hanky1 said:

---

Does ketanji brown jackson know what a woman is?

---

When that question was asked, I thought the senator was confused on the subject.

I think hanky just recently transitioned and is looking for information on the topic. I support you, hanky!

BearNIt said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

So many smart people, yet none can define woman

---

Maybe we're just tired of moronic questions.

---

You don't know?

BearNIt said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

So many smart people, yet none can define woman

---

Maybe we're just tired of moronic questions.

---

Yeah, responding to hanky just feeds his ego and leads to further moronic gotcha (in his mind) questions. I've been tempted to respond a couple of times, but I know I'd be giving him exactly what he wants: attention. Referring to one of his other threads, I don't believe for a second that he'd actually cough up $10,000 if he lost. It would be fun to watch him try to weasel out of it though.

BearForce2 said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

So many smart people, yet none can define woman

---

Maybe we're just tired of moronic questions.

---

You don't know?

---

Moronic Question.

BearNIt said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

So many smart people, yet none can define woman

---

Maybe we're just tired of moronic questions.

---

You don't know?

---

Moronic Question.

---

The question is legit, the answer or lack of answers, not so much.

BearForce2 said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

BearForce2 said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

So many smart people, yet none can define woman

---

Maybe we're just tired of moronic questions.

---

You don't know?

---

Moronic Question.

---

The question is legit, the answer or lack of answers, not so much.

---

Legit for who?

I just want to know how hanky's transition into womanhood is going. I promise to use the right pronouns. Should it be she/her or they/them?

It

AunBear89 said:

---

It

---

Folks, it's very important that we let hanky1 declare their own pronouns, unencumbered by our influence.

Big C said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

It

---

Folks, it's very important that we let hanky1 declare their own pronouns, unencumbered by our influence.

---

Also their own name. Perhaps "Loretta?"

This is what is wrong with politics. Not answering basic questions because it fits the narrative. Can't wait to see when someone comes up to debate that in mathematics 1+1 is not equal to 2 or that gravity does not exist on earth….Time for a Maccallan….,

Goobear said:

---

This is what is wrong with politics. Not answering basic questions because it fits the narrative. Can't wait to see when someone comes up to debate that in mathematics 1+1 is not equal to 2 or that gravity does not exist on earth….Time for a Maccallan….,

---

Why can't you accept that it isn't a basic answer for many people and judges need to consider the rights of those people. Why can't you accept that some people are different from you? Why do you want to dictate other people's lives?

Republican Senators were asked this week what their definition of “woman” is. Some very interesting answers. Here is Josh Hawley’s. pic.twitter.com/E0tOwj2uJg

— Ron Filipkowski 🇺🇦 (@RonFilipkowski) April 7, 2022

dajo9 said:

---

Republican Senators were asked this week what their definition of “woman” is. Some very interesting answers. Here is Josh Hawley’s. pic.twitter.com/E0tOwj2uJg

— Ron Filipkowski 🇺🇦 (@RonFilipkowski) April 7, 2022

---

I'm still in shock to find out that after all these years, I may not be married to a woman. My life has been rocked to it's very foundations.

Australia has topped our supreme court justice..

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

---

I don't take issue with your position and agree that the sports side is complicated. I think you probably acknowledge that you are far out of step with Republican mainstream in 2022. Look at the forum (including this thread) and see how more mainstream Republicans demonize transgender and other LGBTQ+ people and support efforts to pain them as groomers, etc. I don't think it's fair to define a "middle ground" without recognizing just how extremely socially backwards the Republican party has tacked.

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

This is what is wrong with politics. Not answering basic questions because it fits the narrative. Can't wait to see when someone comes up to debate that in mathematics 1+1 is not equal to 2 or that gravity does not exist on earth….Time for a Maccallan….,

---

Why can't you accept that it isn't a basic answer for many people and judges need to consider the rights of those people. Why can't you accept that some people are different from you? Why do you want to dictate other people's lives?

---

Who did this? 🤣 pic.twitter.com/IfAVtv2K9R

— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) April 7, 2022

Please stop sharing your spank bank.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

---

The sports issue is complicated. Having just a "transgender" division wouldn't really work, because there are so few transgender people period. In many places they'd have no one to compete against, and if you're talking about things like high school sports it seems unfair to say to trans kids that they should be excluded from an important extracurricular activity, one that can help with college applications and the like.

Most higher-level leagues (NCAA, Olympics) have put in rules that trans women athletes have to have completed a certain amount of hormone therapy or have testosterone levels below a certain threshold before they're allowed to compete in the women's division. This is all relatively new and not fully studied, so I'm sure the rules are not 100% scientifically perfect, but they seem to strike a reasonable balance between the issues of personal freedom and competitive fairness that come into play here. I'm fine with adjusting those rules if new science can be verified on just how much advantage trans women actually retain once they've completed a full medical transition. Some sports might require different rules than others, and that's also fine.

For now, the balance seems to be holding. Conservatives love to trumpet individual anecdotal examples like Lia Thomas, but the things they will not tell you are:

1. She won a single event at an Ivy League meet. Her swim times are not dominant across all of the NCAA.

2. If you compare her to the women's division now (across all events) versus when she competed as a male swimmer in the men's division before, it's pretty comparable. She was at about the same standing among the men then that she is amongst the women now.

3. Note, however, that you have to look at her men's times from BEFORE she started hormone therapy. After she started on hormones her swim times fell to nearly the bottom of the men's division, which actually shows you how much of a physical effect that can have on a person. Conservatives like to point at only her post-hormone times and claim that this shows any bad male swimmer can transition and immediately start dominating as a woman. This is not true. The hormones took Lia Thomas from a middling male swimmer to a bad one, but when she moved over to the women's division she was again an average competitor against the field. This is actually an argument in favor of the current NCAA rules being reasonably fair.

hanky1 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

This is what is wrong with politics. Not answering basic questions because it fits the narrative. Can't wait to see when someone comes up to debate that in mathematics 1+1 is not equal to 2 or that gravity does not exist on earth….Time for a Maccallan….,

---

Why can't you accept that it isn't a basic answer for many people and judges need to consider the rights of those people. Why can't you accept that some people are different from you? Why do you want to dictate other people's lives?

---

Who did this? 🤣 pic.twitter.com/IfAVtv2K9R

— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) April 7, 2022

---

And, to answer her question, "Some moron who doesn't know how to use apostrophes."

That's not how you pluralize numbers. You don't write "eighty's" so why would you write 80's? And if you're confused by basic grammar, then something a bit more nuanced like gender identity is going to fly right over your tiny little pinhead.

sycasey said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

---

The sports issue is complicated. Having just a "transgender" division wouldn't really work, because there are so few transgender people period. In many places they'd have no one to compete against, and if you're talking about things like high school sports it seems unfair to say to trans kids that they should be excluded from an important extracurricular activity, one that can help with college applications and the like.

Most higher-level leagues (NCAA, Olympics) have put in rules that trans women athletes have to have completed a certain amount of hormone therapy or have testosterone levels below a certain threshold before they're allowed to compete in the women's division. This is all relatively new and not fully studied, so I'm sure the rules are not 100% scientifically perfect, but they seem to strike a reasonable balance between the issues of personal freedom and competitive fairness that come into play here. I'm fine with adjusting those rules if new science can be verified on just how much advantage trans women actually retain once they've completed a full medical transition. Some sports might require different rules than others, and that's also fine.

For now, the balance seems to be holding. Conservatives love to trumpet individual anecdotal examples like Lia Thomas, but the things they will not tell you are:

1. She won a single event at an Ivy League meet. Her swim times are not dominant across all of the NCAA.

2. If you compare her to the women's division now (across all events) versus when she competed as a male swimmer in the men's division before, it's pretty comparable. She was at about the same standing among the men then that she is amongst the women now.

3. Note, however, that you have to look at her men's times from BEFORE she started hormone therapy. After she started on hormones her swim times fell to nearly the bottom of the men's division, which actually shows you how much of a physical effect that can have on a person. Conservatives like to point at only her post-hormone times and claim that this shows any bad male swimmer can transition and immediately start dominating as a woman. This is not true. The hormones took Lia Thomas from a middling male swimmer to a bad one, but when she moved over to the women's division she was again an average competitor against the field. This is actually an argument in favor of the current NCAA rules being reasonably fair.

---

My thrust is not to take down Lia Thomas at all, but very much to protect women's sports as we have known it for years. A biologic at birth little girl works all her life to get to the top, and is "potentially" taken down by a person who "chooses" to change gender. That is a choice, and yes oft times dictated by feelings and events that I may not be able to comprehend, but it is still a choice.

In any other aspects of life, as I tried to point out with Amy Schneider, I have no problem. Nothing but respect for her choices but with those choices should come some limitations (understood in advance, of course). What is more important? My gender, or my competing in sports? Secondarily, as you noted "there are so few transgender people period" it seems absurd to make dramatic changes in our social structure (namely women's sports) to less than 1% or our population, and even less when you consider how many transgender individual women play sports. I guess in having nothing but respect for those who choose gender change, I just feel this is a step way too far that negatively effects so many women athletes.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

---

The sports issue is complicated. Having just a "transgender" division wouldn't really work, because there are so few transgender people period. In many places they'd have no one to compete against, and if you're talking about things like high school sports it seems unfair to say to trans kids that they should be excluded from an important extracurricular activity, one that can help with college applications and the like.

Most higher-level leagues (NCAA, Olympics) have put in rules that trans women athletes have to have completed a certain amount of hormone therapy or have testosterone levels below a certain threshold before they're allowed to compete in the women's division. This is all relatively new and not fully studied, so I'm sure the rules are not 100% scientifically perfect, but they seem to strike a reasonable balance between the issues of personal freedom and competitive fairness that come into play here. I'm fine with adjusting those rules if new science can be verified on just how much advantage trans women actually retain once they've completed a full medical transition. Some sports might require different rules than others, and that's also fine.

For now, the balance seems to be holding. Conservatives love to trumpet individual anecdotal examples like Lia Thomas, but the things they will not tell you are:

1. She won a single event at an Ivy League meet. Her swim times are not dominant across all of the NCAA.

2. If you compare her to the women's division now (across all events) versus when she competed as a male swimmer in the men's division before, it's pretty comparable. She was at about the same standing among the men then that she is amongst the women now.

3. Note, however, that you have to look at her men's times from BEFORE she started hormone therapy. After she started on hormones her swim times fell to nearly the bottom of the men's division, which actually shows you how much of a physical effect that can have on a person. Conservatives like to point at only her post-hormone times and claim that this shows any bad male swimmer can transition and immediately start dominating as a woman. This is not true. The hormones took Lia Thomas from a middling male swimmer to a bad one, but when she moved over to the women's division she was again an average competitor against the field. This is actually an argument in favor of the current NCAA rules being reasonably fair.

---

My thrust is not to take down Lia Thomas at all, but very much to protect women's sports as we have known it for years. A biologic at birth little girl works all her life to get to the top, and is "potentially" taken down by a person who "chooses" to change gender. That is a choice, and yes oft times dictated by feelings and events that I may not be able to comprehend, but it is still a choice.

In any other aspects of life, as I tried to point out with Amy Schneider, I have no problem. Nothing but respect for her choices but with those choices should come some limitations (understood in advance, of course). What is more important? My gender, or my competing in sports? Secondarily, as you noted "there are so few transgender people period" it seems absurd to make dramatic changes in our social structure (namely women's sports) to less than 1% or our population, and even less when you consider how many transgender individual women play sports. I guess in having nothing but respect for those who choose gender change, I just feel this is a step way too far that negatively effects so many women athletes.

---

Okay, but did you read the rest of what I wrote? There are still some unknowns, but for now it seems like requiring trans women to undergo hormone therapy brings them out of "biological male" range in terms of athletic performance and into reasonable norms for biological females. So why isn't it fair to allow them to compete as women if they have met those requirements? None of this is a dramatic restructuring: it's saying that if you're trans, you have to do this before you can compete as a woman. What's wrong with that?

FYI, the NCAA and Olympics have had these rules in place for a decade or more. I haven't noticed any dramatic changes in that time.

Big C said:

---

My concern is this: What if a transgender female is admitted into a women's ward and then wins the wheelchair races. Unfair!

---

You mean like Marjorie Taylor Greene?
That Adam's Apple looms large.

sycasey said:

---

Okay, but did you read the rest of what I wrote? There are still some unknowns, but for now it seems like requiring trans women to undergo hormone therapy brings them out of "biological male" range in terms of athletic performance and into reasonable norms for biological females. So why isn't it fair to allow them to compete as women if they have met those requirements? None of this is a dramatic restructuring: it's saying that if you're trans, you have to do this before you can compete as a woman. What's wrong with that?

FYI, the NCAA and Olympics have had these rules in place for a decade or more. I haven't noticed any dramatic changes in that time.

---

I'm a long time track and field fan.

I believe that the NCAA started calling for one year of testosterone suppression treatment in 2010.
The problem is, is that bone density and muscular structure is already in place biologically with these athletes.

And then again, there's always the rare bird like 2-time Olympic 800m Gold Medalist, Castor Semenya of South Africa, who was born essentially intersexed (XY). The sanctioning body, World Athletics (formerly the IAAF) places athletes like Semenya in the category of DSD which stands for disorders/differences of sex development.

Research commissioned by the IAAF showed in 2017 that female athletes with elevated testosterone had a competitive advantage, claiming that high testosterone was responsible for as much as a 3% improvement in runners. That means that an elite 800m runner such as Semenya would be 5 to 7 seconds slower in the 800m if she reduced her testosterone in line with the new rules.

So World Athletics decided that anyone not willing to undergo testosterone therapy to bring their levels down to allowable limits, would be restricted from competing in events between the 400m and the Mile.

Semenya didnt like the side-effects of undergoing testosterone therapy, so she tried to make her South African Olympic team in the 5000m. She wasnt able to qualify.

But after seeing the 200m Women's Final take place in Tokyo last Summer, the World Athletics might have to adjust that restriction even lower. Christine Mboma (who had dropped down from the 400m) looked like she had been shot out of a cannon in the last 40 meters, going from 5th to 2nd..

Here's the Olympic 200m Final:

Women's 200m final | Tokyo Replays - YouTube



Here's a good read on the topic:

Namibian sprinters resurrect 'paradox' of DSD rules (trust.org)

roids or HGH.

Pre PEDs

sycasey said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

---

The sports issue is complicated. Having just a "transgender" division wouldn't really work, because there are so few transgender people period. In many places they'd have no one to compete against, and if you're talking about things like high school sports it seems unfair to say to trans kids that they should be excluded from an important extracurricular activity, one that can help with college applications and the like.

Most higher-level leagues (NCAA, Olympics) have put in rules that trans women athletes have to have completed a certain amount of hormone therapy or have testosterone levels below a certain threshold before they're allowed to compete in the women's division. This is all relatively new and not fully studied, so I'm sure the rules are not 100% scientifically perfect, but they seem to strike a reasonable balance between the issues of personal freedom and competitive fairness that come into play here. I'm fine with adjusting those rules if new science can be verified on just how much advantage trans women actually retain once they've completed a full medical transition. Some sports might require different rules than others, and that's also fine.

For now, the balance seems to be holding. Conservatives love to trumpet individual anecdotal examples like Lia Thomas, but the things they will not tell you are:

1. She won a single event at an Ivy League meet. Her swim times are not dominant across all of the NCAA.

2. If you compare her to the women's division now (across all events) versus when she competed as a male swimmer in the men's division before, it's pretty comparable. She was at about the same standing among the men then that she is amongst the women now.

3. Note, however, that you have to look at her men's times from BEFORE she started hormone therapy. After she started on hormones her swim times fell to nearly the bottom of the men's division, which actually shows you how much of a physical effect that can have on a person. Conservatives like to point at only her post-hormone times and claim that this shows any bad male swimmer can transition and immediately start dominating as a woman. This is not true. The hormones took Lia Thomas from a middling male swimmer to a bad one, but when she moved over to the women's division she was again an average competitor against the field. This is actually an argument in favor of the current NCAA rules being reasonably fair.

---

She won an event at the DIVISION 1 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. What lying liberal source mislead you?

DiabloWags said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Okay, but did you read the rest of what I wrote? There are still some unknowns, but for now it seems like requiring trans women to undergo hormone therapy brings them out of "biological male" range in terms of athletic performance and into reasonable norms for biological females. So why isn't it fair to allow them to compete as women if they have met those requirements? None of this is a dramatic restructuring: it's saying that if you're trans, you have to do this before you can compete as a woman. What's wrong with that?

FYI, the NCAA and Olympics have had these rules in place for a decade or more. I haven't noticed any dramatic changes in that time.

---

I'm a long time track and field fan.

I believe that the NCAA started calling for one year of testosterone suppression treatment in 2010.
The problem is, is that bone density and muscular structure is already in place biologically with these athletes.

And then again, there's always the rare bird like 2-time Olympic 800m Gold Medalist, Castor Semenya of South Africa, who was born essentially intersexed (XY). The sanctioning body, World Athletics (formerly the IAAF) places athletes like Semenya in the category of DSD which stands for disorders/differences of sex development.

Research commissioned by the IAAF showed in 2017 that female athletes with elevated testosterone had a competitive advantage, claiming that high testosterone was responsible for as much as a 3% improvement in runners. That means that an elite 800m runner such as Semenya would be 5 to 7 seconds slower in the 800m if she reduced her testosterone in line with the new rules.

So World Athletics decided that anyone not willing to undergo testosterone therapy to bring their levels down to allowable limits, would be restricted from competing in events between the 400m and the Mile.

Semenya didnt like the side-effects of undergoing testosterone therapy, so she tried to make her South African Olympic team in the 5000m. She wasnt able to qualify.

But after seeing the 200m Women's Final take place in Tokyo last Summer, the World Athletics might have to adjust that restriction even lower. Christine Mboma (who had dropped down from the 400m) looked like she had been shot out of a cannon in the last 40 meters, going from 5th to 2nd..

Here's the Olympic 200m Final:

Women's 200m final | Tokyo Replays - YouTube



Here's a good read on the topic:

Namibian sprinters resurrect 'paradox' of DSD rules (trust.org)

---

Semenya is a prime example of why the "What is a woman?" question is complicated. There are intersex people like her. There are also biological females who show some of the traits you would ordinarily assign to males: testosterone levels, bone structure, density, height, etc. These things would certainly give them an advantage athletically, but isn't that the point of athletics, making use of your physical advantages?

So to me you'll never have the 100% perfect solution. You just need something that maintains basic fairness. Seems like the current rules for trans women can maintain that, which is why I don't think trans women in sports is as big a deal as right-wing outlets would like to make of it.

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Gender is fluid (as are just about all mental states) so no judge should have a preconceived notion since issues may come before them they haven't thought about before.

If the Olds have a hard time with this. . . Sorry, not sorry.

---

So can one have compassion and acceptance of gender fluidity, but at the same time feel there needs to be a separate category for those who gender involved identify themselves "woman" should not compete in women's sports? I don't see it being negative that there are men's, women's and transgender sports. You are too smart and don't need me quoting where Lia stood as a male swimmer, when identifying male, and where she is now.

Another good example is Amy Schneider competing as a transgender woman on Jeopardy and winning over a million dollars. What a lady. No mental advantage from having been a male here, so no problem We both know women are smarter than men.

Secondly, he/she who controls speech, controls the conversation. I have a hard time accepting pronouns, while accepting transgender choices.

Do you see any middle ground here, or is it all or none.

---

The sports issue is complicated. Having just a "transgender" division wouldn't really work, because there are so few transgender people period. In many places they'd have no one to compete against, and if you're talking about things like high school sports it seems unfair to say to trans kids that they should be excluded from an important extracurricular activity, one that can help with college applications and the like.

Most higher-level leagues (NCAA, Olympics) have put in rules that trans women athletes have to have completed a certain amount of hormone therapy or have testosterone levels below a certain threshold before they're allowed to compete in the women's division. This is all relatively new and not fully studied, so I'm sure the rules are not 100% scientifically perfect, but they seem to strike a reasonable balance between the issues of personal freedom and competitive fairness that come into play here. I'm fine with adjusting those rules if new science can be verified on just how much advantage trans women actually retain once they've completed a full medical transition. Some sports might require different rules than others, and that's also fine.

For now, the balance seems to be holding. Conservatives love to trumpet individual anecdotal examples like Lia Thomas, but the things they will not tell you are:

1. She won a single event at an Ivy League meet. Her swim times are not dominant across all of the NCAA.

2. If you compare her to the women's division now (across all events) versus when she competed as a male swimmer in the men's division before, it's pretty comparable. She was at about the same standing among the men then that she is amongst the women now.

3. Note, however, that you have to look at her men's times from BEFORE she started hormone therapy. After she started on hormones her swim times fell to nearly the bottom of the men's division, which actually shows you how much of a physical effect that can have on a person. Conservatives like to point at only her post-hormone times and claim that this shows any bad male swimmer can transition and immediately start dominating as a woman. This is not true. The hormones took Lia Thomas from a middling male swimmer to a bad one, but when she moved over to the women's division she was again an average competitor against the field. This is actually an argument in favor of the current NCAA rules being reasonably fair.

---

She won an event at the DIVISION 1 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. What lying liberal source mislead you?

---

My apologies for the mistake. It doesn't really change my larger point: she won one event, that's it. She's not dominating everyone else.

sycasey said:

---

Semenya is a prime example of why the "What is a woman?" question is complicated. There are intersex people like her. There are also biological females who show some of the traits you would ordinarily assign to males: testosterone levels, bone structure, density, height, etc. These things would certainly give them an advantage athletically, but isn't that the point of athletics, making use of your physical advantages?

So to me you'll never have the 100% perfect solution. You just need something that maintains basic fairness. Seems like the current rules for trans women can maintain that, which is why I don't think trans women in sports is as big a deal as right-wing outlets would like to make of it.

---

It's a tricky situation because transgender kids at the high school level who have the advantage of increased testosterone levels wind up blowing a lot of biological females away on the track.

Case in point: The Connecticut State Track Championships where transgenders Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood wound up going 1-2, with Miller breaking the state record running 11.72

Two Transgender Athletes Set Records At Connecticut Track Meet | Bossip

If you've ever watched Semenya run professionally in the 800m, it's pretty clear that she dominated.
She won Gold at the 2009, 2011, and 2017 World Championships and Olympic Gold in 2012 London and 2016 Rio.

When she made improvements of 25 seconds in the 1500 and 8 seconds in the 800m, World Athletics had to investigate and required her to take a sex verification test to ascertain if she was female. Sadly, the results ot that test (which were never made public) got leaked in the press.

DiabloWags said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Semenya is a prime example of why the "What is a woman?" question is complicated. There are intersex people like her. There are also biological females who show some of the traits you would ordinarily assign to males: testosterone levels, bone structure, density, height, etc. These things would certainly give them an advantage athletically, but isn't that the point of athletics, making use of your physical advantages?

So to me you'll never have the 100% perfect solution. You just need something that maintains basic fairness. Seems like the current rules for trans women can maintain that, which is why I don't think trans women in sports is as big a deal as right-wing outlets would like to make of it.

---

It's a tricky situation because transgender kids at the high school level who have the advantage of increased testosterone levels wind up blowing a lot of biological females away on the track.

Case in point: The Connecticut State Track Championships where transgenders Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood wound up going 1-2, with Miller breaking the state record running 11.72

Two Transgender Athletes Set Records At Connecticut Track Meet | Bossip

If you've ever watched Semenya run professionally in the 800m, it's pretty clear that she dominated.
She won Gold at the 2009, 2011, and 2017 World Championships and Olympic Gold in 2012 London and 2016 Rio.

---

Right, I think trans women athletes should have to undergo hormone therapy to bring the testosterone levels down before competing in the women's division. How much or how long is up for debate.

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

She won an event at the DIVISION 1 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. What lying liberal source mislead you?

---

My apologies for the mistake. It doesn't really change my larger point: she won one event, that's it. She's not dominating everyone else.

---

True.
Lia Thomas wasnt a Michael Phelps by any means at the 2022 NCAA Championships.

She didnt break any records, while Kate Douglass broke 18 NCAA records. But she did beat out others in qualifying for the 500 yard freestyle final and she wound up winning that event by 1.75 seconds over Olympic Silver Medalist, Emma Weyant.

I love Track and Field.
It's literally the mother of all Sports.
I would like to see everyone in high school get to participate.
But I just dont know what the answer is. Michael Phelps concurs . . .

"I believe that we all should feel comfortable with who we are in our own skin, but I think sports should all be played on an even playing field" and "I don't know what that looks like in the future. But it's -- it's -- it's -- it's hard. It's a really ... honestly ... I don't know what to say."

DiabloWags said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

She won an event at the DIVISION 1 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. What lying liberal source mislead you?

---

My apologies for the mistake. It doesn't really change my larger point: she won one event, that's it. She's not dominating everyone else.

---

True.
Lia Thomas wasnt a Michael Phelps by any means at the 2022 NCAA Championships.

She didnt break any records, while Kate Douglass broke 18 NCAA records. But she did beat out others in qualifying for the 500 yard freestyle final and she wound up winning that event by 1.75 seconds over Olympic Silver Medalist, Emma Weyant.

---

So this all tells you that after hormone therapy, Lia Thomas is well within the performance range of the biological females she competed against in the NCAA. Not destroying the sport, just competing at about the same level as the other women.