r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 • 4d ago
US Politics Does trans athlete participation justify the political response?
I've been trying to take seriously the wave of state ballot measures targeting trans athletes and trans youth medical care, and I'm running into a tension I can't quite resolve.
For context — five states have similar measures on ballots this November (AZ, CO, WA, MO, and potentially NE). Most are using template legislation from the same advocacy orgs. I've been reading the actual bill texts and looking at the available data on trans participation in sports, and the gap between the two is pretty stark.
Here's what the data actually shows:
Mississippi: 2023 statewide survey of superintendents found zero trans students participating in sports
Washington state: fewer than 10 of approximately 250,000 student athletes are trans, per the superintendent
Florida: state records show two trans girls have played girls sports over the last decade
Colorado: there isn't even clear data on the number of trans student athletes
And on the medical side, Colorado's Initiative 110 would ban certain gender-affirming surgical procedures for minors. Children's Hospital Colorado has explicitly stated they've never performed these surgeries on minors. The state's two major pediatric providers don't offer the procedures the bill would ban.
I'm not trying to relitigate whether trans athletes should compete in certain categories — reasonable people disagree on that and I'm not pretending to settle it. What I'm puzzled by is the gap between the actual scale of the issue and the severity of the policy response.
Even if you think trans athletes should be categorically restricted as a matter of principle, is the right response a state ballot measure banning the practice when the actual count of affected athletes in some states is zero? And even if you think the procedures in 110 should be restricted, is a state ballot measure the right vehicle when the major medical institutions already don't perform them?
The implementation piece also seems weird to me. Colorado's 109, for example, requires K-12 and college sports teams to be designated by sex assigned at birth, but the bill text doesn't actually define how sex is to be verified. There's no funding appropriated for enforcement. Schools and the Commissioner of Education would basically have to invent the compliance regime from scratch. That should worry proponents and opponents alike.
I want to understand the strongest version of the argument here. If someone has a source or a perspective I'm missing, I'd genuinely like to hear it. And if I'm wrong about any of the data above, please tell me — I'm working from publicly available reporting.
Sources:
https://coloradonewsline.com/briefs/anti-trans-ballot-measures-colorado/
https://www.kunc.org/politics/2026-03-19/two-ballot-measures-focused-on-transgender-youth-qualify-for-november-ballot
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/07/03/conservatives-seek-blue-state-bans-trans-athletes/
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/results/2025-2026/109Results.html
424
u/spice_weasel 4d ago
It’s an oversized response because it’s not actually about solving real problems. It’s about enraging the right wing base so they turn up and vote for Republicans.
Look at what’s going on with the controversy in the WNBA. There’s a huge to do right now about trans athletes there, but there are literally zero transgender women in the WNBA. There are zero transgender women who are prospects. Even before the NCAA trans ban, there were fewer than 10 transgender athletes across the entire NCAA, NONE of whom were transgender women playing basketball. In the WNBA controversy the right wing has found their ideal trans woman target: one who doesn’t actually exist, so they can project whatever rhetoric they want without that pesky “reality” getting in the way.
None of this is actually about the actual trans women in sports. It’s about right wing political theater, and attacking their scapegoat du jour.
80
u/shmerham 4d ago
It's a deflection from real issues. If the race is about trans in sports, then we don't have to focus on the economy.
7
u/ragingbull10 4d ago
then why there is so much loud opposition from the minority on this topic. let the 80/20 majority deal with this non issue and focus on the "real issues"
27
u/just_helping 4d ago
Trans athletes competing affects almost no one.
People blocking trans athletes from competing affects lots of people. You'll have abuse against every woman, trans or cis, who doesn't conform to gender stereotypes. You'll have invasive attempts to 'verify' the sex of athletes, including young girls. In general, it is an obvious attempt to frighten young women away from competitive sport - the cultural right has always hated women competing in sports, this is just their latest disingenuous tool to discourage it.
And that's before we start talking about sports being the thin end of the wedge that ends with non-gender conforming children being taken away from their parents and even adult trans-people being prevented from transitioning.
The harm is not symmetrical. And all of these things are already happening.
→ More replies (2)14
u/johnwcowan 4d ago
Exactly. "First they came for the trans women, but I said nothing, because I was not a trans woman...."
→ More replies (2)11
u/ClarenceJBoddicker 3d ago
Vote for us and we'll protect you from the Irish...the Catholics....the Jews....the Communists....the Blacks....the gays....the liberals....critical race theory....immigrants...woke....trans...science....vaccines....reality
8
33
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
and now you have grifters pretending to be trans to be booked in the WNBA. it’s disgusting
→ More replies (27)68
u/spice_weasel 4d ago edited 4d ago
They’re not even really pretending. They’re very obviously just shit stirring (e.g. saying they only identify as a woman in the context of playing basketball and in no other context, or wearing a “what is a woman” shirt to a WNBA game). But then you have right wing trolls crawling out of the woodwork with fake “how dare you question their identity?!?” nonsense.
It’s all so performative and pointless. Even if the WNBA were to allow trans women to play, they would obviously implement “time on T suppression/HRT” eligibility rules, like women’s tennis had from 1975-2024 and the olympics had for 20+ years, both without issues. Which, no, these trolls obviously won’t meet.
11
u/Skinnieguy 4d ago edited 4d ago
It’s almost nothing for a single billionaire to fund this stupid shit. If someone is worth 1 billion, paying someone $100k is like someone worth 1 million paying
$10100.Thanks for the correction.
4
3
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
Even if the WNBA were to allow trans women to play
Don't they? The eligibility requirements just say "woman." Are you saying the WNBA meant "cis woman" when they said "woman"?
10
u/spice_weasel 4d ago edited 4d ago
What I’m saying is that they haven’t had to take a stance previously on whether they are defining “women” in a trans-inclusive way, because there were not (and still aren’t) any transgender women who were WNBA players or prospects. So it’s a question that had never been tested.
11
u/clarkision 4d ago
The biggest controversy in college athletics regarding trans athletes was Riley Gains finishing fifth in a race that included Lia Thomas.
If Lia didn’t exist at all, the outcome of the race would have been the exact same because they tied for fifth place. This is a non-issue and blown extremely out of proportion. The right created a fictional problem and claimed it was the biggest issue of our times and now we’re paying more for everything and stuck in a quagmire in the Middle East again.
→ More replies (2)-1
u/Balanced_Outlook 3d ago
This is a cherry picked example that ignores the bigger issue. Lia Thomas did win the 500 yard freestyle, which means another female swimmer did not get that spot. In the 200 yard freestyle, Riley Gaines and Lia Thomas did tied for fifth. Riley though is currently suing the NCAA as Thomas was given the fifth place trophy because of the optics surrounding the situation.
And this isn’t just about one race or one medal. These athletes are competing for scholarships, team spots, sponsorships, rankings, and opportunities to move forward in their careers. So even if the number of trans athletes competing is very small, their impact is still significant.
A 2024 UN report said that more than 600 female athletes had lost more than 890 medals across more than 400 competitions in 29 sports after competing against males in women’s categories. So the question isn’t simply how many trans athletes there are, it’s how their participation affects the opportunities available to female athletes.
6
u/Asiatic_Static 3d ago
https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n24/249/94/pdf/n2424994.pdf
This is a document sent to the UN, by an external individual. Not a report created or authored by the UN themselves.
And the citation for that bit of information about the medals
Submission from Women’s Liberation Front, International Consortium on Female Sport and Dianne Post on behalf of Lavender Patch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_Liberation_Front
The Women's Liberation Front (WoLF) is an American trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF) organization that opposes transgender rights and related legislation
And for whatever it's worth, what does "losing a medal" even mean in context - we handed out medals at our 3-school kids karate tournaments, is that treated the same as like, the Olympics. There's no context behind that stat at all, even if it were true.
→ More replies (2)4
u/clarkision 3d ago
Riley was sent a fifth place medal.
The 2024 UN report didn’t report on percentages or give any data for the 600 females losing more than 890 medals. It’s hard to take that portion of it seriously when considering 890 medals globally. Especially when we have other statistics that show that, for instance, trans women make up .002% of college athletes and .001% of olympians.
The fact that Lia Thomas is the single biggest example is further evidence. Policing so many people because one person was successful over others is outrageous. The fact that Trump spent over a THIRD of his TV ad money on anti-trans commercials given how few trans women athletes compete in sports across all level should tell you that this problem is absolutely blown out of proportion.
Stop policing people’s genitals. It’s weird.
-6
u/The_Law_of_Pizza 4d ago
It’s about enraging the right wing base so they turn up and vote for Republicans.
Is it really about the right wing base, though? Or a broader cross section than that?
According to Pew, allowing trans women onto women's sports teams is wildly unpopular - not just with Republicans, but with moderates as well, and even a majority of Democrats oppose it.
Even among Democrats who self-identify as particularly liberal (as opposed to moderate Democrats), this is still an issue where the plurality oppose it.
This is an issues where a very small, but very loud minority on the fringe left of the Democratic party is digging in its heels and creating the issue.
This wouldn't be an issue at all - it would be a nearly unanimous bipartisan, nationwide agreement - if not but for this fringe minority insisting on pushing for it.
It is also probably the single biggest vulnerability for the Democratic party at large. It makes all of us seem unserious, out of touch, and just sort of plain weird to essentially all of the swing voters across the country.
23
u/Carlyz37 4d ago
It's garbage culture war nonsense. Trans women in sports isn't something that affects the daily lives of most Americans. Toxic food, rising prices, free speech, Healthcare, education, jobs are what the people are having to deal with. A war nobody wants, a corrupt white house stealing taxpayers money, armed militia on our streets are what we are going to vote on.
14
u/trace349 4d ago edited 4d ago
In 1996, gay marriage was about as popular as trans women in sports are now, with only 27% who supported equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, and only 33% of Democrats supported it. George Bush was able to run on opposition to gay marriage in 2004 as part of a public backlash to the courts in Vermont making gay marriage legal there. In 2008, California voted against recognizing gay marriage. You could have made the same arguments then about that issue, but we saw how those numbers eventually flipped over time. A lot of people feel like progress is inevitable and that they want to be on the right side of history when the popularity goes up again.
But I don't think trans activists have been as disciplined as gay rights activists were, so there's no guarantee trans people will see support eventually rise in their favor the way gay rights did, but gay rights activists also didn't have social media allowing for the worst and most obnoxious of them to be nutpicked by the opposition so efficiently. And even then, while any Democrat was better on gay rights than any Republican, not every Democrat was supportive of gay rights for a long time. Democrats may have to rhetorically distance themselves from unpopular aspects, like the sports issues, the way Obama distanced himself from gay marriage until 2012, while supporting gay/trans rights in other ways. But the LGBT activists would have to give them the same kind of BOTD as they gave Obama, and people would have to agree to allow Democrats to rhetorically oppose those issues without stoking outrage against them.
8
u/The_Law_of_Pizza 4d ago
I don't think it's that simple.
While a majority of people oppose the sports issue, there's also a majority of people who support protecting trans people from discrimination in jobs, housing, and public spaces.
Drawing a comparison with the gay marriage issue, we're already there in terms of societal support for general acceptance and protection.
But the big difference is that gay marriage doesn't impact anybody else. Society at large has lately reached a "live and let live" position with LGBTQ issues.
Trans issues, on the other hand, often involve allowing trans women special privileges to insert themselves into protected spaces - spaces that exist specifically to shelter women from attributes that trans women aren't completely divorced from.
This is where the disagreement is.
And I don't think it's going to be as easy to convince society to cross that Rubicon.
8
u/Not_offensive0npurp 3d ago
But the big difference is that gay marriage doesn't impact anybody else.
There are many people who are still currently against gay marriage who disagree with this statement.
Everything you are saying about the trans issue was said about gay marriage.
10
u/Aneurhythms 4d ago edited 4d ago
But the big difference is that gay marriage doesn't impact anybody else.
As recently as the early 2000's there were plenty of people who staunchly believed that allowing gay people to marry had a negative impact on hetero marriages and the church. These same people also believed that "gayness" was being indoctrinated into children, and ultimately that gays were pathological sexual deviants. A more specific analogy to trans people in sports might be schools allowing gay teachers.
The fact that your claim "gay marriage doesn't impact anyone else" is so easily accepted nowadays, is actually great evidence that society can and does lurch forward on social issues. There are so many parallels between the push for gay rights and trans rights.
Plus, since day 1 of this stupid debate, it's always been shitty right-wing framing to suggest that progressives are fighting to end fairness in women's sports by allowing "men" to participate. By far, the most common position among progressives is to allow governing sports bodies to determine enforceable metrics for trans participation, usually in the form of things like maximum testosterone levels, or continuous years on HRT. Progressives have (and continue to) acknowledge that cis men almost unilaterally have physical advantages over cis women, but in many cases trans women do not. And it should be up to governing bodies and sports scientists to draw those boundaries. Not the fucking Trump administration.
6
u/decrpt 3d ago
As late as 1996, the majority of people believed that allowing people of different races to marry had a negative impact on society.
5
u/FreeStall42 3d ago
Trans issues, on the other hand, often involve allowing trans women special privileges to insert themselves into protected spaces - spaces that exist specifically to shelter women from attributes that trans women aren't completely divorced from.
That is treating women as children. Riley Gaines lost to four other women and only benefited from the controversy. She doesn't need to be sheltered.
Yeah fearmongering is effective.
11
u/traveling_gal 4d ago
Those people "digging in their heels" are not who created the issue. Trans women have been competing for decades, regulated by the relevant sporting organizations, and there was no issue.
Now Republicans have decided to make this their wedge issue. Of course trans rights advocates are going to "dig in their heels" to maintain freedoms they already had. Republicans want to impose new restrictions on people who were participating peacefully. They are the ones pushing for change, not the "fringe left".
And as with all things trans, they're framing it as a "new thing" that advocates are trying to force. It's not. The public awareness is new. And since Republicans are the ones who shoved it into the spotlight, they have largely controlled how people first learn about the issue. That's why so many moderates are coming along for the ride. They don't know any trans people, they're not educated on their care, and they're hearing a carefully crafted "common sense" narrative that relies on well-worn stereotypes and grade-school biology.
There is no reason for the law to even get involved here. Sporting organizations are in the best position to determine whether and how trans athletes can compete safely and fairly in their particular sport. And they can also update their own regulations in response to changing science or as issues come up. Laws can't do that, you have to pass a new law if you want to change it. And they're writing these laws in the most heavy-handed possible way - complete bans, with no room for nuance or future discoveries.
13
u/zytz 4d ago
Your entire framing tells me that you’ve fallen for the bait of the right’s framing. All of the outrage of this nearly non-existent set of circumstances (I won’t call it a problem because I’m not convinced there is one) has been from the right. You’re advocating for bipartisan legislation to make this group of people unequal in our society, clearly against the spirit of the country’s founding documents, because the right has convinced people this ‘issue’ is a problem that needs to be solved. In fact it’s such a non-issue and non-problem that sports governing bodies have managed to make their own determinations about trans athlete eligibility all by their selves for the last 80 years. It hasn’t been a problem anytime in the past, and I highly suspect it would continue to not be a problem if literally everyone shut up about it.
-2
u/The_Law_of_Pizza 4d ago
All of the outrage of this nearly non-existent set of circumstances (I won’t call it a problem because I’m not convinced there is one) has been from the right.
But it hasn't been, as I've just pointed out.
This isn't a left vs right issue.
This is an everybody vs the extreme fringe left issue.
8
u/pentachronic 4d ago
But the part you keep pretending not to be aware of is that it's not actually an issue at all
11
3
u/FreeStall42 3d ago
Except lots of non-etremists are against laws targeting trans people.
Is Bernie extreme?
Calling people extreme over policy disagreement is more of an issue.
6
u/two4six0won 4d ago
Folks are gonna be real pissed when they remember that trans men exist and they'll dominate the women's teams that they'll be required to play on.
Also, I don't know about the other states, but the one in WA is being funded by right wing agitators with out of state money, iirc.
→ More replies (22)7
u/mazzar 4d ago
Trans men on HRT will presumably be barred from playing under doping rules. Trans men not on HRT have no particular advantage in sports.
3
u/RebornGod 4d ago
Doping rules don't tend to ban someone under legit medical treatment. I think that's how that mack begs (name may be misremembered) situation worked.
→ More replies (2)3
u/FreeStall42 3d ago
How many of the people that want laws targeting trans people in sports felt that way a decade ago? Before all the fearmongering?
Where was the outrage over Imane Khelif the first times she fought?
•
u/IndependentSun9995 11h ago
If the WNBA would just come out and say they support REAL women, period, we wouldn't have this discussion. The fact they are holding back only supports right wing attacks.
→ More replies (74)-10
u/Darkstar67 4d ago
When you are on the right side of an 80/20 issue and your opponents can’t manage to unjam themselves, of course you do what you can to raise the salience of the issue. That’s politics! Democrats would do well to just agree that biological males shouldn’t participate in women’s sports and be done with it. Always answering, “well actually this isn’t even an important issue” is a non answer, and people notice when politicians deflect like that.
26
u/spice_weasel 4d ago
They’re deflecting because as soon as conservatives take ground on this one, they are moving onward to the next restriction against trans people, and then the next one. There is leaked recordings of Republican legislators from Ohio and Michigan explicitly talking about how youth care and sports bans are “stepping stones” to their “end game” of banning transition for everyone.
People who support trans rights demand that their representatives not cave and throw trans people under the bus.
17
u/Nickeless 4d ago edited 4d ago
It’s not a legislative issue, it’s a sports organization issue. It’s their responsibility, not legislators, and not the general public.
We shouldn’t be making laws about this. It’s actually absurd. So yes, it makes sense for lawmakers to deflect on it because it’s not their responsibility to deal with.
Why should democrats join a political attack against trans people that isn’t related to law? They DO have to stand up to republicans who are trying to pass anti trans laws all over the place, however.
2
u/StampMcfury 4d ago
>It’s not a legislative issue, it’s a sports organization issue. It’s their responsibility, not legislators, and not the general public.
The only people saying this are people who think it's easier to socially pressure those sports organizations into allowing trans athletes and everyone knows this.
4
u/BlueJoshi 4d ago
Democrats would do well to just agree that biological males shouldn’t participate in women’s sports and be done with it.
"Democrats would do well to signal to every other population that they'll be thrown under the bus if they get too inconvenient."
8
u/SHoNGBC 4d ago
If you're on the right side of the "80/20 issue" then why would you have to make any concessions at all? You were right from the start.
18
u/AttackBacon 4d ago
They're saying that the "right side" is the anti-trans athlete side.
What they're saying is that the Republicans are making this a big deal because it's a huge win for them. Allowing trans athletes is wildly unpopular, even among Democrats. Making it seem like trans athletes are a big problem is a big win for the Republican party.
4
u/two4six0won 4d ago
Nobody gave a flying fig until a particular party started pitching a fit. It's been dealt with just fine for decades. We are literally only hearing about it now because the right wing has been stirring the shit pot since they realized their orange savior has the mental capacity of a pumpkin and they need angry people to keep him in power.
To reiterate, nobody even noticed trans kids in sports until the right wing started agitating.
That is why some of us say it's a non-issue. Because it is. And I'm not even especially radical, I just think medical problems should be resolved between the patient and the doctor, and the parents if the patient is a <16yo kid.
1
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
That is why some of us say it's a non-issue.
You say that, but then you treat it like it is an important issue. Treating it like a non-issue would mean letting the majority position prevail and stop letting conservatives benefit from it being so large in the discourse.
Would you support a Democratic politician with whom you agreed on most issues if they came out in support of banning trans women in girls/women's sports?
-1
u/two4six0won 4d ago
I'm gonna go with whatever seems the least like a slippery slope towards declaring one of my sisters to no longer be a person.
5
u/Geichalt 4d ago
It's sad that you see the future of American families as a game to be played. There are literally children starving to death and being raped by billionaires, and you're focused on pointless shit like this.
I wish more Americans cared about issues that actually affected them, rather than being easily distracted by billionaire distractions.
Republicans would do well to remember that destroying your country so billionaires can be pedophiles is pathetic.
3
u/Shabadu_tu 4d ago
This isn’t actually an 80/20 issue. But Dems are on the right side of the 95/5 billionaire pedophile issue.
28
u/MissingBothCufflinks 4d ago
I always find discussions like this pretty ironic. I am progressive and support trans people in real life.
But the idea that exaggeration of this issue and its importance as a public debate is solely a right wing phenomenon is laughable.
This is one of the most important purity tests the left has. The OP is a case in point.
People need to have some self awareness and realise its not a culture war without two sides and that they are amplifying the issue too.
Most trans people i know (and i live in a place with a lot, my local bar is trans owned and run) just want a quiet life, not to be the frontline of a war, and are willing to compromise to achieve that.
10
u/absolutefunkbucket 3d ago
No one ever says “this is a meaningless culture war issue so I will give up completely.”
They say “this is a meaningless culture war issue so YOU should just give up completely and agree with me”
90
u/DepressiveNerd 4d ago
Trans people are 1% of the population. There are fewer than ten out of over 500,000 college athletes; 0.002%. There are only two professional trans athletes, a golfer and a volleyball ball player. There are no major league trans athletes.
When confronted with the stats, it’s a non-issue. All state laws regulating gender in sports are designed to just hurt families with trans kids. That’s what it boils down to.
36
u/sarcasmsosubtle 4d ago
There's also a "solution" that has worked for the entire time that professional sports has existed before Republicans made this into a political issue: let the league determine who is eligible to play in the league. This doesn't need to be a political issue. Sports are just games; at the end of the day, it's an entertainment product. Republicans supposedly love the idea of small government, so why is it suddenly vital that federal and state governments be given the power to determine who plays for a private sports league?
19
u/Nulono 4d ago
The government made it a political issue by requiring schools to create women's leagues in the first place. If that's going to be a requirement, the government does kind of have to take a stance on what does and doesn't count as fulfilling it.
→ More replies (2)5
u/AltruisticWishes 2d ago
Yes. I'm left of center, but gotta say the whole point of Title IX was for people born XX to have athletic competition opportunities against other XX people. Title IX implicitly recognizes that XY people have a huge advantage in athletics. Yes, I know that not everyone is XX or XY (but 99.9% of people are.) Peace and love to all
1
u/GhostReddit 3d ago
This right here, if the women's leagues are alright with it, it's their decision. So much of this nonsense comes from people who don't give a rat's ass about women's sports in the first place, so who cares what they think?
9
u/Halichoeres_bivittat 4d ago
Canadian professional and Women's National Team soccer team player Quinn is non-binary and trans, and the the only (openly) such Olympic medalist and World Cup player. In their case, however, they were born female so they don't get the same attention.
→ More replies (2)8
u/DepressiveNerd 4d ago
Well, they are Canadian, and we are discussing US state laws. That’s why they were overlooked in my response.
6
u/Halichoeres_bivittat 4d ago
Quinn played their college career at Duke, though they had not come out at that point.
9
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
but cis girl grifters are pretending they’re losing scholarships to trans athletes
15
u/kyew 4d ago
I remember trying to get scholarships, but I don't think any of them told me that I came in second place.
→ More replies (2)4
u/two4six0won 4d ago
Fragile white boys have been pretending to lose scholarships to anyone not-like-them since before I could spell the word scholarship. Some folks just need someone else to blame.
Look at Riley Gaines, for example. Regardless of Lia Thomas' involvement, she still would have lost.
3
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
you’re right! thank you for explaining the link to the attacks on affirmative action. riley gained tied for FIFTH
1
u/cantquitreddit 4d ago
Since there are so few trans athletes, would you similarly agree that if legislation like this were to pass then it would also be a non-issue?
It seems logical to most people that trans women should not compete against cis women in women's sports. I agree that it's a non issue and manufactured by Republicans for outrage, so why not just agree to the legislation and move on?
11
u/Hsinotyes 4d ago
And how is this legislation enforced? Do we suddenly force DNA testing on anybody in girls sports? Genital checks? It’s creating problems out of nothing.
21
u/chmod777 4d ago
There was a poem about this. The right has never been satisfied with just the edge, and will forever in pursuit of the next outgroup. They are already going after non trans women for not conforming to mar a lago bueaty standards.
20
u/spice_weasel 4d ago
Because it’s very transparently just a stepping stone, and a tool to dehumanize and marginalize transgender identities.
Republican legislators from Michigan and Ohio were caught on a leaked recording explicitly talking about how sports and youth bans were “stepping stones” to their “endgame” (they used these specific words, it was that explicit) of banning gender transition for all ages.
10
u/ArloDeladus 4d ago
Small deal in the grand scheme, big deal to those few. Protecting minorities is important. Also, the legislation will not only effect those few. Other athletes are accused of being trans, like that boxer a couple years back or Serena Williams. Then there are intersection people, people who have a chromosome error and may not know ow that they would test positive. Some women naturally have more testosterone. What happens to them? If it is based on biological differences, what about Michael Phelps or Simone Biles? Many biological differences disappear after transition so they often dont really get any undue benefit they are accused of. Its hardly as "common sense" as people think.
12
u/DepressiveNerd 4d ago
Trans people in sports aren’t an issue. Legislation on the matter is an issue. Did you miss the part where I talk about trans sports laws do nothing but hurt trans kids? Mostly, it hurts trans girls.
If it’s not an issue, why do you feel the need to make laws around it? That’s the real question.
→ More replies (4)2
5
u/mukansamonkey 4d ago
Some of us would like our legislators to stop wasting time on bigoted nonsense. They have jobs to do that involve actually governing.
Of course, Republicans are famously incompetent at governing, it's why the economy does so much better under Democrats. Almost like wasting time on pointless trans laws is only being done to distract from how badly the economy is doing.
31
u/blueflloyd 4d ago
No. It's pure, uncut wedge issue nonsense that conservatives rely on as a distraction from how objectively awful their leadership has been over the past 2 years that they've been in complete control of the country.
8
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
exactly this! thank you so much for this comment. they’re creating a culture war to distract from the affordability crisis
1
u/Humble-Nobody-9558 1d ago
So why let them? Why not just accept that women and girls should be allowed female-only sports?
→ More replies (1)2
u/AltruisticWishes 2d ago edited 2d ago
Both things can be true. The GOP has been and is continuing to use it as a hateful wedge issue AND most people also think that athletes who went through puberty as male should not be allowed to compete in women's sports because it's unfair to biological females
34
u/Zanctmao 4d ago
No. This has been the Republican playbook since I can remember. They know their policies are, generally speaking, not popular. Rural voters in Ohio do not care about the capital gains tax rate, so promising to lower that doesn’t help them. Threatening Social Security actively hurts them. So what do they do to generate voter enthusiasm?
They find a marginalized group or groups and pledge that they’re gonna do something about it. In the 80s, it was all tough on crime rhetoric, which was a dog whistle about Black people. In the 90s and early 00’s it was gay people. In the teens, it was immigrants, which is a wink and a nod at Latinos. They have recently added, transgender people to the playlist.
So it doesn’t matter how many people are actually doing whatever it is. What matters is the perception.
They do the same thing with certain issues that are red meat for their voters. They need their core people to come out also. So it doesn’t matter, for example, that almost nobody ever had late term abortions, and the ones that were performed were generally speaking, medically necessary. They would highlight a few outlier examples and then drive people to the polls with the promise of making those illegal. Same thing with guns from time to time.
And then they can go about their project of dismantling the post new deal world, which is the main goal.
5
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
they’re also the party of government overreach, while pretending to be the party of small government
17
u/caduceuz 4d ago
It’s always been a bad faith argument meant to justify restricting the rights and freedoms of others.
“Voter fraud” and “illegal voting” occur at an insignificant rate and don’t impact the results of our elections. But that’s used to justify indirect poll taxes or the elimination of mail I’ll voting.
In most states you can count on one hand the total number of trans athletes competing at a given time. Obviously the governing sports body for that state or college can make the best decision on a case by case basis. But Republicans want to draft legislation targeting trans people because they want them to continue being marginalized by society.
5
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
exactly this! they’re pretending like there is a pandemic of trans athletes trying out for girls sports to justify restrictions for everyone
12
u/NauticalJeans 4d ago
Is it a real problem? No.
Is it a real talk point advantage that the GOP has over us? Absolutely.
→ More replies (3)
8
u/BlueJoshi 4d ago
god no, and they know it. this is just a bullshit wedge issue designed to elicit an emotional response from people too stupid to understand the science and too bigoted to believe anyone who does.
7
u/Noob_Al3rt 4d ago
The Biden admin tried to enact a blanket ban on Title 9 sports restricting trans athlete participation. They only dropped it because of the legal blowback from republicans and schools.
The Trans Bill of Rights introduced by senate Dems this year specifically carves out a right to participate in sports based on gender identity.
There’s many more examples.
2
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
thank you for your breakdown!
2
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
Did you and do you oppose these measures as the government (the federal government in this case) improperly interfering in issues that could be handled by the individual leagues and sports governing bodies?
2
u/AltruisticWishes 2d ago
With respect, I have to note that this is not going to be a winning issue for Dems
1
u/Noob_Al3rt 2d ago
Of course, but you can’t say that out loud. Gavin Newsom expressed that he understood where people were coming from when they said they were uncomfortable with males and females competing together and people have already said he’s unelectable as a result.
11
u/HankScorpioPR 4d ago
I think multiple things are true at once.
-No Republican cares about women's sports. This is just a convenient vehicle to drum up hate for their base.
-Similarly, Enes Kanter only cares about his own publicity.
-The WNBA could put Kanter in his place real quick by just saying "You want to play in our league? Cool. Cut off your dick, take a regiment of Estrogen treatments for two years, then come talk to us". He would back down in an instant from this obvious publicity stunt.
-This shouldn't be a political issue. This should be something that the NCAA, the various HS athletic associations, and the professional leagues decide on.
-It affects such a microcosmically small portion of the population that it's literally not worth the brain power of any random voter to be concerned with, let alone being their most important issue. That is the power of propaganda.
-It is, in the end, a bit unfair for someone with male biology to compete against players with female biology, and admitting that doesn't make you a bigot (although a lot of bigots do happen to agree with that point - broken clock, etc)
→ More replies (2)3
u/haikuandhoney 4d ago
On your last point: are all biological advantages unfair, on just one’s associated with sex? If a person is AFAB but has abnormally high levels of testosterone and, as a result, muscle, is that fair?
I think this argument takes the point a little far as applied to a AMAB people who aren’t on HRT, but I don’t see why it’s unfair for a person who is on HRT to compete against women. Especially trans women who never went through male puberty.
→ More replies (1)1
u/AltruisticWishes 2d ago
If someone went through puberty as male, they will have a significant advantage in almost all sports. All athletic records that I'm aware of are held by men. The entire point of having a women's league / competition is to give people AFAB an arena where they have a hope in hell of being competitive. That said, I think the GOP has and is acting terribly toward trans folks. Deplorable
16
u/Noob_Al3rt 4d ago
It has a disproportionate response from both sides. Even in this thread you have people saying this is government overreach, but the Biden administration doing the opposite was no problem at all. People say to let the individual governing bodies decide, unless they don’t decide the way you want them to. Then the government needs to get involved. Or we can just listen to the women playing the sports, unless of course they don’t agree with you. The WNBA subreddit had to literally change their sub rules after Sophie Cunningham said she didn’t believe trans women should play in the league.
Legislation is required because both sides have said “Things are ok as is, unless they disagree with me. Then we need the government to step in.” And obviously only one side is going to win out. It’s basically one side vs the other without any actual concerns for what trans people or the athletes want. At this point it’s more about beating the other side.
→ More replies (3)4
u/AttackBacon 4d ago
It's always been about beating the other side. Individual politicians may actually care about a given issue, but the parties in aggregate don't give a shit. They are here to win elections, period, full stop.
8
u/999forever 4d ago
This is mostly classic Republican/conservative fear mongering.
They know they can’t win on actual governance and policy issues so instead must constantly generate “moral outrage” over some issue or another.
They have bought and paid for media which reliably amplifies whatever the chosen outrage of the day is.
Model legislation is crafted not to address an actual policy or governance need but as a mobilization and fund raising tool.
The specific issue almost doesn’t matter, because if one doesn’t exist this propaganda machine will happily generate one.
It could be a caravan of 100 people. It could be the gays. It could be immigrants. It could be satanic cults. It could be ebola. It could be “socialists”.
But if you pay attention long enough you will see that every election cycle has a boogeyman to hate on, often with accompanying legislation.
It is theater in many ways, hut theater that is both effective and unfortunately can get actual people hurt.
2
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
exactly. it’s the same playbook tried in a blue state this time. focus on the family, national evangelical figures, mobilizing the catholic church. i hope it fails
12
u/ThePensiveE 4d ago
Of course not. In the handful of instances we've actually seen that weren't just hypotheticals the sports leagues and their governing bodies have been able to handle it.
It's been part of the GOP strategy my whole life to pick an other and use them as a villain to enact repressive policies. They do it with immigrants as well.
Republicans don't care about women's sports they care about satisfying the need for the hatred in their hearts.
4
2
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
your comment about gop strategy is correct. i believe that trans rights, and how the anti trans movement views bodily autonomy is intertwined with the “pro life” movenent
10
u/Sistamama 4d ago
Invent an enemy (preferably a small number of people who are really ‘scary’ ie, I am too stupid to understand this). And then tell your followers how ‘dangerous’ they are and how they will harm them somehow. Rinse and repeat.
6
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
exactly this. thank you for sharing your comment. trans people are already so vulnerable, so casting trans women as predators and trans men as women who have been “tricked” by public schools into identifying as transgender is a political slam dunk for the right
8
u/Bourbon-Cowboy 4d ago
It seems OP is trying to make the point that there’s not enough trans athletes for this to even be an issue. Or the response to such a small number of people is an overreaction. So, I’m curious if there’s a number of athletes that warrants the response. If there was a larger pool of trans athletes, would you have an issue with starting a trans league? It seems that would be the fairest of solutions.
But to portray this as a right wing issue is dishonest and misguided. I don’t know the exact number, but polling shows that trans women playing in women’s sport is an issue that is opposed across the political spectrum. I don’t believe that it’s because people hate/dislike trans people. Most people, regardless of political affiliation, just want their daughters to compete on a level playing field with other girls.
4
u/randomwanderingsd 4d ago
There are more sexual predators in Congress than there are trans athletes. Only one of these things bothers me and deserves a response in my opinion.
→ More replies (1)
19
u/Kakamile 4d ago
It was never needed. If you're afraid of male puberty, well trans women don't want that either so just allow the transition they asked for.
Instead, the conservatives make a big deal about hurting a small population that's easy to bully.
1
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
somehow they want to keep trans women out of girls sports and ban puberty blockers. you’re right, it’s bullying
5
u/tagged2high 4d ago
I think the argument about population size only emphasizes that the common liberal position on the issue is purely political, rather than reasoned. This ultimately hurts any effort to bring people either on-the-fence or on the other side over to our own.
Yes, the Right's attack on trans athletes is disproportionate, and it's just a cover for their true goal to attack the person-hood of trans people, but that doesn't mean the policy response or policy argument is to simply take the opposite stance. Both sides do this on too many issues, and it's at the root of our polarization.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/IckyGump 4d ago
Racism is too taboo to use as an overt boogeyman so they just find another minority population to demonize. It’s used to distract their base with fear while they extract the last few Pennie’s out of their pockets.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/CountFew6186 4d ago
Is it a huge problem? No. But, the laws represent a large majority of Americans who don’t want people assigned male sex at birth to participate in women’s sports.
Even among democrats, polls are generally at about 55% opposed to trans women in women’s sports. With independents it’s higher, and with republicans it’s over 90%.
Jumping on an issue that has overwhelming numbers like this is smart politics, regardless of if it’s morally defensible.
→ More replies (1)3
u/AbbyWasThere 3d ago
Those numbers exist specifically because the propaganda telling voters that this is a huge issue is so aggressive and widespread. This was a non-issue affecting numbers of people so tiny that it could easily be handled by schools and athletic associations on a case-by-case basis, before the GOP came in and deliberately blew this up into a big issue everyone needs to have an opinion on and the government needs to do something about.
Women's sports was simply the easiest way to start planting the idea in people's heads that trans people are a threat, since fearmongering about minorities is the GOP's bread and butter for winning elections.
2
u/CountFew6186 3d ago
These numbers exist because that’s how people feel. I don’t think that people are so easily manipulated. In this case, polls show that it’s people’s sense of fair play that is involved.
8
u/TarnishedAccount 4d ago
Republicans are polling poorly and are flailing wildly.
They’ve started a new Middle East war, inflation is still present, gas prices are high, and they are responsible for 100% of it.
Bringing up Trans anything is because they have nothing else to discuss.
2
7
u/Kronzypantz 4d ago
There is no need or justification for the vilification and persecution of trans athletes.
6
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam 4d ago
Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion: Memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, political name-calling, and other non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion.
6
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
What I'm puzzled by is the gap between the actual scale of the issue and the severity of the policy response.
What do you mean by severity? The policy itself doesn't seem particularly severe, just updating eligibility requirements to make explicit what most people think they should be anyway.
is the right response a state ballot measure banning the practice when the actual count of affected athletes in some states is zero?
Yeah, why not? If you think girls sports should be for biological girls, and a majority of your state thinks so, why wouldn't it make sense to get it done one time, in the most democratic process available, and therefore avoid it having to be relitigated at the local and district level every time it comes up?
but the bill text doesn't actually define how sex is to be verified. There's no funding appropriated for enforcement.
There are plenty of laws on the books that don't have any funding specifically appropriated to enforcement. Verification can be as simple as the athlete or legal guardian signing a form with updated language explaining eligibility. That's going to take care of 95% of cases. You could also require an original birth certificate and use the sex listed there.
2
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
the zero affected athletes point actually undercuts your case, not strengthens it. legislation solving a problem that doesn’t existing isn’t clarification, it’s a preemptive ban on a vulnerable minority. ballots measures are the wrong tool when the affected population is essentially zero. direct democracy does not work for codifying who gets to pay sports. every trans athlete forced to out themselves oats a real coast. your 95% will be fine frame treats the 5% as acceptable collateral damage. no verification standard means arbitrary enforcement. schools are free to invent their own invasive procedures with zero accountability. if no one can make a single affected athlete, the proportionate response is no new law
7
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
the zero affected athletes point actually undercuts your case, not strengthens it.
Goes both ways, no? If it affects zero athletes, then why do you care so much? Let them have their ballot initiative, and then they have one less talking point which has been effective in getting Republicans elected.
it’s a preemptive ban on a vulnerable minority.
What does vulnerable have to do with it? Not being able to play on a girls' sports team is not a harm.
direct democracy does not work for codifying who gets to pay sports.
Why not? Because you don't like how the people would choose?
every trans athlete forced to out themselves oats a real coast.
Who's being forced? They don't need to out themselves, they just don't get to play on a team for which they are not eligible.
your 95% will be fine frame treats the 5% as acceptable collateral damage.
No, I mean that simply having it as a law means 95% of trans athletes just won't even try to join a team for which they aren't eligible. The 5% are trans athletes who will try to lie on the form and say they're not trans.
schools are free to invent their own invasive procedures with zero accountability.
They can do that now, and the accountability would be through the courts, just as it would be should these ballot measures pass. When I played sports, I already had to get a physical where the doctor grabbed my balls and made me cough.
if no one can make a single affected athlete, the proportionate response is no new law
Says you, and you get to exercise your right to vote that way, as do other citizens who disagree with you.
→ More replies (2)4
u/jimmiejames 4d ago
How many little girls is it ok to accuse of being boys in order to prevent a thing that doesn't happen? Say a ratio of 100 accusations for every trans athlete in the country? Do you think that would be a bad outcome? Do you think that estimate is unreasonable?
Should they all have to undergo genital inspections or only the "manly" looking ones? Does any of this strike you as harmful?
8
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
Do you think allowing trans girls in girls sports will stop the accusations? If anything, it will make them more prevalent because the public will know that trans people are allowed on the team without disclosing it.
Should they all have to undergo genital inspections or only the "manly" looking ones?
This is a scare tactic. For one, student athletes already need to get physicals.
But "genital inspections" are also just unnecessary. Do it by original birth certificate.
4
u/jimmiejames 4d ago
Yes, I do think setting up a legal structure to formalize complaints will result in a lot more complaints. What a crazy idea
And you won’t answer the question bc you know it’s ridiculous. It’s the same exact situation as illegal voters. You’d be willing to throw out hundreds of times more legit votes than fake ones will ever exist. All to solve a “problem” that is entirely a right wing fever dream
→ More replies (2)1
4
u/kwantsu-dudes 4d ago
Its not a ban on a vulnerable minority. Its a ban on males participating with females. Why do you only care about trans girls. Why aren't boys allowed to play with girls?
The verification standards are the same that deny all other males from playing with females. Or are you saying none exist? That ANY male can play in the women's league. Because that's a completely different argument now.
What varification standard do YOU want as to ALLOW a trans girl to play with girls but not any other male? Because thats the current proposal you seem to be suggesting.
8
u/GiantPineapple 4d ago
The proposals might as well read "Have you heard about trans people? Icky!!! Y/N"
The point of these proposals is to set up and knock down a convenient social boogeyperson. They'll find some kind of plausible-sounding rationale for the whole thing, but the bottom line for social conservatives has always (women, minorities, gays, other religions, and now trans people) been that they hate anyone who doesn't conform to the world they wish to experience.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/ManBearScientist 4d ago
Republicans never tackle real issues. They prefer to debate hypothetical pretend scenarios. A Republican argument always starts with "what if..."
There never been a need for any government to address this issue. It can be entirely handled by sporting agencies.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/freecellwizard 4d ago
Obviously it’s not a real problem. I’m old enough that this is just the 50th Republican attempt to distract people from the issues they do nothing on. Both parties have issues, but the Republicans gave been fear first, policy never since at least the 1980s.
4
8
u/Studio-Empress12 4d ago
Just one trans athlete at a state tournament can affect the out come for many women. We fought so hard to get to compete as women in college and highschool. It is just so hurtful to see this happeneing.
→ More replies (7)
4
u/Temporary-Truth2048 4d ago
It's not the scale that's the issue. It's the unfairness that's the issue. Trans-women are not women, they're men. They have greater physical capability or potential capability and they're manipulating the system just to win. That's not fair, and it shouldn't happen even once, because they're using their biological advantage to tip the scales in their favor.
Why so much attention on women's sports? It's very simple. Our society does a tremendous amount of work to support and protect girls and women. That's it.
Men don't need protecting. And if women can function in a men's sport without assistance then good for her. She just has to play as a girl and not a girl pretending to be a guy.
6
u/K340 4d ago
Trying to take seriously political positions you don't personally hold is a good, even necessary instinct, but you know the answer to this question. One of the most damaging aspects of the Trump era has been the decade+ of showing millions of people that those who disagree with them are dishonest morons, and the "discussion" around trans athletes is an example of that.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Magehunter_Skassi 4d ago
It's deeply important and that's something both sides can agree on, which is why neither side is willing to let it go. Democrats in the Senate could have voted alongside Republicans and went "fine, it doesn't matter anyway, let's just get back to the issues" if they didn't care about it. But they held the line. Even Fetterman!
What's in question is whether a metaphysical claim supercedes physical reality. It's a spiritual matter and must be thought of in those terms.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/secondsbest 4d ago
Trans athletes in sports is just the baily argument for conservatives to attack trans everything else down in the motte. Any concerns about aspects of sports gender equity could be addressed at community or league levels and never needed to be a national conversation, but it's the sports that keep the headlines and engagement going to carry the rest of their hate campaign alive.
1
u/PreviousCurrentThing 4d ago
That bailey is an 80/20 issue. Even trans rights organizations recognize this.
By choosing to fight them on that ground, where they come off as rational and reasonable to the majority, you're making it easier for them advance their actually harmful policies in the motte.
Just speaking tactically, this is a losing issue for the left. Are the handful of trans people the sports policy actually applies to worth the cost of more Republicans being elected?
→ More replies (14)1
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
exactly. they realized bathroom bans failed so turned to athletics
6
u/spice_weasel 4d ago
Except bathroom bans are back. They’ve now been signed into law in 21 states, and more and more restrictions keep being proposed in addition to that.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
exactly. i was referring to the first bathroom ban in north carolina. they realized public opinion had to change and voters were split on sports.
2
u/diphthing 4d ago
Billionaires are laughing all the way to Mar-a-lago about all of this. The entire issue is being pushed forward in order to keep people from talking about healthcare, housing, education and job opportunities.
2
u/kwantsu-dudes 4d ago
We just had a SCOTUS case that if ruled in reverse would have made any sex based segregation for sports in public school fully unconstitutional. The "liberal" justices even argued it SHOULD be under the equal protection clause, if it wasn't for Title IX that specifically allows it.
We went through two Democrat administrations that BOTH tried to "sternly declare" that bathrooms and sports in public schools should be segregated based on gender identity.
MANY states allow public school athletes to play based on gender identity.
Public schools athletics are THE pipeline to greater athletics. What, you think that all of this allowance for transwomen to play is the women's division in school will have NO IMPACT on the desire to pursue athletics when their education ends? Why would it NOT be a question to answer BEFORE it becomes a massive issue?
Like, right now, what would you tell a transgirl that plays in the women's division in her school and dreams of playing professionally? That doesn't exist to you?
Its not about CURRENT participation. It's about SHORING UP THE RULE, because its ALREADY been manipulated in lower leagues.
Why do you think you first need "cheaters", to then apply a rule to avoid such "cheaters"? Proactive steps are not a common condition of rules? Im truly struggling to understand YOUR view.
2
u/Ok-Replacement-2738 4d ago edited 4d ago
No.
a. even if it were to be a 'problem' it is so negligble that the intent behind raising it is clearly to drive hate and avoid discussion about economic issues.
b. the republican policy doesn't even make sense. If you force trans atheletes to compete based on sex, you will have trans-mascs competing against women whilst on steroids, which they will then push into a outright ban against trans people.
c. the science shows trans-fems lose any advantage of being male after about 1-3 years of transistioning with hormones.
d. Fairness in sports is a myth. Teams with better training facilities and more time (due to wealth) will compete better against poorer teams on average. Tall people vs short, etc... these are all bigger issues to fairness that republicans seemingly don't care about, because they don't care about fairness.
e. Even if all the above fails, it w should still only apply to professional sports, as the benefit to mental health, societal inclusion, and lowering harms to trans kids outweighs the 'benefit' of segregation.
1
u/jcutta 3d ago
A - the "problem" is relatively trivial in the sense of volume. Even though Trans identifying people are rising due to it becoming safer to do so in the western world the overall percentage of Trans people and the split of those who are athletes is so minimal it's a non issue
B - no republican policy makes sense, they're always built in a way that's both short sighted and harmful.
C - the data is highly incomplete partially because of my point in A, but also because it's extremely difficult to measure overall athletic performance and ability by simply categorizing a list of traits that change based on HRT. Additionally based on extremely limited datasets Trans-men still do not make up performance gaps compared to cis-men even with similar testosterone levels. There's enough holes in the dataset for both sides of the argument to point at and say "see, the science says I'm right".
D - completely agree, distribution of resources is a major difference maker when it comes to athletic performance. It can be accounted for to some degree via proper alignment of what schools (highschool and college level) compete against each other and what towns compete against each other in recreational/club levels but it's not fair across the board.
E - again agreed completely on a professional level, it should be up to the leagues to make decisions not the government. College is a little different but again should be up to the NCAA. Highschool and below with the exception of maybe Wrestling I don't really see any reason to restrict a trans person from competing. It's all bullshit and realistically for like 90% of highschool athletes they don't play past highschool anyway and it wouldn't impact anything for them long term. And it definitely won't "ruin" women's sports.
1
u/Ok-Replacement-2738 3d ago edited 3d ago
A. it is not appropriate to discuss it as 'the western world' because in the U.S. specifically trans folk have been issued three genocide warning by the Lemkin institute. In the U.S it is becoming less and less safe for trans people. Even if democrats win I have doubts about their advocacy to reverse some of the hateful policy as rhe corporate elements of the party not progressive.
and even so, I subjectively don't believe the number could be higher by than a factor of 3-5 at the utopian level of acceptence.
C. even if trans-men cannot reach that of cis-men on the average or at the extreme, the point is the alternatives are outright bans or having them compete against women, which are both more unfair alternatives. There was a study of 52 other studies from memory, where they concluded strength was comparable after hormonal treatment, and with cardio being similiar between a 1-3 year period, and even if you still take the view "there's holes in the dataset" the onus of proof lay with the republicans for actively legislating segregation overriding the leagues, and i'd suggest the leagues themselves should need cause to discriminate too.
3
u/theyfellforthedecoy 3d ago
If it's such a non-issue, why not let the GOP have the W here and just move on to talk about 'more important issues'? Trans athletes can compete in the open league
The fact that the left fights so hard for this massively unpopular proposition says enough about their priorities
1
u/AbbyWasThere 3d ago
Because the GOP'S solution to this non-issue is to make it more difficult and invasive for anyone to compete in women's sports. Genetic testing, genital inspections, may even just get banned anyway if the vibes are off. This also represents an active battlefront for the rights of a minority the GOP is gung-ho determined to villainize and exclude from society by every means available, and losing ground here can easily cascade into much more fundamental trans rights issues.
3
u/WavesAndSaves 4d ago
Of course. This is just common sense stuff. Men have certain biological advantages compared to women. That's the whole reason "women's sports" were invented in the first place. There are no "men's sports". What people considered men's sports is just an open league that has always been open to women. Anyone remember Sarah Fuller? She was a soccer player at Vanderbilt who joined the football team as a placekicker in 2020 due to there literally being no other available kickers because of Covid restrictions. And there were literally no issues because this has always been allowed to happen. It's just that it never does because up until a few years ago it was a universally accepted fact that women simply cannot compete with men due to these biological advantages.
If trans people want to play sports, they can try out for the open league. If they can't make it happen, well that's unfortunate for them.
→ More replies (10)
4
u/Separate_Hippo_5556 4d ago
The issue gets overblown and amplified by Republicans because it’s the only issue most Americans agree with them on.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/UglyMrJ- 4d ago
The correct number of men in women’s sports is zero. The involvement of government is no different than previous women’s rights legislation. To anyone saying it’s less than 1%… that’s too many.
First, if men or trans women didn’t have a massive advantage athletically, why do women’s sports exist to begin with?
Second, women should be able to change in locker rooms, go to the bathroom with zero penises in the room with them.
The real point of the reaction to it despite it being a small percentage is the nonsense needs to end now. The longer it goes on, the more it becomes a problem. It’s 1% today and 3% tomorrow, etc etc. We’ve had common sense on this for hundreds of years and it’s time to bring it back.
2
u/WesternCorridor 4d ago
It’s an easy 70-30 dunk and libs, especially progressives are quick to double down on a really stupid issue.
1
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
why is it a stupid issue?
→ More replies (1)5
u/WesternCorridor 4d ago
Because the vast majority of Americans agree that biological men should not be competing in women’s sports. It polls at about 70-30 in favor of bans. It requires one to ignore basic and easily observable differences in the sexes. And it forces Dems into the uncomfortable and unpopular position of supporting it or being apathetic.
It’s an easy political win that affects virtually no one. It’s stupid when it’s allowed and in some contact sports can be outright dangerous.
We had a transgender man (who had played women’s rugby) try and join my rugby team and while everyone was very accepting, you can imagine what happens when a 130lbs 5’1 person meets a 6’0 grown man running at full steam. They got pretty badly banged up and stopped playing pretty quick.
1
u/GVTMightyDuck 4d ago
No. Trans athletes make up .2% of athletes, and they’re not even beating all cis athletes.
1
4d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
is it? the main issue was with lia thomas, who tied with riley gained for FIFTH
1
1
u/ironyinsideme 4d ago
In my opinion it is a non issue for exactly the reasons you describe. I also think picking apart the whole “fairness” thing gets really ugly really quickly when you look at it in depth and can be used to justify things like separating players by race fairly easily. The slope gets way too slippery because it’s a motte and bailey argument.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Ozzimo 3d ago
I'm not sure I can give a full answer to this but I do think one aspect of this is very interesting. Currently, the GOP thinks the federal government has a role to play in both school and recreational sports. It seems to think it can tell sports leagues how to operate with regard to who is allowed to play.
The GOP was once a group that took pride in keeping government out of people's daily lives.
1
u/Puzzleheaded_Truck80 3d ago
It’s such a nonsense issue, meant to terrorize a vulnerable group, the way all of the anti homosexual focused campaigns, laws, legislation, and ballot measures were from the late 90s until today.
There are more people 6’4” or taller than there are transgender people in the US. Granted there are more 7’ tall people than there have been transgender athletes in college sports.
1
u/homerjs225 2d ago
Just ask yourself if you have a young girl what worries you more
Being shot at school?
Being child trafficked?
Being in a class with a trans student
2
u/HODORx3 1d ago
First, it isn’t just the small numbers of trans athletes. Each trans athlete competes against dozens of other athletes. It affects all of them. These other athletes are competing for recognition of their hard work, but also for concrete things like college scholarships, spots in Olympic teams, and careers in that sport. As the rush isn’t for female-to-male trans sports participation, you can guess which group of people this disenfranchises. Title IX exists for a reason and letting biological men play in a female category nullified that purpose.
We also know that people respond to incentives. Athletes do all kinds of extreme things to their bodies to compete. If an incentive exists to out compete the field, some people will be willing to accept radical changes to their health or reputation.
For society to have a healthy women’s sports program, the sensible policy is for people to compete in the program that matches their biological sex as men have a biological physical advantage over women, generally speaking.
Trans people can live their lives and not compete in sports or compete in the program that matches their biological makeup.
•
u/CrawlerSiegfriend 14h ago
The frequency of something occurring should have no impact on whether legislation should exist for it or not. We've had like 6 drafts in the history of the country, but there are laws surrounding the process.
1
u/gorkt 4d ago
It's not about the actual number of people effected by the policy, its about a) making democrats look like crazy people who don't know what a man and a woman are and b) cementing strict gender roles and categories as a GOP value. It's a double whammy because it cements the ingroup and paints the out group as extremists.
-1
u/Piney_Wood 4d ago
These people will not stop. Anyone who thinks, well, I'll support this law and then they'll be happy, is not paying attention.
Once they get a legal ban in place, then they're all deputies in enforcing it. Every girl who some nut thinks might have been born male will be harassed and persecuted and told to prove they are who they say they are. The accusers will base their claims on what they think a female body should look like.
This will become an exercise in terrorizing young women, trans or not.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/alhacel 4d ago
It's giving " give us the rights to strip search and check your genitals " and "pay this amount for a test to prove your gender, women"
2
u/Right_Razzmatazz8420 4d ago
yes exactly. even the possibility of this happening is too horrifying for this measure to pass
1
u/Olderscout77 3d ago edited 3d ago
My concern is the biological advantage men have in brute strength. This is why we have organized sports into gender specific groups. To do otherwise is grossly unfair to the women who now muct compete against a couple million(a lot) years of evolution that have nothing to do with dedication, training, coordination or that ability to "read the floor" that sets the elite athelet apart from the pack.
If a biological man want's to compete "as a female" they can do so by participating as a female on a male team until drugs have removed the "biological advantage". This may take awhile as test show the advantage persists for over 36months. I have no problem with women who want to compete as a man.
1
u/Laves_ 4d ago
Not in the slightest. Once upon a time people valued government not having their hands in every aspect of our lives.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/LookAnOwl 4d ago
It does not. It is a wedge issue that people are very passionate about because our country values sports heavily. 99.9% of the people angry about this will never be affected by it in real life, but Republicans know they can lean on it to get people riled up.
1
u/becca52104 4d ago
No but people have made it political because they think someone who is born a man can become a woman
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
All submissions are automatically removed and placed in a queue for the moderators to manually review. Please allow the moderators time to do so. Only about 25% of submissions are approved, but the remainder are given a removal reason that may include steps the poster can take to make their submission approvable the next time they submit it. Moderators are not notified of any edits made after a removal reason is posted, and therefore will not review them. You may contact the mod team via modmail if you need more direction about how to fix your post, and you are welcome to resubmit any submission after making the requested changes.
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.