These studies just don't understand testosterone.


Just because testosterone levels are "equal" between a biological female and a biological male (that underwent HRT), does not mean the playing field is level at all.

I'm a little surprised that in the Great White North, Moose Jaw Elementary has teams that get on a bus and travel to Buzzard's Breath Elementary and have a cricket match. I know there's tons of youth hockey, but didn't think it was actually affiliated with schools.
I am quite amazed you think a 9th grade transgender girl would not have an incredible advantage over a cisgender girl.
Neither do I, other than the whole "competitive" thing I've talked about. Because I think you need to do some incredible mental gymnastics to come up with sports that aren't competitive.

I assume there's a lot of tongue in cheek here. What I can tell you is that here in the Vancouver area, there are plenty of elementary schools that compete against one another in all sorts of sports. Hockey isn't one of them, though. Nor is cricket.

While I wouldn't say that every transgender girl will have an incredible advantage, because people are different, yes, I expect that would be the case sometimes.

If we speak About real Competition outside of school yard it’s pretty much close to always at that age .

Imo it’s not even close and it will get worst and worst for the fairness of the sports as they get older .
We literally speaking about the equivalent of steroid use advantage aka-> taking testosterone to be stronger , which obviously a guy create naturally more then a girl .

Unless we speak about a male that is totally feminine to the core (which imo we wouldn’t see much in competition anyway ).

Ps: I was just speaking from my own experience but it seem that little link here is pretty clear about my experience being right .

https://www.medpagetoday.com/pediatr...diatrics/87447

“ It’s massively different
Clearly male and female aren’t the same just because someone think he/she is ….

"sometimes" doing a lot of heavy lifting here. This is the difference in handgrip strength between males and females. Handgrip strength is a good proxy for physical strength.



Notice, there is some overlap, in that the strongest females can sometimes beat the weakest males. However, even the strongest females cannot match average males.

In other words, males are stronger than females nearly all the time not just "sometimes", with very little overlap in the distribution.

And for the primary driver of this?

People focus on the least important things on this topic IMO. Yes, it's doing some heavy lifting. Maybe I should have said most of the time. Maybe it's almost all the time. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter that much. If it's happening in a sport and at a level/age that is lower stakes and/or inclusion is very important, then I'm not especially concerned whether it's a big advantage some, most, or almost all of the time - I'd default to inclusion. If it's happening in a sport and at a level/age that is high stakes and/or inclusion isn't as critical, then I'm not especially concerned whether it's a big advantage some, most, or almost all of the time - I'd default to protecting the level playing field.

What are those points where it swings to one side or the other? I don't know, which is fine, as I sure as hell shouldn't be the guy deciding it. And I think that applies to most (all?) of us in this thread. And state legislatures sure as hell shouldn't be deciding it.

I mostly agree here, although being precise with language is important and "sometimes" is just not an accurate description of the differences between males and females.

As a general rule, I would default to inclusion for training and practice and exclusion for competition. As an example, I did karate for a couple of years. Default is everyone trains and spars together. However, when it comes to competition you need to match people by ability, and sex is a significant determining factor here, as it is in any sport.

Therefore female safety has to be prioritised over inclusion.

fwiw that is why i asked earlier on which ground we were talking about.
imo if its only about inclusion, i see no problem when its restricted for the school they study in for example (gym class, school yard, etc.) or elementary level .

But as soon u imply outside school leagues , inter high school district/cities competition, and of course inter state +, it just unacceptable.
u basically allowed someone on steroid competing vs girl because he feel like it ?
i just cant go there.
u might even discourage teenage girls from competing at high level because of this.

Sports are often quite different from each other, and the arguments for and against trans inclusion are going to differ. Safety in karate and safety in, say, swimming are going to be completely different and excluding young trans girls from the regional swimming meet can't be argued for safety reasons. I don't know about karate per se, but most combat sports have some combination of weight class and skill level for matching opponents in competitions, as well I would imagine a pretty big emphasis on personal safety within the rules of the sport, so even then I'm not sure how big the safety issue actually is here. My real point is that these types of determinations are better left not to GOP state mandates that apply the same thing to every sport and situation, but much more individually based on the concerns of the individual sports. When, exactly, the stakes are high enough to exclude a trans woman from joining the school's baseball team to play against their local school can be different from when you exclude a trans woman from the karate state championship.

This.

I watched an interview with Riley Gaines and she talks about how when Lia Thomas arrived on the scene after only a year earlier competing as a man and ranked 400th . They were all in shock how she was destroying records and competitors and how uncomfortable the woman felt when Lia was naked in the locker room . She also said many athletes were scared to speak up due to retribution . She also noted that they had actually tied and they only had one trophy and gave it to Lia for the photo opportunities.
She also mentioned they had a swimmer female that transitioned male and competed in the men's division and finished dead last in every meet

She also mentioned that she gets texts and calls from fellow competitors, coaches and directors to keep speaking out.

The sad reality is if you do speak out your subject to violence from the trans activists. We are seeing more and more of it now

She is a brave young lady.

Oh, hey Lozen! You seem to have missed a couple posts again...

You keep bringing this up, and nobody was biting, so I finally looked up the example you were talking about. It appears there is a single incident that the right wing trans hate-o-sphere is broadcasting everywhere. Riley Gaines posted the video evidence of this supposed assault, and, uh, as CNN notes "it doesn't appear to show anyone striking her". Yes, she went to a college campus to spread her anti-trans-inclusion message and yes that meant she was at a protest against her which fair enough, I wouldn't want to be there, but I think you repeatedly going around suggesting trans activists are being violent isn't supported by even the single anecdote you're obsessing over.

Also worth noting that Lia Thomas, whatever you think of that situation, is a situation talking about the absolute elites of swimming, and my general point here and with the Biden ruling is that not all sport is the same level as that and one can simultaneously think Lia Thomas shouldn't be allowed and thinking that the grade 9 regional swim meet should allow trans girls.

No that trans girl should not compete in a regional meet as it is not fair . There are more instances lately of both the trans community and the woke mob committing violence

Lets not forget the Nashville Shooter which may have been a hate crime and we will not know till the manifesto is released if it is ever released with the pressure from the trans community not to and there are other examples of it .

Do you think that?

That's funny, I think the same about you.

For example, this response to when it was "important to focus on inclusion and getting more kids involved" and therefore non-competitive.
I find this either incredibly naive or willfully obtuse. I'll give you intramural, but I don't think there's really all that much intramural happening in K-12. For colleges, I don't think anyone cares. But the others - What do you think the kids on the JV team are doing? They are trying to make it to the varsity. And what happens when a trans women is the star of the JV? Do you just tell her, "Well, sorry. This is where you top out."? I also don't think no-cut is what you think it is. I was on many teams from middle school through college, non of them cut anyone but were highly competitive and very successful.

But that's the problem with the proposed policy - it throws out that it is ok to have restrictions in a competitive environment but doesn't make clear what that is. So, different people have different ideas about what that means. Some will consider anything less than a Division I college team non-competitive (and, as we have seen, not even then). Others will see the local league season in U-10 soccer as being competitive. Most - and I'll include you here, but correct me if I'm wrong - don't think about it and say, "oh, just let everybody play when it doesn't matter" and not really think about what that means and the consequences.

I'm all for inclusion in sports. But I'm also for a fair playing field. The proposed policy is fine except for being vague about when it is ok to have limits on participation. This means it will solve nothing and only lead to more fights.

So when she advances to grade 10, you just tell her, "Sorry, you're done here"? And what do you tell the girl that got second place, because that will happen.

More or less, with the caveat that I'm the least certain and the most agnostic around the "transition point" for any given sport. That is, I generally think trans people should be included in most lower level youth competitions, and should be excluded in the pinnacles of elite sports like olympics. For each sport - and it will be different and should be up to the individual sport governing bodies - the transition points by definition are going to be hard to draw objectively. My personal take is Lia Thomas' competitions are on the side of eliteness that she should be excluded, but I'd respect the view of someone who argued I was wrong and the line should be a little higher instead.

More or less. I don't think grade 10 is the boundary I'd personally choose, but yes if you accept the framework that accepting trans people in lower level youth sport but not in elite sport then there will be some transition points where someone progresses over the boundary and can no longer compete. I'd try to approach that conversation with a lot of empathy. And I'd tell the 2 through nth places the same types of things I tell anyone who got 2 through n, that they did a great job and should be very proud of their hard work.

That's how laws work. They're subject to interpretation. We can all agree that a 6th-grade intramural track meet is less high-stakes than an NCAA championship game. Deciding which events should be excluded is something the courts can hash out.

Simply saying "all sports are competitive" is obtuse and hyper-literal. We can still draw distinctions between them. I mean, I personally am fine with removing the exceptions and letting trans kids play whatever, but you know Republicans will lose their **** over that. So we have a compromise that's admittedly not perfect.

I obviously believe that there is a enormous difference between youth level sports and NCAA and up to the Olympics. I also believe that statistically, there just aren't that many trans kids out there to cause a lot issues in these lower level sports. I mean, we are looking at a like a couple at most for an avg sized school and obviously not all of those will be prone to a problem. You just aren't going to have very many situations relatively speaking in sports as a whole. I hope that isn't construed as saying that trans lives aren't important.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to take your position of inclusion in youth sports while realizing that allowing Lia Thomas to compete in that division was a circus show.

That's a terrible way to run a country. Look at how it worked on abortion.

Yes, I agree completely. To me, the fact that trans people are a small fraction so your average sports team like maybe has one trans person on the team, is part of the analysis that this is an ok thing to include them at lower levels of competition. It just numerically isn't going to wreck the experience. But it would be a disaster at the olympics.


I don't like referring to any trans person as a "circus show", but ok.

Sure, it’s going to be a mess. There’s no clean solution when people fundamentally disagree over whether trans kids should be allowed to play school sports.

What are the other instances of the trans community commiting violence?

You're just making up that it could be a hate crime. There is no reason to think it is other than wanting to vilify trans people. Am I missing any available information that suggests otherwise?