Sure, but your comment is implying it’s an all or nothing situation. Walking back is walking back and nothing else matters.
There’s are multitudes of trans issues, and questioning one does not mean you are questioning all of them.
If somebody thinks people born male shouldn’t be competing in non rec league sports against people born female, that doesn’t mean they should be treated the same as people that want to ban drag shows and ban accepting lgbt children and all the other blatant bigotry coming from the MAGA cult.
If you can’t accept the nuance in the conversations then there will be no conversation.
If you want to pretend there is nuance you will be fully aware that the evidence that supposedly supports banning trans athletes, which is an initial step of control used to further limit transgender people by e.g. preventing them for entering the country, are meta studies based on comparisons of cisgender men and cisgender women, right?
There isn’t a nuanced debate to be had and I’m sick of pretending that people like myself who just want to live our lives are a subject for debate.
So yes, worrying about tens out of hundreds of thousands of athletes when there isn’t clear evidence of an advantage is bigoted and not calling that out leads to situations where conservatives and the far right try to introduce bills like that which was recently struck down (thankfully) in Montana.
Now, question for you - why is it so important to you that a minority of people should have their basic humanity and ability to participate in society be questioned in the way that transgender people are? Why do you support that? Why do you consider that to be an okay thing to do, when the consequences of allowing it are so plain to see?
Well, this is a conversation for sure. Brushing somebody off that doesn’t have the same experience as you is no way to keep people on your side.
I honestly have never heard of a study on trans athletes, so I don’t even know what you’re referring to. And if you’re saying there are biological differences between cisgender people and trans people, this is not an argument I have ever heard and is the exact example of nuance in the conversation I was referring to.
So, here’s my thinking if you are open to hearing it. I am a very liberal and compassionate person. I have always been. I absolutely support trans people, and if one of my children came out as trans I would be happy for them and support them. The hate that comes from republicans towards trans people (even children) disgusts me. But I have never understood the debate on athletics.
First, if you’re saying that legislation is largely unnecessary because the governing bodies of the sports leagues are already handling it, I totally agree. Those legislations are more about pointing a finger at trans people and shaming them than it is about protecting young athletes.
Second, you phrase it as “banning trans athletes”. This sounds different than the debate I have heard. There are plenty of rec leagues or clubs where your sex/gender shouldn’t come into play. And other leagues just depend on sex, not gender identification. Nobody should be saying a trans woman can’t play in a “male” league.
Now, it seems like you’re saying people born male should be allowed to compete in any competitive league according to their gender. This is where I disagree (and the governing bodies of the leagues should enforce this).
It seems like there are thousands of years of evidence that people born male have an athletic advantage over people born female. This is the entire reason male and female sports have always been separated. For you to say there is no evidence of an advantage goes counter to what seems obvious.
If I had a daughter that was in a competitive sport, I would be upset if she was losing to somebody that had obvious biological advantages of being born male (size, strength, etc).
With all that said, when I hear somebody like Newsom bring up the athletics debate then I hear somebody say liberals are “walking back any support for trans folk”, I feel like this is just throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don’t know if Newsom had other negative things to say about Trans people, which is mostly why I asked the question initially.
My understanding of HRT is that it it changes your muscle density, among other things. Although studies have shown they may still retain higher levels of muscle mass and strength. Anecdotally, a friend of mine is no where near as strong as they were before HRT. I know they were quite shocked when they realized they could no longer lift things they were once able to carry before transitioning.
Sure, but your comment is implying it’s an all or nothing situation. Walking back is walking back and nothing else matters.
There’s are multitudes of trans issues, and questioning one does not mean you are questioning all of them.
If somebody thinks people born male shouldn’t be competing in non rec league sports against people born female, that doesn’t mean they should be treated the same as people that want to ban drag shows and ban accepting lgbt children and all the other blatant bigotry coming from the MAGA cult.
If you can’t accept the nuance in the conversations then there will be no conversation.
What conversation do you want exactly?
If you want to pretend there is nuance you will be fully aware that the evidence that supposedly supports banning trans athletes, which is an initial step of control used to further limit transgender people by e.g. preventing them for entering the country, are meta studies based on comparisons of cisgender men and cisgender women, right?
There isn’t a nuanced debate to be had and I’m sick of pretending that people like myself who just want to live our lives are a subject for debate.
So yes, worrying about tens out of hundreds of thousands of athletes when there isn’t clear evidence of an advantage is bigoted and not calling that out leads to situations where conservatives and the far right try to introduce bills like that which was recently struck down (thankfully) in Montana.
Now, question for you - why is it so important to you that a minority of people should have their basic humanity and ability to participate in society be questioned in the way that transgender people are? Why do you support that? Why do you consider that to be an okay thing to do, when the consequences of allowing it are so plain to see?
Well, this is a conversation for sure. Brushing somebody off that doesn’t have the same experience as you is no way to keep people on your side.
I honestly have never heard of a study on trans athletes, so I don’t even know what you’re referring to. And if you’re saying there are biological differences between cisgender people and trans people, this is not an argument I have ever heard and is the exact example of nuance in the conversation I was referring to.
So, here’s my thinking if you are open to hearing it. I am a very liberal and compassionate person. I have always been. I absolutely support trans people, and if one of my children came out as trans I would be happy for them and support them. The hate that comes from republicans towards trans people (even children) disgusts me. But I have never understood the debate on athletics.
First, if you’re saying that legislation is largely unnecessary because the governing bodies of the sports leagues are already handling it, I totally agree. Those legislations are more about pointing a finger at trans people and shaming them than it is about protecting young athletes.
Second, you phrase it as “banning trans athletes”. This sounds different than the debate I have heard. There are plenty of rec leagues or clubs where your sex/gender shouldn’t come into play. And other leagues just depend on sex, not gender identification. Nobody should be saying a trans woman can’t play in a “male” league.
Now, it seems like you’re saying people born male should be allowed to compete in any competitive league according to their gender. This is where I disagree (and the governing bodies of the leagues should enforce this).
It seems like there are thousands of years of evidence that people born male have an athletic advantage over people born female. This is the entire reason male and female sports have always been separated. For you to say there is no evidence of an advantage goes counter to what seems obvious.
If I had a daughter that was in a competitive sport, I would be upset if she was losing to somebody that had obvious biological advantages of being born male (size, strength, etc).
With all that said, when I hear somebody like Newsom bring up the athletics debate then I hear somebody say liberals are “walking back any support for trans folk”, I feel like this is just throwing the baby out with the bath water. I don’t know if Newsom had other negative things to say about Trans people, which is mostly why I asked the question initially.
My understanding of HRT is that it it changes your muscle density, among other things. Although studies have shown they may still retain higher levels of muscle mass and strength. Anecdotally, a friend of mine is no where near as strong as they were before HRT. I know they were quite shocked when they realized they could no longer lift things they were once able to carry before transitioning.