I asked what percentage of females losing to males in elite competitions for serious prize money was too much, and was told that no one supports that happening. I countered that I thought Uke did and was corrected. Thus logic holds that even one occurrence of it happening is too much.

I was hoping to get an answer like 15%. (Which I btw would be fine with as those women should have trained harder).

Stating that Trans people are the real bullies in these scenarios is just pure and nonsensical gaslighting. And suggesting that the story with the 9 year old being bullied is the only story that has received National and International coverage is just false. I think that the topic of trans people participating in sports is an interesting one to debate, but you will get no credibility from me or any other rational individual with these types of statements

This is what you said:

And here's the conversation that transpired:

So, all that has been said is that we don't know of anyone that is "fully supportive of trans people winning races for serious prize money." I don't have an issue with it if that's how they decide to structure the race, but there may also be events where it makes sense to structure the races with rules around transgender participation, a separate category, what have you. Happy to let adults sort out how they want to run their races, knowing there will be some **** ups now and then, and they'll have to figure it out.

To put it another way, if someone decides to organize an amateur event with rules that allow transgender women to enter and win women's events, then why would there be a number where that would become unacceptable? The organizers might have one, and then they can change the rules if they like.

In that case:

For the people who are partially supportive of trans people winning competitions for serious prize money against females, what percentage of this happening is too much?

I mean hopefully we can all agree that if it were happening 100% of the time...e.g. males were winning all of the women's events, that that would be too much. And if some percentage of the time is ok, then how much is too much? It's a simple question.

I'm saying 15%.

Sorry, I did a bunch of editing of that post. I think what I added at the end addresses this:

To put it another way, if someone decides to organize an amateur event with rules that allow transgender women to enter and win women's events, then why would there be a number where that would become unacceptable? The organizers might have one, and then they can change the rules if they like.

"It's up to the organizers" is an interesting dodge but I'll give you credit for it.

I suppose I could reword the question hopefully one final time:

For the people who are partially supportive of trans individuals winning events for serious prize money against females, if the rules allowed for unfettered participation of trans individuals in such events, then what percentage of trans individuals winning such events would be too much, if any?

My answer is still 15%.

I would agree with this but I also think the amateur female athletes should have a choice whether to compete in an event with or without transgender athletes without being labeled transphobic by the Ukes and Trolls of the world.

Well, honestly I think it's kind of a silly question. There might be events where no one cares, and so the number could be 100%. There might be other events where everyone cares and the rules are changed before it even happens. Why would I have some % of winners that I think is acceptable for events that I don't participate in, watch, or have anything to do with?

My answer remains the same.

Do you mean that they should be able to choose not to enter because they don't like the rules, or that they should be able to determine the rules?

I think the point is that if a specific league announces that trans athletes are welcome to participate in a league that offers x amount of $ then it doesn't really make a difference if first place is 100 or 100K. Its up to the league and the participants and that's the way it should be. That seems quite different than the avenue to the highest most lucrative competitive class or the Olympics doing the same thing.

I would hope you would care because you care about sports and would want to see female sports preserved.

Your take is basically: if Saudi Arabia wants to ban females from playing sports why should I care?

Welp, I guess I should've known that's what I would get for trying to discuss the issue seriously with you.

No idea where this is coming from. I asked a super simple question and you lawyered up, forcing me to reword it multiple times. Now apparently you're taking your ball and going home.

You could just say 20% and I'd be like "I think that's a bit high but ok".

Right, it's a real sincere discussion when you compare organizers of an amateur event allowing transgender women to compete in a women's race with Saudi Arabia banning females from playing sports. And insinuating that not worrying about said organizers doing that means I don't care about preserving female sports. Yeah, it's just a mystery as to why I'd "take my ball and go home".

Maybe we could try starting over:

Bobo: Do you agree that if males were always winning women's sporting events that involved serious prize money that that would be problematic, regardless of whether the rules allowed for their participation in such events or not?

It's a yes or no question.

If transgender women were always winning the vast majority of women's sporting events that involved serious prize money that would be problematic, and I expect we'd see said rules change.

Actually the problem isnt events with serious prize money its more the high school and college ranks

Yes. I think we're seeing changes when the numbers are still quite small, and thus we'd never get to the point where it became the vast majority.

My question was always: at what level would it become problematic for you (or for Uke or anyone else who is..at least partially.... supportive of trans participation at the highest levels in women's sports)? On this I never got a straight answer and that's fine-- I'm fine moving on without it.

Formula 72's point (if I'm understanding him correctly) is that the backlash we're seeing to the trans movement is at least partially driven by some of the high profile stories of trans individuals winning events at the highest levels and thus ignoring them and/or pushing for increased acceptance of trans individuals at the elite level is counterproductive to the overarching aim of greater trans acceptance-- which I thought was interesting. Of course that's all going to play out how it plays out.

Meh. If money isn't involved they should just suck it up. Probably overly cynical.

I think the opposite: because money is involved they should just suck it up. Or boycott it. And fans can decided whether or not to spend entertainment dollars on it.

The high school level is where the scrutiny should be.

You mistake the point about what you perceive as "minimizing". There is a phenomenon I called the social media amplification of anecdotes. It means that something probably zero people ITT were paying the slightest attention to - the amateur adult belgian waffle gravel race - gets elevated because how any and every example of a trans person doing well in sports no matter how niche is going to become a right wing social media phenomenon. Sorry, I don't choose to centre my engagement on these issues around this type of stuff.

The thing is, I don't think anyone in this thread is either ignoring those are pushing increased acceptance of them. I don't think there's anyone that's suggested they're against rules around transgender participation at the highest levels. What some are saying is that it's ridiculous to put so much focus on those while ignoring far more important issues. Might those events be causing some of the backlash? I guess, but how are we going to escape that? While this all gets figured out, there's always going to be some edge cases. Just like there are always going to be some extreme activists that take actions that are easily mockable - this is unavoidable. The issue here is the right wing derposphere is amplifying those examples, and people are lapping it up.

Exactly. Not a lot of concern, I notice, about the minimizing of the story about the transphobic grandparents bullying girls with short hair.

It was a professional race, not an amateur one. It had a first place prize of $5,000.

https://www.belgianwaffleride.bike/

It actually appears to be a tour of some sort or a series of races with multiple events across the US and with one race in Mexico. You calling it an amateur event even though I've previously brought up the prize money is part of a pattern that you seem to have in dismissing any events where trans people win as inconsequential and non-important.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thecult...ssics/%3famp=1

"Belgian waffle ride" refers to a style of race that is apparently popular in..... Belgium.

And here also is where we need to get back to you guys getting your story straight.

Yesterday you argued that you were not supportive of trans women winning races against females for serious prize money. This Belgian Waffle race was one of those events, and yet you dismiss it as being non-important, just as you would with any other type of example of this nature. It reeks of dishonesty and that's why I asked that question that I asked last night about just how many occurrences of this sort are too much.

If females don't stand a chance of making money at the highest levels, then they'll choose to persue sports where they do stand a chance of that while in high school.