so low priority.

The way I view it is they claim to believe in a free market. I don't know of any leagues off the top of my head that aren't companies. If one company chooses to do it one way and it is actually bad for business, another company would replace them if it was actually an issue. But being that it isn't that big of a deal, no rival companies have surfaced to replace them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 38 points 5 days ago

Not placing a value judgement on this, but you can probably expect a lot of Dems to distance themselves on trans issues. It's a group of issues that takes up a lot of air, and divides the party, while uniting republicans.

[-] oyo@lemm.ee 23 points 5 days ago

It's so fucking dumb to capitulate to Republicans on any of these issues, because they'll just find some other bullshit to fabricate into a huge deal amongst their base of morons. Stand behind your beliefs you fucking cowards.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] straightjorkin@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago

It's stupid because their donors do not want them moving left, so they continue to pander to these nonexistent folks that they think will move away from the republican party to vote for them, leaving behind their actual base, who will simply not vote.

[-] knightly@pawb.social 16 points 5 days ago

Sadly. You're correct. The existence of people like me is a wedge issue. >_<

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
197 points (100.0% liked)

News

26876 readers
3855 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS