American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by GGG

I’m not hand waving it away.

I’m specifically saying that you let trans and Cis people compete in the gender they identify with up to the elite level. That isn’t hand waving. That is a specific solution.

People who are concerned that a trans women will take the tier one spot on their kids team and their kid will have to play tier two instead and they will lose out on an athletic scholarship should be ignored. Their kid wasn’t getting a scholarship anyways.

This is what I mean when the right is inventing a problem to get people in line with discriminating against trans people. At the high school and lower level there should be no question that the answer is let kids play where they are comfortable.

I'm sorry. You are right. That is a good and reasonable solution and you weren't hand waving. My bad, I apologize.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

What do you mean their kid wasn't getting a scholarship anyways? They would have.

I dunno how athletic scholarships are dolled nowadays, but I think there is some vetting involved and it’s not solely based on coming in 1st in your sport.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

In a balance of harms view, there is much more harm caused to many more people by allowing trans-folk to participate in the current sporting categories defined by gender: you would have to add the comparative harm of disadvantaging all other athletes within that category.

It's not an elegant solution, but society is about compromises. We need independent sporting categories for people who have made the decision to transition. It's not perfect, but balance of harm here is pretty clear IMO.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This doesn’t mesh with reality, though. You can’t just declare where the balance of harm lies without actually backing it up. There’s obviously room to find out where the balance is, but you haven’t found it here.

Except it is mathematically the case that it does. You are talking about accommodating ~0.33% of the population (per StatsCan for both trans and non-binary -- trans alone is ~0.19%) at the expense of effectively the rest of said population. And in reality, it's likely even less than that, as there's a reason no one really raises the issue about FtM trans competitors in male sports being unfair to CIS men.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Yeah, I don't think anybody is transitioning to get a leg up in sports.

No to that, but I've seen enough of crazy sports parents to think a parent may try to transition their kid for that purpose. (sort of kidding/sort of not).

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Except it is mathematically the case that it does. You are talking about accommodating ~0.33% of the population (per StatsCan for both trans and non-binary -- trans alone is ~0.19%) at the expense of effectively the rest of said population. And in reality, it's likely even less than that, as there's a reason no one really raises the issue about FtM trans competitors in male sports being unfair to CIS men.

But it’s not at the expense of the rest of the population because it does not affect the rest of the population. For every trans female athlete there are going to be cis female athletes below and above them in terms of ability. It has no impact on those above them, and you can’t automatically assume because of the fact that they medically transitioned that they have advantages on even the ones below them, beyond the typical range of physical ability in cis women.

If you take the position that trans athletes should be able to compete in categories that match their post-transition bodies, you aren’t accommodating anyone. Girls with girls, boys with boys, exactly as it is now. Arguing that they should be separated out is attempting to accommodate people.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by GGG

I’m not hand waving it away.

I’m specifically saying that you let trans and Cis people compete in the gender they identify with up to the elite level. That isn’t hand waving. That is a specific solution.

People who are concerned that a trans women will take the tier one spot on their kids team and their kid will have to play tier two instead and they will lose out on an athletic scholarship should be ignored. Their kid wasn’t getting a scholarship anyways.

This is what I mean when the right is inventing a problem to get people in line with discriminating against trans people. At the high school and lower level there should be no question that the answer is let kids play where they are comfortable.

That's where there is some grey area. If it's rec sports, then all good.

If it's high school aged academies/travel teams/competitive school teams etc that basically serve as pipelines to NCAA, then they mostly all are running on their own rules.

It would create a fair amount of backlash if legislation forced those programs to allow everyone to choose where they were comfortable. There is also room for creating a framework to make those programs more inclusive.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

That's where there is some grey area. If it's rec sports, then all good.

If it's high school aged academies/travel teams/competitive school teams etc that basically serve as pipelines to NCAA, then they mostly all are running on their own rules.

It would create a fair amount of backlash if legislation forced those programs to allow everyone to choose where they were comfortable. There is also room for creating a framework to make those programs more inclusive.

So first I think we are in agreement that in 90-99% of cases the no brainer absolute answer is let the kids play.

However even in the high end club/travel space the backlash would be unreasonable. Those “pipelines” are essentially organizations taking parents money to put their kids into positions to get scholarships. Access is gained by the ability to pay. There are plenty of these organizations that will take parents money. So there isn’t a shortage of spots. What harm is created by these academies allowing all athletes?

And what trans athlete is going to be playing on travel teams designed as pipelines to NCAA athletics if they are not working to meet the HRT and testosterone standards of the NCAA sport they are participating in. So in the end regulation is just not required.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Frankly it’s pretty disgusting that a bunch of bigots are in here flouting their anti trans views and ignoring the real breaking news in American politics dominating headlines at the moment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/...e-dish-redhen/

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I'm sorry. You are right. That is a good and reasonable solution and you weren't hand waving. My bad, I apologize.

Time to disengage patronizing-mode.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Frankly it’s pretty disgusting that a bunch of bigots are in here flouting their anti trans views and ignoring the real breaking news in American politics dominating headlines at the moment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/...e-dish-redhen/

Apologies that we didn’t create a separate thread for this conversation. Between this and “Presidents with mullets” I can see now that discussing trans athletes has been nothing but a distraction from events critical to the American political infrastructure.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Time to disengage patronizing-mode.

Is that how that came across? I was being sincere. He did provide an actual response that was a concrete solution that seemed reasonable to me. I don't see it the exact same way, but I thought it was good in that it addresses the potential strength discrepancy at least at the elite level, which would mean MtoF trans athletes wouldn't be competing against CIS females in professional sports where money and sponsorships are on the line or, presumably, in the Olympics.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Is that how that came across? I was being sincere. He did provide an actual response that was a concrete solution that seemed reasonable to me. I don't see it the exact same way, but I thought it was good in that it addresses the potential strength discrepancy at least at the elite level, which would mean MtoF trans athletes wouldn't be competing against CIS females in professional sports where money and sponsorships are on the line or, presumably, in the Olympics.

You missed the last part though, governing bodies of sports have already come up with solutions at the elite level based on allowing the participation of M to F athletes. They are being revised based on more evidence but in general allow participation with HRT and threshold testing and time.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Frankly it’s pretty disgusting that a bunch of bigots are in here flouting their anti trans views and ignoring the real breaking news in American politics dominating headlines at the moment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/...e-dish-redhen/

They obviously hate each other, if my wife were to order something I wanted off a menu, I would essentially lay claim to 2-3 bites of her food by saying "that's what I wanted" then ordering something different.

Everyone knows the truest sign of love is being in a position to eat off the other persons plate without asking.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by #-3

They obviously hate each other, if my wife were to order something I wanted off a menu, I would essentially lay claim to 2-3 bites of her food by saying "that's what I wanted" then ordering something different.

Everyone knows the truest sign of love is being in a position to eat off the other persons plate without asking.

They could just be sociopaths...World Leaders are notoriously mentally unstable individuals.

[SutterBrother]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

They should just let every gender compete in one group.

Everyone should be allowed to take whatever drugs they want, and get any kind of cybernetic upgrade too.

Lets find out what a fully jacked and teched out human body can do!

Cyborg Olympiad. How is this a bad plan?

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I suspect they will face backlash no matter what - if there are rules or no rules. If they dominate - they will get backlash. If they suck - they will get backlash. If they change in the same change room - backlash. If they get their own special change room separate from the team - backlash. If they do nothing but play the sport and are completely average - backlash.

That’s the way it will go for the foreseeable future. History shows that to be the case with societal changes. And even for these historical issues, we aren’t fully there.

A gay sportsperson in the past, like gay actors, politicians, employees, had to keep quiet about it otherwise the impacts on them, their livelihood and in many cases, their families, were catastrophic.

In in a lot of instances (most?) that isn’t the case now. A massive outlier however, is in team sports where the number of openly gay people in sports does not appear to be credible given the proportion of gay people in society.

Similar with visible minorities, it was not long ago and it still occurs that you get monkey noises when a black person touches a soccer ball and the crowd waved inflatable bananas in their faces.

Changes in societal attitudes and public policy will likely continue to move at a glacial pace compared to how quickly it needs to move to enable Trans people to live their lives free from the backlash that will occur no matter how successfully or unsuccessfully they perform.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

That's where there is some grey area. If it's rec sports, then all good.

If it's high school aged academies/travel teams/competitive school teams etc that basically serve as pipelines to NCAA, then they mostly all are running on their own rules.

It would create a fair amount of backlash if legislation forced those programs to allow everyone to choose where they were comfortable. There is also room for creating a framework to make those programs more inclusive.

This is why I think you can just handle it on a case by case basis until you get to college or high school or whatever level of the sport where things get serious.

As far as I know - there are no specific rule for a kid who just dominates his youth sport league to the point where no one can compete. They just figure it out and move the kid to a league where its a challenge for him and fair for everyone else. I'm sure we've seen our kids or even ourselves play against some kid who starts growing before everyone else or is just miles better than every other kid his age - it just seems to get handled without becoming a national story.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

But it’s not at the expense of the rest of the population because it does not affect the rest of the population. For every trans female athlete there are going to be cis female athletes below and above them in terms of ability. It has no impact on those above them, and you can’t automatically assume because of the fact that they medically transitioned that they have advantages on even the ones below them, beyond the typical range of physical ability in cis women.

If you take the position that trans athletes should be able to compete in categories that match their post-transition bodies, you aren’t accommodating anyone. Girls with girls, boys with boys, exactly as it is now. Arguing that they should be separated out is attempting to accommodate people.

I'm going to assume from "girls with girls, boys with boys" that you're approaching this in the context of trans kids/teens. I don't even think that's a pressing concern for a multitude of reasons, and I really don't care what they do at that age.

When we start talking about adult competition, the Canadian cyclist is kind of the point -- figuratively speaking, they're rag-dolling the competition and they've only been competing professionally for five years, but they've had the benefit of 32 years of male physiology prior. I think GGG's suggestion that you let them compete up until the elite level is probably a workable starting point, but even then the age of transition is going to have a huge influence on the advantage someone is going to be afforded relative to their CIS peers.

[calculoso]

Declining birth rate? Texan republicans seem to have a thought

https://twitter.com/user/status/1631293564293447685

[GGG]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Declining birth rate? Texan republicans seem to have a thought

https://twitter.com/user/status/1631293564293447685

If you want to improve birth rate subsidizing children is realistically the only option.

Now Universal daycare, health care and direct payments would be better than targeting property owners but by targeting property owners the target “the right” type of family to have children.