I actually think that at the high school level, there are plenty of reasons to ban transgender athletes from traditional girl sports. They are fair competition, health and safety issues and because I think the inclusion would discourage female participation in sport. I pick this level as the most important because this is the age I think sports become truly competitive or at least the goal of fair competition is at its highest. I also think at this age inclusion can cause the greatest harm to the other participants, ie. cis females. But because of the breadth of sport, I don't think that exclusion is the sole solution to the issue even at this level, as do the anti trans groups.

While some may not agree, I think professional sports are more perverted by money than any transgender participation issues. So, if pro sports wants to have an all transgender WNBA team, I would expect the fans and customers to either accept the change or vote with their wallets and stop supporting. After the Fallon Fox issue in MMA, I would expect any female fighter to have a clause added in their contract that they only have to fight or defend title against a natural female competitor. I only know of one transgender UFC fighter other than Fox in the last 10 years. But if some professional fighter wants to fight a transgender competitor, why would I care? I would either pay money to watch it or not.

College sports is in a weird transition phase itself. Is it professional or amateur? Are the Olympics amateur after the dream teams? The best college this year may go back to OSU because he will make more money with NIL than a rookie NFL contract? How does that change the equation.

So back in the day when college sport was truly amateur or in a sport likely to not involve NIL money, I could see taking the position that the act of transition does not even the playing field between an athlete that went through puberty as a male vs. one that went through puberty as a female.

I can't name a single sport that females but up better results than males. I don't know of any that it is even close. But turn the situation around, if a transgender athlete wants to wrestle and went through a female puberty, I could see accommodating them by putting them in weight classes two levels lower than their actual weight.

So you asked:

When we are talking about the college or professional level are you saying 1) there are no differences between men and women in sports, 2) there is a difference between men and women in sports but bottom surgery and hormones make men and women perfectly even on the playing field or 3) men and women are different in sports but who cares women sports are boring anyways and this is the perfect excuse to get rid of them?

I think the proper answer is none of these above. I am interested enough in sports, including female sports, and the benefits they bring to try to grow them, rather than limit them and their potential participants simply because one pillar of historical division, by sex is being tested by the transgender athlete.

jjjou812, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I am a bit lost on the last paragraph. I don't think many people ITT are trying to suggest transpeople should not be able to play sport. I think the argument is if they should play against men/open or women.

I think the legislation proposed is to limit the ability of people to make choices in all instances. If it appeared to reference people in this thread, it was not my intent.

Let me give you an easy example - fast pitch softball. I think that is a sport that can accommodate a trans athlete regardless of level of play.

Maybe you don’t let them pitch or you limit their number of innings in an effort to maintain fair competition but there is no need for a ban. It’s a game where it is normal 9 on 1. Does 9.5 -1 really make a difference?

That is completely different from mma fighting.

Then again, I hate baseball.

As someone who played baseball growing up and slow pitch softball for way too long I am failing to see why it would be any more fair for a trans person to play fast pitch softball than most other sport.

I think we can agree sports that require heavy contact are a step ahead of being worse to allow trans people to play with women, but every other sport seems equally or at least close to each other in how dumb it would be to allow this.

I think the obvious answer is the larger the team, the more diluted the physical advantage becomes. At some point the advantage becomes de minimis. I don’t know at which point it becomes di minimis but 9.5-1 is certainly closer than 5:5-5 (basketball) or 1:5-1 (mma).

Again, I have an admitted bias against baseball- the very best offensive players fail a little less often than the average players.

Ah, the thread meisner was so scared to post in! Or he got some weird pleasure from not replying to me here and continuing to blather on about how I "wouldn't answer a simple question". Ah well, no matter now I guess.

Meanwhile, bahbah it looks like I missed your reply, sorry.

I'd think at some point in high school, hopefully not until the later grades, but I'm not stuck on any particular age and would rather let those who know more than me (and more than legislators) sort that out.

That should definitely be a factor, although I have my doubts if it would be a huge one.

None of those, of course, but 2 is close. There is no such thing as a perfectly even playing field. But I think if a person had transitioned in all ways, I can't see how keeping them out would even be an option, or desirable.

But that little less often is huge in terms of an entire season wins and losses.

That’s because it should be.

Also, I thought name calling wasn’t allowed anymore.

Go be irrelevant somewhere else.

I agree. The display of athleticism by the hitter against 9 other players 33 percent of the time just doesn't appeal to me compared to 11-11 battles over 10 yards. Sorry.

Ok but why can't the male transgender woman play with the males?

Pretty sure no one has said they can't.

Whats the reason for them needing or thinking they shouldn't play with the males give they are males the sport is separated by males and females, even tho they are woman?

You don't understand the difference between sex and gender?

I don't know why you choosing to use language in a way completely unique to yourself indicates anything about what I do or don't understand. Pray tell, what did you feel was insufficient about the term "transgender woman" that you thought you needed to add "male" to the front of it? Transgender woman appears to provide all the information we need.

I assume they want to play where they are more likely to win, because winning is fun. But I really can't answer for them.

I copied a prior post on this issue from the other closed thread. While wanting to win can't be understated, saying that is the only reason a transgender athlete would want to continue in their sport against cis athletes is attributing the worst motive to what I would expect to be a multifaceted answer.

I know plenty of great athletes that quit in college because it was too much work and they wanted to enjoy college.

Originally Posted by 5 south
I think it's ridiculous to think someone is going to transition just to win in the girls' league.
I wouldn't actively fight to keep a transgirl off the team, especially given Uke's suicide stats but an above average 15yo male basketball player will crush in the girls' league.
If I was that age and transitioning I probably wouldn't do school sports. I'd be embarrassed to go out there and dominate. Like that swimmer at Penn. Should be ashamed of herself. You have such an undeniable advantage, what's the point?
********
Response
I think just about every statement here is incorrect and believe it will lead to CP posting his George Carlin meme.

Even if I disagree that she should be allowed to compete, I see no reason for her to be ashamed of anything. She was a division one college athlete before her transition and wants to remain after her transition. I would bet she is training in the pool at least four hours a day to compete at this level. She probably lives in an athlete dorm, eats at the athletes dining hall and has a very limited social life compared to most college kids. Then there is the travel to competitions on the weekends. She, like most high level athletes, has probably dedicated at least 30-40 hours a week to swimming for over ten years. And the whole point of all the training and sacrifice is to compete against other similarly dedicated athletes. And win. Winning is the reason for it all. It makes it worth it.

So whether or not she has an undeniable advantage is not a reason for her to not want to compete in her sport of choice. It may be a reason for the NCAA to not let her compete against female athletes. It probably discourages other females from wanting to endure the sacrifice given the unfair advantage of the the trans competitor. But she should not be ashamed for wanting to compete in a sport she is dedicated to and trains for at a high level.

I realize its narsisistic and not in the spirit of competition but I'm speaking for the logic behind allowing it.

You seperate between male and female, and then let a male play with the females with an unfair advantage of begin male.

Where is the logic?

Because he cheated. He's a male. He has a body they don't and can't have. Its unfair and any reasonable athlete feels that way and would be ashamed. Only a narcissist would feel this is an accomplishment.

For all the things you are suggesting are worth something, winning in this competition wouldn't make them worthy. It would only make a narcissist male feel that way.

Watch a previous NBC4 report on H.B. 68 in the video player above.

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A bill to ban transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports is at odds with an Ohio High School Athletic Association policy that is allowing fewer than 10 trans athletes to take part this school year.

House Bill 68 would bar all trans students from taking part in female athletics and revoke the OHSAA’s trans-athlete policy, a measure that provides a step-by-step process for a trans student to request participation. The policy states trans girls must complete a minimum of one year of hormone treatment and demonstrate, by way of “sound medical evidence,” that she does not possess physical advantages.

Gov. Mike DeWine vetoed H.B. 68, which would also prohibit Ohio’s children’s hospitals from providing gender-affirming care to trans minors, in late December. Still, the Ohio House voted to reverse DeWine’s decision earlier this month, and the Senate is expected to follow suit on Jan. 24.

“Millions of women and little girls in Ohio are looking to the Statehouse and saying, ‘Are you going to protect the integrity of women’s sports? Are you going to allow me, as a woman, to compete on a level playing field in Ohio?'” said Rep. Jena Powell (R-Arcanum).

However, the OHSAA, which said about 400,000 athletes in grades 7-12 participate in its sanctioned sports each year, asserts its policy is effective in protecting the integrity of girls’ sports while also providing participation opportunities for trans students. Seven trans girls are participating in high school sports during the 2023-24 school year, while six took part during the 2022-23 school year.


“H.B. 68 would have a direct impact on the OHSAA’s transgender policy, which has been in place since 2015 and has served our member schools to provide participation opportunities for transgender students without putting biological females at a competitive disadvantage,” the association said. “The OHSAA will continue to advocate for our policy and support of all student-athletes and await the outcome of the Senate’s decision.

Republicans focusing on wedge culture issues attacking, uh, checking notes, seven trans kids?

From the quote it sounds like both parties support the idea of all 400k student athletes having the ability to play the sport(s) they want. The difference is repubs want to protect the ~200k girls who want a safe and even playing field and dems want to protect the 7 who prefer to play with those they have a competitive edge against.

I think anytime a politician favors the 7 over the 200,000 we need to ask them which one of the 3 options below best fit their attitude about women sports:

If we divide by sex what sense does it make to make gender based complaints?