News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Good news! Puberty blockers exist and have been studied and used for literal decades for other reasons.
The science says 2-3 years of hormone therapy levels the playing field and there's no more advantage.
In fact, women who haven't transitioned often have an advantage because their testosterone levels can be higher than women who have transitioned.
And that's the crux of the issue: human variation.
Would you be opposed to a requirement that trans women wanting to compete in women's leagues undergo 3 years of hormone therapy before being allowed to play?
I think most trans people would agree that's reasonable, but at that point, you also have to talk about the bans on transition for minors, which would affect a minors ability to have that time frame met, and then their ability to play.
True, and that's a thorny problem but one that has to be addressed eventually.
In the case of a trans woman having not went through puberty as a male then yeah true enough as far as I know.
Are you sure about that? Because I looked it up and (after a few instances of "we have no idea but maybe not") I found this. I'll also admit that I only read the conclusion so I can't make any guarantees for the quality of the paper.
Yeah that's the thing: Testosterone is only one part of athletic ability. The paper lists some parameters that are either not affected or affected but not reduced to within the average range of cis women, but the obvious example would be height.
The paper does what all transphobes, and coincidentally most sexists, do when this subject comes up:
Pretends that the average woman has a shot at high level athletics even at just the college level.
If there's scholarships on the line, the people getting them are going to have certain natural advantages on top of busting their asses for years at the sport.
To quote an old Utah Jazz coach:
So when you compare the average 22 year old woman to an elite college athlete, you're gonna a very large gap. Just like comparing an average 22 year old guy to whoever just won the Heisman trophy.
The difference is larger in women. Because the average guy is more likely to have played sports growing up, and those gains in coordination when you g last for life.
And that's not even it.
There are just soooooooooo many reasons why this who thing is overblown fearmongering designed to get idiots mad at a very small very vulnerable group.
Of all the things to be mad about right now, your mad at tops, absolutely tops, double digit young non-paid athletes.
Just fucking why?
If it's not transphobia, what other reason do you care to still be going thru this thread desperately trying to have the same argument?
Well I care about the truth for its own sake, but you can also call it pedantry. I recognize that this is culture war bullshit by conservatives meant to demonize trans people for what's mostly a non-issue, but setting aside conservatives being conservatives it is a debate worth having. And I have nothing better to do, that helps too.