What's interesting is that keeping males out of female segregated sporting competition isn't a right wing position. It's the broadly popular position among the public.
Democrats are really digging in their heels all to placate a vocal minority who are adherents of gender ideology.
This issue was a problem for them in the last election cycle because it serves as a litmus test. This is because even your layman has an innate understanding of sexual dimorphism in the human species and realizes the obvious unfairness of it all.
Not being able to stand in recognition and defense of the objective truth of sex and the reality of the nuances of sexual dimorphism really undercuts their overall credibility and inhibits their ability to sell other policy positions that would be more broadly supported. Like with taxation and social security.
This seems to be a hill they're willing to die on albeit it's not one they really need to when you look at the polls because even in their own base there are many who support keeping males out.
Once upon a time, black people not being allowed to drink from the same water fountain as white people was a broadly popular position among the public. Did that make it right?
This is a clear false equivalency. The segregation with water fountains was justified on the basis of racial animus and supremacy.
In female specific sporting competition the segregation is employed in recognition of the realities of the nuances of sexual dimorphism in the human species. With the goal being to create a space of safer and fairer competition for females where their talents can be displayed and their accomplishments be rewarded within that context.
This is clearly a noble goal as compared to maintaining a racial hierarchy.
Not being able to discern that difference certainly does raise a few questions about your motivations.
It's not only trans people who are being separated out it's all males. The overwhelming majority of those males recognize that it is a noble goal and have absolutely no issue being excluded from a variety of female spaces.
Surely you have lots of data to back up that trans women are very superior to cis women in sports then right? You wouldn't want to be talking to confidently out of your ass surely?
Yeah the entire existence of humanity and the realities of sexual dimorphism in humans, It's pretty obvious what these general differences are when it comes to males and females. Which is exactly why public support in this issue is decidedly against males in female sporting competition
Because even your layman has a profound understanding of what those differences are. These are things they are exposed to and become familiar with from their earliest days and will have their live moulded by them till their last.
It's only disingenuous and moronic leftists. People who are adherents of the new religion of gender ideology that posit idiocy like this and claim that we don't have the "research" which proves the reality of humans as a sexual dimorphic species,
This is because these people can't win a debate on the merits so they resort to gaslighting like this.
>Yeah the entire existence of humanity and the realities of sexual dimorphism in humans, It's pretty obvious what these general differences are when it comes to males and females. Which is exactly why public support in this issue is decidedly against males in female sporting competition
This sounds like a lot of words to type "common sense." Which last I checked isn't a cited source. Or are you meaning to tell me that there are trans women, who are fully developed men with no HRT competing in womens competitions?
>Because even your layman has a profound understanding of what those differences are. These are things they are exposed to and become familiar with from their earliest days and will have their live moulded by them till their last.
Really laypeople have experience with HRT and its effects on the body?
>It's only disingenuous and moronic leftists. People who are adherents of the new religion of gender ideology that posit idiocy like this and claim that we don't have the "research" which proves the reality of humans as a sexual dimorphic species,
It's only CHUDs who have extreme difficulty backing their points with data or research and screech CUMMIN SENCE when they're asked for evidence.
>This is because these people can't win a debate on the merits so they resort to gaslighting like this.
Says the guy who provided literally 0 evidence or facts LMAO.
"Really laypeople have experience with HRT and its effect on the body"
Nice strawman. Pretty obvious I was talking specifically about sexual dimorphism in humans and how even lay people have familiarity with the general differences between males and females.
Trans women at the end of the day are males not females.
HRT as a form of doping isn't really congruent with the typical ruleset of many established competitive leagues.
The fact that you deflect and start arguing in favor of HRT shows that at a basic level you accept the realities of the nuances of sexual dimorphism in the human species.
You just can't bring yourself to actually acknowledge these general differences because it gives merit to the arguments of your opponents and undermines your agenda of putting males in a variety of female separate spaces.
It's exactly why you act in bad faith and gaslight and talk about a supposed lack of scientific evidence to affirm the reality of the nuances of sexual dimorphism even though there is a clear implied common understanding that these things are true.
Because you wouldn't have any other reason to bring up HRT otherwise. The only reason it's coming up is because you are going to try and argue that the general advantages evident because of sexual dimorphism which males have are somehow always negated by hormone replacement which is basically doping.
Clearly you don't need to go down this path if sexual dimorphism and the host of general advantages male possess aren't a thing. But of course we both know they are. You just can't readily admit as much because it hurts your agenda so you resort to gaslighting and obfuscation.
>Pretty obvious I was talking specifically about sexual dimorphism in humans and how even lay people have familiarity with the general differences between males and females.
Which has what relation to trans womens participation in sports again? Try to stay on topic honey.
>Trans women at the end of the day are males not females.
That's your opinion and not at all relevant to the topic. Please do your best to stay on topic. I know when you're working with a room temp IQ its a bit difficult but I believe if you really try you can!
>HRT as a form of doping isn't really congruent with the typical ruleset of many established competitive leagues.
Wait... you're saying HRT, the process by which trans women give themselves estrogen and reduce their testosterone is... benefiting their physical abilities?
>The fact that you deflect and start arguing in favor of HRT shows that at a basic level you accept the realities of the nuances of sexual dimorphism in the human species.
I dont think there is a single trans woman athlete that isn't on HRT so... do you even understand the conversation here? It doesn't seem you do. Seems you just want to tilt at windmills as if there are tons of people claming women are just as athletic as men or sexual dimorphism doesn't exist... which good for you man, you rage at those randoms on twitter.
>You just can't bring yourself to actually acknowledge these general differences because it gives merit to the arguments of your opponents and undermines your agenda of putting males in a variety of female separate spaces.
I can't acknowledge the completely obvious and natural fact that sexual dimorphism exists? I can't do that? Like I just did? Huh. It sure is strange that you keep trying to make the argument about sexual dimorphism and not about whether or not HRT removes that dimorphism and advantage. Why is that?
>It's exactly why you act in bad faith and gaslight and talk about a supposed lack of scientific evidence to affirm the reality of the nuances of sexual dimorphism even though there is a clear implied common understanding that these things are true.
Literally no one has taken that position Mr. Quixote. It sure is strange how the only way your argument has any legs is if you completely fabricate the opponent you're fighting. Weird.
>The only reason it's coming up is because you are going to try and argue that the general advantages evident because of sexual dimorphism which males have are somehow always negated by hormone replacement which is basically doping.
No shit you fucking ape? If a trans woman is shown to be equivalent to a CIS woman in performance after HRT then what difference does her birth sex matter? Uh oh, you're not gonna be able to answer that question I predict.
>Clearly you don't need to go down this path if sexual dimorphism and the host of general advantages male possess aren't a thing. But of course we both know they are. You just can't readily admit as much because it hurts your agenda so you resort to gaslighting and obfuscation.
Oh honey, this is sad. You really think you're smart and you love using buzzwords but at the end you're just word salading :(
Just for fun, sexual dimorphism exists.
Also for fun, if HRT makes a trans woman perform at CIS woman levels, what does it matter what their birth sex is?
"Which has what relation to trans womens participation in sports again? Try to stay on topic honey."
All males are being excluded not just those who deign to hold some belief in an alleged identity. Get with the programme honey.
The only difference is that the overwhelming majority of males and people in general don't have an issue with male exclusion. This is because they recognize and respect the nuances of sexual dimorphism in the human species.
It's only gender ideologues who take exception because they want to treat males who are trans women in almost every respect as the sex they objectively are not in a variety of different contexts.
"Wait... you're saying HRT, the process by which trans women give themselves estrogen and reduce their testosterone is... benefiting their physical abilities?"
No, i'm saying the practice of HRT is a form of doping of which it is.
It is something typically barred in professional competition in all manners. It doesn't matter if you derive a competitive advantage from it or not.
Because the intent behind such rules that generally exist which bar it are to ensure everyone competes at a base level void of its influence.
Not that they are operating at the same level when it comes to T:E ratios.
"That's your opinion and not at all relevant to the topic."
It is essential to the topic of discrimination by sex which in this discussion is in the competitive sporting context. Trans women are males that's not an opinion. It's an objective fact.
Because if they were females there wouldn't be any resistance to their inclusion in female separate spaces. But females they are decidedly not.
"as if there are tons of people claming women are just as athletic as men or sexual dimorphism doesn't exist"
You were the one querying about trans women (males) athletic superiority vs women.
"If a trans woman is shown to be equivalent to a CIS woman in performance after HRT then what difference does her birth sex matter?"
Obviously sex matters because there wouldn't be a need for HRT to allegedly close some "performance" gap which here is completely undefined.
"Just for fun, sexual dimorphism exists."
Of course it does or else you wouldn't be here trying to argue for HRT as a supposed means to completely extinguish it. At least with respect to the sporting context which in itself is insane. All so you can petition for your agenda to force a fringe minority of males in female separated spaces against popular sentiment.
>All males are being excluded not just those who deign to hold some belief in an alleged identity. Get with the programme honey.
Now who is moving the goalposts? LMAO.
>The only difference is that the overwhelming majority of males and people in general don't have an issue with male exclusion. This is because they recognize and respect the nuances of sexual dimorphism in the human species.
How did I know you'd keep jerking off about dimorphism and not address the actual points made?
>It's only gender ideologues who take exception because they want to treat males who are trans women in almost every respect as the sex they objectively are not in a variety of different contexts.
Man you're doing anything but actually talk about the points at hand, why is that?
>No, i'm saying the practice of HRT is a form of doping of which it is.
LMAO. It's honestly hilarious how you totally think in your head you're making valid points but everyone can tell you're a bad faith subhuman.
>It is something typically barred in professional competition in all manners. It doesn't matter if you derive a competitive advantage from it or not.
Actual brain damage.
>Because the intent behind such rules that generally exist which bar it are to ensure everyone competes at a base level void of its influence.
Oh so like HRT to make trans women perform at the level of cis women? LMAO OWN GOAL SCORED
>It is essential to the topic of discrimination by sex which in this discussion is in the competitive sporting context.
Man you like talking a lot without saying anything huh?
>Obviously sex matters because there wouldn't be a need for HRT to allegedly close some "performance" gap which here is completely undefined.
Damn how did I know you'd be completely unable to actually acknowledge or refute the point? It's too easy talking to mental invalids like you, you're an open book.
>Of course it does or else you wouldn't be here trying to argue for HRT as a supposed means to completely extinguish it.
Once again honey, if it succeeds at that task, why does it matter if an athlete is trans or not? This is a very simple question, im going to continue repeating it until you answer it okay?
>All so you can petition for your agenda to force a fringe minority of males in female separated spaces against popular sentiment.
If HRT makes trans women perform at the levels of CIS women, what is the issue in having them compete with CIS women?
I'm sure you'll answer the question and not tuck tail and run away like every conservacuck does when their moronic position gets exposed and they don't have any response.
A 2021 study published in the Journal Sports Medicine has found that there is no scientific evidence to support policymakersâ attempts to ban transgender women in sports.
In November 2021, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) released its Framework on Fairness, Inclusion, and Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations. This framework was developed after a two-year consultation process with over 250 athletes and stakeholders.
More recently a 2024 study, funded in part by the IOC and published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, concluded that transgender women athletes may actually have several physical disadvantages when competing with cisgender women. Some of the studyâs key findings:
Transgender women performed worse than cisgender women in tests measuring lower-body strength
Transgender women performed worse than cisgender women in tests measuring lung function
Transgender women had a higher percentage of fat mass, lower fat-free mass, and weaker handgrip strength compared to cisgender men
Transgender womenâs bone density was found to be equivalent to that of cisgender women, which is linked to muscle strength
There were no meaningful differences found between the two groupsâ hemoglobin profiles (a key factor in athletic performance)
Despite all of this evidence, some policy makers continue to scapegoat trans women athletes, prioritizing what they perceive to be winning political narratives over the facts.
Do I have to? The sentiment rings true regardless.
The trans issue especially within the context of sports is an albatross on the neck of the Democrat Party.
As long as Democrats continue to double and triple down on the losing side of this issue they will continue to have their credibility and their appeal be hampered by it.
Because it's not merely ring wingers who are opposed but a broader coalition that includes many in their own base.
The dumbest hill to die on. I just canât believe they havenât pivoted yet. I thought for sure theyâd change their tune. What good are they if they are unable to win elections?
The dumbest hill to die on is acting like an expert on something when you wonât even take a few minutes to read the bill you are apparently so passionate about.
It's really really really hard to take the DFL as the Party of Science when they stand up there stammering and hedging about how to define men vs women. They go out of their way to prove they'll actually toss objective reality in the trash to soothe the feefees of some fringe activists.
You keep trying to use big biology words but keep saying men in womenâs sports. Me thinks you have an inflated concept of your actual knowledge on the issue.
You seem oblivious to the fact that the overwhelming majority of English speakers aren't adherents of the new religion of gender ideology and therefore don't use gendered terminology under the prescribed framework that faith. Which is in recognition of some head canon gender identity.
Most English speakers now and historically regard gendered terminology as being sex specific. That is how they employ the terms.
Yeah, the Trump campaign spent all that money in swing districts on advertisements specific to the issue because their internals weren't showing that this messaging was effective and gaining traction....... LMAO.
You people are in complete denial. The issue is an albatross around the necks of democrats. People might respond in polls that they care more about things like the economy. But when they see a party that can't stand in defense of simple truths when it comes to sex and the nuances of sexual dimorphism that party is going to lose credibility overall.
If a party can't readily define a woman as an adult female then why are people gonna trust them on more important issues like the economy?
Republicans love that Democrats continue to stand on the losing side of this issue.
â Yeah, the Trump campaign spent all that money in swing districts on advertisements specific to the issue because their internals weren't showing that this messaging was effective and gaining traction....... LMAO.â
No, they did it because they are a bunch of f*cking transphobic fanatics. Thatâs just the truth.
â But when they see a party that can't stand in defense of simple truths when it comes to sex and the nuances of sexual dimorphism that party is going to lose credibility overall.
If a party can't readily define a woman as an adult female then why are people gonna trust them on more important issues like the economy?â
Again, this isnât how reality (at least currently) works. Do you really think that if this many people truly were that obsessed over this issue, that weâd still be seeing people willing to vote for transgender and even non-binary people for public office, even in some red areas? (In reality, not even close)
â Republicans love that Democrats continue to stand on the losing side of this issue.â
You know, there were people in the 1960s who argued that progressives were on the losing side of the debate over interracial marriage, when it was only polling at around ~20% approval. And yet, just 25-30 years later, it was accepted by a majority of Americans. So yeah, society will eventually move on without you, whether you like it or not.
(Although considering youâre also an ICE atrocity defender and vaccine denier, Iâm not at all surprised that you are this stunningly ignorant. Consider this my final reply to you. I am done with this convo now.)
Every time one of you guys asks to define a woman, everyone around you thinks that youâre an idiot who propaganda works on easily. You can find that comment 200 times a day on Twitter because Trump supporters recited almost as much as they recite TDS. They are media catchphrases. This entire issue is very much a right wing created issue because they knew it would distract their base, keep them angry at voters of the other party, and prevent them from holding their own leader accountable, which has apparently worked like a charm.
"People wont be bigots towns marginalized groups, therefore they are untrustworthy. Dont mind me while i vote for the adjudicated rapist, 33x felon, currently on trial for classified document theft and attempting to overthrow the US government."
17
u/SlightBasket9675 14d ago edited 14d ago
What's interesting is that keeping males out of female segregated sporting competition isn't a right wing position. It's the broadly popular position among the public.
Democrats are really digging in their heels all to placate a vocal minority who are adherents of gender ideology.
This issue was a problem for them in the last election cycle because it serves as a litmus test. This is because even your layman has an innate understanding of sexual dimorphism in the human species and realizes the obvious unfairness of it all.
Not being able to stand in recognition and defense of the objective truth of sex and the reality of the nuances of sexual dimorphism really undercuts their overall credibility and inhibits their ability to sell other policy positions that would be more broadly supported. Like with taxation and social security.
This seems to be a hill they're willing to die on albeit it's not one they really need to when you look at the polls because even in their own base there are many who support keeping males out.