The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I'm curious as to how a lot of you feel about this. I know the conservative side is typically against the whole transgender thing but I'm curious as to how many of you view the trend. Trans gender "women" seem to be dominating in many sports these days. Transgenders dominate in weightlifting, track, wrestling, football, basketball, mixed martial arts and others. Do you think that is fair or are you ok with a man being "woman of the year" and champion of a woman's sport? What are your thoughts?

At first thought, it doesn't seem fair to me that transgenders would be able to compete in certain levels of women's sports.  Other stuff, I wouldn't care, like if it's not competitive sports -- intramural stuff or city leagues or whatever.

But, I admit that I'm not entirely briefed on what it means to be transgender, in terms of your body chemistry.  I don't have a problem with the fact that you are transgender; I just don't want there to be an inherent competitive advantage.

I don't know that transgender women are "dominating" in sports.  I don't know of any transgender WNBA MVPs or Grand Slam (golf or tennis) champions, there aren't any transgender women's champions in UFC, Bellator, or Invicta, I've never even heard of a competitive woman's football league, etc.

I think that like most instances of transgender discussion, there is a lot of commotion about unlikely outcomes.  Just like with the bathrooms, where we're supposed to believe that there is a real danger that men will transition to the life of a women just to be next to a stall where a female is pooping, we are also supposed to be wary that there will be a flood (or maybe the flood is already here, according to OP?) of men pretending to be women in all aspects of their life just so that they can dominate over women in sports... and be ostracized as cheaters and frauds.

The motive doesn't make sense.

So you hand pick a few things Spider, that doesn't mean transgender women are not competing in sports and winning championships. One main reason there hasn't been one in UFC is because, from what I know, Dana White has said he would not allow the only competitor I know of to compete.

There was an undefeated Texas wrestler who won the state championship, a sprinter who won two state titles in Connecticut (and from the photo I saw she had a better mustache than I did in high school), and a weightlifter who won an Australian International competition, all within the past year.

I personally think sports such as these puts other athletes at a competitive disadvantage. I definitely see a problem with physical competitions such as these. I do not however see where an advantage would lie in non-contact events such as billiards, bowling, darts, etc.

(Modified for an obvious typo)

 :-\ I've never really gave it a lot of consideration,my initial thought when reading this was about Real sports with Bryant Gumbel story (lastyear?) of the Asian track athlete being banned from competing. Her competitors felt she looked too male,had hairy armpits,and the Country she was in banned her from competing.

I don't feel like there is 1 blanket rule that would work for all situations,IE: Saying NEVER can any form of transgender,hermaphrodite,compete in this sport,or another.

The "No"'s they shouldn't be allowed to compete,are fairly obvious.A great boys high school basketball player,2 years into a college career that is failing,gets gender reassignment surgery,then tries compete as a women's basketball...

I think the tricky cases,are the effed up parents that raised their daughters as boys (or vice versa),then when the kid grows up and finds out.They are dominant in a sport because they're not a girl,but a boy. Either tricked,or born as a hermaphrodite I think it's a case of when did they know,why,etc...Making the decision based upon medical,when,how,etc...

This is the best answer I could give... :P

It's clear that nobody is going to go through transgender surgery and hormones specifically to compete in sports, but that's not really what's being suggested.  In cases where there are transgendered athletes, I see how it could give an unfair advantage, because of increased body mass or testosterone or whatever.

I am pretty liberal on most things.

But I support a clear policy of a Y chromosome bars you from women only sports.  If you want to chop off your dick you can use the women's bathroom but no compete in women's sports.

On transgenderification in general... If an adult wants to get carved on to make himself/herself look like the opposite gender, no problem. A guy wants to get rid of all his genitalia and proclaim himself as an android eunuch? More power to him...it. Where I do have an issue is with parents who don't give firm guidance to young kids and allow them to change genders at a ridiculously young age. I saw a story recently about some baby boy who was born without having his gender specified on his birth certificate, because the parents "want him to make his own choice." What kind of an asshole parent would subject their kid to that kind of self-confusion right at the start of their life?

On transgender athletes competing...  Simple answer, no.  If you're a male athlete who wants to discard your magic johnson and and prance about wearing yoga pants, go for it...but you don't get to compete against the "real" ladies in their sports.


I wonder if there has ever been a case of a hermaphrodite athlete competing in both men's and women's sports...

The statement offered was that transgendered women are "dominating."  That is clearly not true, as I don't think there is a single transgender champion at the highest level in any sport that was cited.

Now, if you want to say that there are some trans women winning at some levels, sure... there are a few champions here and there at the lower levels of of the sport.  But that is nowhere remotely near "dominating."  Out of the hundreds, if not thousands, of female champions across the globe, a tiny handful are transgender.  They are not "taking over women's sports."

Forget the motives...forget the prevalence. Answer the question. Should a man who goes through gender reassignment to become a female be allowed to compete with the females in sports?

Given the physical advantages that males have over females, the only reason that transgender women are NOT dominating in women's sports on a wider scale is only because the number of transgender athletes is very, very low.

OK. I'll give you that, but you still haven't weighed in on the reality that there are instances. I'd counter you by asking (and there really is no way to know) how many transgender women have even pursued or been allowed to pursue professional careers in the sports you mention? If they are not trying, there naturally won't be any champions there. In addition to picking apart the title, do you have any thoughts on the fairness of transgender female athletes competing, regardless of the level, against naturally born females?

Spider ... Not sure why you took offense to the word "dominating" but I'll change it to it is common to see them win if it makes you feel better. It's only a matter of time before trans men are killing in women pro sports as it seems much more common that the younger crowd is confused about their sex.

A transgender high school athlete beat girls in the Connecticut track state championship Tuesday, but his time would have placed him last in the boys’ race. http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/04/transgender-athlete-beats-girls-but-wouldve-placed-last-against-boys-video/

Andraya Yearwood is a freshman at Cromwell High School. ‘She’ is also a transgender athlete with a mustache and huge muscles who, after previously competing as a boy, has recently begun to compete as a girl.
 ... Yearwood is a transgender athlete who competed for Cromwell as a girl for the first time on April 5, winning both sprints in a tri-meet against Portland and Old Saybrook. The Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference “defers to the determination of the student and his or her local school regarding gender identification,” according to a Hartford Courant story about Yearwood earlier in the year. (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/DBQ1SLGUMAAjexG-1.jpg)

Transgender weightlifter Laurel Hubbard, who was born a man, won the Australian international women’s competition March 19.
Hubbard, 39, lifted 591 pounds, nearly 20 pounds more than the woman who won the silver medal by lifting 572 pounds.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/female-athletes-crushed-by-women-who-were-once-men/#oQ1FeaKHTtVzX7ah.99

Transgender cyclist Jillian Bearden, a 36-year-old biological male and Colorado Springs native, won the women’s division of the El Tour de Tucson in four hours and 26 minutes in November 2016.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/female-athletes-crushed-by-women-who-were-once-men/#oQ1FeaKHTtVzX7ah.99

Mack Beggs, 17, was born a girl and reportedly began identifying as a boy at the age of 3. Though Beggs underwent testosterone treatments for more than a year and had the muscle mass of a teenage boy, Beggs competed and took first place in the University Interscholastic League state girls’ championship on Feb. 25, 2016.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/female-athletes-crushed-by-women-who-were-once-men/#oQ1FeaKHTtVzX7ah.99

We need a like button. 

Yes.

Of course, my explanation for my answer involves both motives and prevalence.  But if you want a simple binary response, there you go.

^^^ Thanks... I just happen to think it is cheating. Once I've pretty much decided it is cheating, the motives and prevalence become pretty much meaningless to me.  I don't care why you're cheating, or how many of you are cheating...

It's like Cartman competing in the Special Olympics, but with more dominant results.

I think I could find several instances in sports of rarely-occurring-but-questionable circumstances that are not prevalent enough to warrant changing the rules for everyone.

If transgender women were actually "dominating" and "taking over women's sports" then sure, I would be open to changing the rules.  But it's not like we have women's world records in track being shattered by trans women.  To the contrary, all of the examples CF cited seem to be fairly insignificant lower-level events, and given that the source is WorldNetDaily, I am inclined to believe that said list is a fairly exhaustive account of the worst cases of an uneven playing field.

In fact, looking at the main article CF linked, the vast majority of the instances cited are not trans women "dominating," but singled out anyway for even being allowed to compete.  This is why motives matter: the headlines ("Female athletes crushed by 'women who were once men'") are effectively used as a smokescreen to attack the much larger number of trans women who AREN'T dominating, but simply being allowed to participate in the sport.  One might wonder why these trans women, who aren't even doing exceptionally well, merit inclusion on such a list.

You complain that these are low level events. That is because those level events so far have been just about all we know of. There were some examples in the Olympics but the IOC did not release the names of the competitors. You can't shout out that it isn't happening when hardly anyone knows who the examples are. There very well may be Olympic medalists.

This doesn't mean that I think it is widespread practice. I actually believe the reasoning to be that there are very few who have even tried competition as a female at the highest levels.

I am unable to think of a way to discuss the topic under the context of "We don't know who the examples are, it could be anyone!" that does not precisely resemble the rambling of conspiracy theorists.

Let me put it this way: the known examples of competitively successful transgender women athletes have been rare, and at relatively insignificant low-level events.

Just wait because its coming. Millennials are suddenly the most "confused" generation of any period in time and they and their children will soon will moving into the professional ranks. 

Right now it may not be an issue of dominance.  Transgender has only recently been widely accepted, at least more in years past.  So it's only a problem if trans BECOME dominant in womens sports...why are you waiting for the become part?  Who really cares if it's before or after said domination?

I agree with Sun, to me that's cheating.

I would stop short of calling it cheating, but I don't think it is competitively fair.

Because these kind of slippery slope arguments have been used to justify discrimination against vulnerable groups for centuries.

As I just pointed out: the premise is supposed to be that trans women are crushing their born-female competition, yet the authors of an approvingly-cited article can't help but show their real agenda and start calling out the trans women who AREN'T dominating, but are simply being allowed to participate.  And that's the underlying true objection: not that they are dominating, but that they are being permitted to join as if they are real women, when clearly they do not qualify as real women.

This is gay marriage or transgender bathrooms all over again: some excuse is trotted out ("sanctity of marriage," "religious freedom," "child predators") but the actual matter of contention is that those people should not be treated the same way we are.

I think you're projecting.  Gay marriage, transgender bathrooms, etc. is not the topic HERE (as in here, on this website, in this thread).  Yes, there will be people that don't want trans people playing sports with women just because they are trans, but that shouldn't affect your opinion on whether they should or should not be able to play sport with women.  What should justify that opinion is "is it fair if a former man who is now a woman, be allowed to compete in sports with women."  and the answer to that IMO is no, it is not fair.  Any amount of discrimination is not going to change that.

How is that statement any different from the following:

"Yes, there will be white people that don't want their kids going to school with black kids just because they are black, but that shouldn't affect your opinion on whether they should or should not be forced to attend a distant school.  What should justify that opinion is "is it fair to force kids to attend a distant school against their parents' wishes."  and the answer to that IMO is no, it is not fair.  Any amount of discrimination is not going to change that."

You see, I can't simply discard the discrimination and look at the decision in a vacuum, because I think the discrimination is an important factor in making the decision.  To ignore it is to sanction it.

(And yes, I know that this discussion is not about forced busing, just as I know it is not about gay marriage or transgender bathrooms.  I am merely drawing an analogy from other forms of discrimination to help explain how I see this situation.)

This is so off base it shouldn't even warrant a response but I can't help myself to say how dumb this comparison is. One is physical competition and the other is racial discrimination.

Based on your stance, at what point is a person born male disqualified from competing as a woman? Do they have to go through the surgery? What if they are only taking hormones? What if they just cross dress? What if they just woke up and felt a little bloated this morning (this one I admit is tongue and cheek)? You are basing this on discrimination so I'm really curious at what point you would discriminate (definition 2 from Dictionary.com: 2.to note or observe a difference) who is allowed to compete in women's sports. You have to at some point but your stance so far has been that you basically can't discriminate at all.

From my perspective, if we would allow this person to qualify as "female" in every other part of society, why would this part be any different?

Again, I am open to revisiting the rules if that proves to be necessary, i.e. if women's sports actually become dominated by trans women.  But what you all are proposing is a ban because you think it might become a problem down the line.  So far, you all have seemed to agree that right now, they are not dominating nor have they taken over.  My position is that while it is possible that women's sports will be overran by people who were not born women, it is also possible that nothing of the sort will happen and everything will be fine (as would seem to have been the case when previous warnings of dangerous perversions destroying our society have been issued).

So rather than take extra steps to exclude people who already face a lot of exclusion in their life, why don't we just wait and see if such steps are even necessary?

On a side note: one of the individuals in the article CF cited is a girl transitioning to a boy... that is competing with girls in the meantime.  So which gender should this person compete with, boys or girls?  Do trans individuals always have to compete with males, regardless of the direction of their transition?

I will say this: one thing I am open to is a blanket classification of external sources of testoterone and estrogen as PEDs, regardless of your gender identity.  Such a rule would have the effect of excluding most transgender individuals, but it would also exclude cisgender men and women that have hormone imbalances.  I would not see that as a form of discrimination.

I am perfectly okay with transgender people competing in sports, just not in women only sports.  But both male to female and female to male transgender are welcome in any sport without a gender requirement...NBA, NHL, NFL, MLS, NASCAR, etc.  What Billy Jean King did is impressive, a biological male that calls himself a female winning the girls tennis tournament not so much.

I think that's it in a nutshell. Women's sports were created because they cannot compete with men on a physical level and not because men didn't want to play with women.  Therefore women's leagues should be women only and anything else should not be allowed. Taking testosterone isn't allowed so why should it be if you have it naturally?

It seems like the world is trying to play that everyone has a right to do and have whatever everyone else does and that simply isn't the case. I think teaching that life isn't fair and you have to make the best with what you are given should be the motto. If you were born a guy, regardless of what you "feel" you should have been, you will never be 100% a woman. I mean, I can want  and call myself whatever I like but I'll never be a black man regardless of how much I augment my skin. That's just the cards I was dealt and I have to accept that.

Thanks, I don't need to respond now.  Pretty much how I feel too.

I think you guys are giving Spider an unnecessarily hard time.  While I don't agree with his conclusion, I certainly understand his point and where he's coming from.

Discrimination is tricky.  I'm certainly not being accusatory of CF or anyone else because here I think it's a valid question, but historically, groups (in an effort to discriminate) will find outlier problems (or maybe even create fear of problems that don't exist) in order to make a group feel lesser.

You see this with things like voter ID laws.  There is no problem, but by raising a potential problem, you're able to make it more difficult for a specific group that you're trying to keep down, either for your advantage or to serve your ideology.

If your intent is to de-legitimize transgender-ism, making them not be able to compete as women in a thing specifically designed for women would surely be a notch in the belt.  ("See, I told you they're not real women...why are they using womens' bathrooms")   I'm not saying that's the reasoning here, but historically (and even now), things like this did and continue to occur, so it's not absurd of Spider to raise those concerns.

This may be a bit off topic, but I don't think it deserves to be split off to a new one. I myself do not understand transgendersim. I have no idea how you feel your gender and maybe that is because I don't have whatever it is inside of me that transgender people do. I don't think I've ever consciously thought about what it feels like to be a male. I just am what I am. What does it mean to feel like you are something other than what you are? It must be a terribly terrifying experience but I have no personal frame of reference and really can't even imagine it.

^ I have evolved on that issue in my lifetime.  I used to have a much simpler "if you have a dick, you're a dude..what's the discussion?" mindset.  What swung me was listening to scientists talk about our biology and understanding what gender is.

I used to make the mistake of equating sex and gender.  They are not the same thing.  Gender is a combination of physical DNA (like what body part you have), but also body chemistry (testosterone/estrogen, etc) and even the wiring of brain chemistry...not to mention that gender is at least partially a social construct.  Your maleness is determined by a lot of different things, which is why dudes act like dudes and women act like women, traditionally. 

Transgenderism is when the physical aspects don't match the other aspects. 

The same way that you'd still be a dude on the inside if they took off your penis and put a hole there.  You aren't necessarily a dude inside just because you're born with one.

That's the thing thought Dave, I don't consciously "feel" like a man. It is just my natural state of being, much like sexuality. It is just a person's natural state. I can't conceptualize feeling like something other than what I am.

I know this is controversial but it seems like a good point to put out the opposing view.  I've gone from supporting to thinking those people who are trans have a mental disorder. Regardless of the switch they still have a lot of issues that switching didn't fix. Not to mention some want to change back. I know people like to say they are tormented or bullied by others and as such are depressed but the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. That's huge and obviously points to other things as being the issue IMO.

[i]a person’s “assumption” that they are different than the physical reality of their body, their maleness or femaleness, as assigned by nature. It is a disorder similar to a “dangerously thin” person suffering anorexia who looks in the mirror and thinks they are “overweight,” said McHugh.[/i]

Why do we see one as a disorder while the other is considered "normal" and everyone must accept it? Seems a bit odd to me.

With that said I have a guy I went to school with that had surgery before our 10th reunion. While we aren't best friends we are close enough (and Facebook Friends) that he sat with us during said reunion.  Other than knowing he was gay in high school I had no idea he wanted to be a dude. Imagine my surprise expecting to see Keith but instead a 6'2" black woman named Dana in heels walks in. It was a bit surreal.

It is precisely my point that I think this is the real subtext behind this discussion, but people are trying to cloak it in concern over competitive advantage, even when we basically all agree that there is no significant problem right now.

That's why I keep referencing gay marriage: people who disapproved of homosexuality - but lost the legal battle to prohibit it - simply took another avenue to strikeback against the "gay agenda."  These were, almost without exception, people who would talk your ear off about the value of two parent households, the danger of single mothers, and the downsides of sex outside of a committed marriage... yet when it came to the gays, suddenly they want to stop marriages and force them to simply shack up instead?

So I think it's fair to question when many of the same people who contradicted their own values just to try to make LGBT lives worse now tell us that trans women are supposedly "dominating" women's sports when there are none of them even competing at the highest levels.

Exactly.

at the highest levels? So you don't care about screwing the young girls and women I guess?

So you are saying what is the point in doing what's right when it will serve some people who are bigots? That's just a wee bit bigoted don't you think? 

The endgame of that particular line of argument is that every bulked up trans female is taking a roster spot from a real female, so therefore they shouldn't be allowed on the teams at all.  And that's a perfectly consistent position to take... if you hadn't opened the discussion under the cover of women losing repeatedly because of this unfair competitive advantage.

If you want to be against transgenderism, then be against it.  But don't try to smuggle in this Trojan horse about "taking over women's sports" when that clearly is not the issue.  Again, we just went through this: people who were unwilling to openly come out and say "I don't think homosexuality should be allowed" were instead trying to flank the issue by going after gay marriage.  And I'm seeing the same pattern right now.

First off, I'm not particularly receptive to the "Why are liberals so intolerant of my desire to discriminate?" argument.  But more to the point, you and I have different opinions on what "doing what's right" entails.

Easy with that "we basically all agree" spiel, Spidey... I would say that cheating, regardless of the circumstances, is a problem.

Men competing in women's sports is cheating. If you were born a man, and decide to become a femme faux-tale, you should no longer be allowed to compete in physical competitions that are segregated by gender...unless you want to compete as your original biological gender.

Sorry, what I meant was that we all agree that trans women are not currently "dominating" or "taking over" women's sports.

Slight hijack - This makes me think of the old George Carlin bit:  "What's your name?"  "Jenovsky"  How do you spell that? S-m-i-t-h.

lol

I'd agree with your statement that it's not YET dominating or taking over women's sports.  BUT, there are stories throughout the country in even small communities of trans girls competing against other high school girls in sports, such as track, etc.  So, the question is, is it fair to the naturally born girls?  I don't think it is, and it's my belief that this is just another step in the wrong direction, where everyone gets a participation trophy.

Spider, How would you feel about a white person dying their skin claiming they "identity" as African American and then compete for an NACCP scholarship?  If only 4 or 5 scholarships a year go to biological Caucasians you really couldn't claim they are dominating the NACCP scholarships....

That is how I feel about single biological male beating a single biological female.  It is not about how many...a single instance is wrong.

Rachel Dolezal?

Exactly.   I didn't see any real difference between her and Caitlyn Jenner. 

Hijack of your hijack.... when people ask me "how do you spell that?" I respond "T-h-a-t, doesn't everybody?"

You're essentially talking about claimed "transracial" people like the aforementioned Rachel Dolezal.  In her specific case, I didn't really have a problem with her because 1) there are a lot of people who "look white" but provably have black heritage, and 2) she was basically just doing what she could to try to help minorities, not claiming minority status to try to gain personal advantage.   There are people who were really upset about her racial appropriation, but I was not one of them.

I do know that Dolezal is a favorite target of transgender opponents to conflate transgender and transracial, and I also know that leftists who had a big problem with her explained why they didn't think that was the case.  Since I didn't particularly care about that example, I didn't read up enough on either side's arguments to form a solid opinion, so my current position on the subject of "transracial" candidates is roughly, "I haven't yet looked at it enough to arrive at an informed conclusion."

However, I can already tell you that trans women athletes wouldn't qualify as "claiming minority status to try to gain personal advantage" in my book.  Sports in our country - or at least, the sports that we are talking about, because it doesn't make sense to complain about trans women in co-ed sports - are segregated by gender, and so a trans female that wants to play sports is forced to choose: does she join a male league, essentially working against her own efforts to be identified as female, or does she join a female league and be criticized for cheating even if she isn't particularly good?  I don't see either of those choices as gaining personal advantage.

Yeah I know it is an old thread but, Gavin Hubbard noe Laurel is a perfect example of why this is wrong.  He was a very good but not elite male weight lifter, so he switched to the women's division and with his male skeleton and muscle structure dominated over legitimate females.

There won't be any sports for women in the near future if we keep worrying about being politically correct. This is just crazy to me. At a time when we are supposed to be supporting women it seems we are actually holding them back.

https://nypost.com/2015/10/01/most-of-players-on-irans-womens-team-are-men-official/

(https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/iran2.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=915)

This is a fair example.  So Hubbard was competing as a weightlifter, and decided to undergo gender transition but continue to compete.

First off, I am going to say that I do not believe Hubbard decided to upend an entire life and undergo a gender transition solely to gain advantage in weightlifting contests.  If you think she did, then say so and we can simply leave this at agree to disagree.  That said, it seems that when that decision was made, three options are available:

1) continue to compete as a male, undermining your own attempts to transition to the life of a woman
2) choose to compete as a female, be branded as a cheater, and have much of the public completely disregard your accomplishments
3) quit competing altogether with the implicit understanding that there simply is no place in gender-segregated competition for male-to-female transgender athletes

Which of these options do you think is least objectionable, and why?

How about we just define "men's competition" as those individuals that have a Y chromosome and "women's competition" as those individuals who do not?

(Yes, that covers all the rare variants like XXY, X0, XXX, etc).

If you want to be stupidly PC, feel free to invent a pair of new words for "men" and "women" in this context.

They probably have words already,  we just don't know them

I believe  he had four choice

4. Remain male.

And i am okay with all of the options except #2.

During transitions don't people undergo hormone treatments that put their body chemistry more in line with the gender they're transitioning to ?
that would have a major impact of lots of stuff .. including muscle mass and bone elasticity.

i don't really have an opinion on the 3 choices presented .. i guess 3 is really the reality of the current situation if you're going to cut out all the bs. secondarily #1 is the best option .. as long as you perform drug tests to account for supplemented hormones.  #2 is the least fair to all other competitors that have a different genetic structure altogether.

It will effect muscle to a limited extent, but your bone structure isn't going away.  I guess if you underwent the change when a toddler but a 25 yo is formed and not going to become equal.

Is this from the "Why don't you just not be gay?" school of thought?

I wasn't evaluating lifestyle choices, I was evaluating competitive choices.

Outside of the deep personal degradation inherent in #1, I'm not sure how practical it is.  If a pro athlete was a cross-dresser, and chose to openly do so in public, how well would that go over?  Because if we are being honest, that is what #1 would entail: transgender athletes who identify as female would be wearing dresses to press events and such.  I am unconvinced that would result in appreciably less criticism than they are experiencing now.

Of course, there is always the aforementioned "Why don't you just not be transgender if you want to continue to compete?" option, which leads neatly into my next point: the only real way to avoid criticism is to accept the position that female-to-male transgender athletes have no place in gender-segregated sports.  And that's a rational position to take... but I don't see many people willing to come out and actually say that female-to-male transgender athletes should be banned from competition.  Instead, they seem to want to offer unworkable solutions that will just create a new, slightly different platform for harassment of these athletes.

Male to female transgender athletes have no place competing as females.  I said it.

They are free to complete as males or as females in sports that permit both.  The PGA allows both males and females.  The LPGA is female only.  I would have no problem with a transgender athlete competing in the PGA while wearing a skirt.  Or in the NFL or NBA. They can join the Harlem globe trotters or race in NASCAR. 

Oh, plenty of people are willing to say that.  Several people have said that in this thread alone (if not in that exact phrasing).

But few are willing to openly say that male-to-female transgender athletes shouldn't compete at all... even though that's the only real way to silence these critics.  And your comparison of transgender women playing in the PGA while wearing skirts simply sidesteps the issue I mentioned above; they won't be received warmly* like Annika Sorenstam, but instead with hostility.  The same reactionary voices will be insisting that transgenders are Shoving This In Their Face, and complaining about political correctness and the LGBT agenda.  They will simply be trading one form of resentment and opposition for another.

*Sorenstam wasn't received all that warmly in the first place.

Why is it personally degrading? You compete based on your chromosomes, not what you identify as.

At least, that's how it should be.

I don't care if they are received warmly.  What I care about is maintaining the integrity of women sports. 

But there will be some who herald a male to female transgender who competes in the men's division as a hero, and that person might win the Arthur Ashe award like Jenner.  Others will boo said individual.  But many athletes have their detractors.  People on this board have trashed Tim Tebow for kneeling others on this board have trash Kap for kneeling (although rarely was it the same folks)

You listed 3 options, here is number 5.  Have a transgender category.  Someone born with a dick shouldn't be regonized as the strongest female weight lifter.  But i have no problem with.them having the world record for strongest transgender weight lifter.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I'm sure you can find some, just as you can find pretty much anyrthing, but it would be a small group. If a trans wants to compete in a men's sport, have their own locker or whatever, I don't care. If Cameron Wake wants to wear a skirt it doesn't matter to most Dolphins fans as long as he is helping us win games. If he wants change his name (ironically he wouldn't have to) and compete in women's wrestling then I would have issue with it. 

The only real caveat i have here, is that if a Transgender man is prohibited from competing against men and forced by whatever league, association, state or whatnot to compete in the womens division, then i have no problem with it as it isn't the choice of the competitor.

Let's just make a Weirdo Division for each sport and be done with it. 

So .... The Connecticut transgender "girl" was beaten at this year's state meet by you guessed it ... another transgender who competed as a boy last year. They blew out the others so again I ask ... why don't they have their own division? 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/31605/watch-two-transgenders-blow-out-girls-state-meet-hank-berrien

This is getting out of hand.  These boys didn't have a sex change.  They didn't undergo any hormone therapy, they just signed up for a division that they could dominate unfairly.  They are BOYS not girls.   

To me it's a matter of how you view not only society but the law.

Should we rule on "what I am" vs. "what I feel."

Try and understand I'm not out to hurt people of another sexuality nor do I want to see anyone persecuted.

Society was build on laws... laws against killing, laws against stealing, what is, vs. what I feel... and if you rule on "what I feel," that's a whole new set of ground rules.

I AM certain things but I can claim to feel like anything I want.  Regardless of sexual/racial lines,  Regardless of really anything...


I am a mentally ill person, but I don't always feel like one,

Decide for yourselves...  it's a debate worth having as we go forward

^ I certainly understand that point of view and I used to share it.  But I changed my mind over the years after listening to scientists talk about gender.  I made the mistake of equating sex to gender.  They are different words that mean different things.

Gender is made up of a lot of factors -- body chemistry, brain chemistry, physical body, and social norms all play into it.

It's easier to make it a black/white issue where if you have a dick, you're a dude....I get it.  But it's a more gray, nuanced world than that, from the science of it.

Then maybe we should examine what terms are used when discussing the issue, because if the guy has a dick, and testosterone flowing through his body chemistry, "He" should not be competing against women.

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement about sports.  In sports, in general, we want to create a level playing field and this doesn't do that -- so I'm good there.  But in the broader sense of "are you what you feel like or are you what you look like?", there is a deeper understanding needed.

I get there is a place for nuance in discussing gender.  But this is pretty instance is black and white. 

The water just got muddy and I am lost. Are they women with dicks or men with boobs?

They were biological boys, with no surgery or hormone therapy who simply checked a different box on the race registration form so they could race vs the girls, instead of other boys.  Connecticut has the most permissive transgender law on the books. No operation needed, just fill out a form.

I'm all for allowing people to identify as whatever they want to identify as in their life. However, when it comes to competitive sports, fair play for all competitors outweighs a single individual's need to be considered something that they aren't.

I used to think that way too but have gone in the opposite direction as I've gotten older.  The funny thing to me is ... outside of the boy /girl thing no one has issue with calling it mental issue if a person thinks they are something or someone else. To many of us, if you have the male chromosomes you are are a male no matter how many times you clack you shoes together and wish you weren't. Transgenders have a higher suicide rate even after having surgery and hormone therapies which to me ... kind of backs up the mental thing. I do realize in some cases a person has both or it is mixed up. and that is not what I am referring to.

That's a big distinction.  Boy/Girl is body chemistry, physical parts (as well as brain chemistry and societal).  Other things don't have so many variables most of the time.

Even race isn't as simple as just melanin.  You could be a black dude who has a melanin deficiency yet you wouldn't necessarily be a white dude...or would you?

not necessarily... persecuted people have a higher suicide rate than the general population.

E.g. there was an elevated rate of suicide inside Japanese intermittent camps.  Suicide was common in nazi death camps and pow camps (committed by doing something that was known to get you shot, like running toward the fence)  It is not shocking that people who are unfairly labeled as mentally insane by much of the population are frequently driven to suicide. 

Suicide rates are higher than ever as well as acceptance among gays, lesbians and trans and yet they lead in percentage compared to other groups of people.  If it was "persecution" generated then their rates would be going down compared to past generations and sadly that isn't the case. This would seem to indicate that acceptance doesn't have much effect as to whether they feel stable.

It's absolutely more gray and nuanced from a humanity or a social perspective.  But I feel like when it comes to something like the law or sports, either you have to draw a line along mens' vs. womens' or we can take a different route and have intergender sports which is in most cases fine with me.

^ Yes.  Pretty much.  Dealing with it in sports is different than dealing with it in life.

You are what you are. You can't change it, that's reality. If you want to imagine yourself as a rooster, a cat, or someone of the opposite sex, then you have a mental issue. The Boyscouts are for boys/people born with a penis. The woman's bathroom is for women/people born with a pussy.

Chicks with dicks and cunts with nuts. What the fuck is wrong with this country? Abnormal behavior is abnormal behavior.

What about people born with both sex organs??

What about them? I'm not talking about people with physical abnormalities or birth defects. I'm talking about Chad who was raised by a single mother and watched too much liberal brainwashing propaganda and now he thinks he's a girl and calls himself Cheryl and wants to fight MMA in the female matches. Or maybe Janet who insists that she's a boy and wants to join the Boy Scouts.

Your question does nothing but muddy the waters and deflect the issue. It's like fat people. Mostly they have no will power and are just lazy. But someone invariably comes along and attempts to condone why people are fat and poses the question. "What if they have a medical condition?" Most of America is fat, but most of America doesn't have a medical condition that causes it. Likewise, most people confused about whether they are male or female weren't born with both sex organs. They just have a mental illness.

your core premise is incorrect. None of this is abnormal behavior. the fact that it occurs in nature is proof enough that it's "normal" for whatever you think normal is

By your definition murder, rape and incest is perfectly normal and should be allowed.

Humans have this great ability to learn, rationalize and then control our impulses ... although social media and forums show that may not always be the case.  It is what separates us from animals.

Some of us, anyway...

According to the dictionary, this behavior is NOT normal. It is not standard, usual, typical, or expected of a man to use the woman's bathroom. It is not standard, usual, typical, or expected for a girl to join the Boy Scouts. I mean shit, it's in the name - BOY Scouts. Just because anomalies happen in nature or life doesn't mean that they are normal. Some animals eat their young, would it be normal for humans to do that? These are mental health issues. Not addressing them as such is doing more harm than good. People should be told that they are acting abnormally instead of enabling their "weirdo" behavior.

I believe this conversation on normality has progressed to points that have already been covered before (http://www.thedolphinsmakemecry.com/forums/index.php?topic=22696.msg308533#msg308533).  Furthermore, it is no longer about transsexual competition, but about the legitimacy of transsexuality itself.

Accordingly, I'm locking this thread.  Please create a new thread to discuss the validity of transsexuality if you wish to do so.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/27/sport/transgender-boxer-everlast-trnd/index.html

This is different.  I am generally opposted to MtF competing against biological females, because of the unfair advantage.  However in this case you have someone who as a woman was at her top of her sport,  and as a male will be a marginal athlete.

I see no issue with trans or even females playing men's sport if they want but women's sports were created so that they had a fair chance at competing. Adding men or "used to be a man" takes that fair opportunity away.

Me too.  And while there have been females who competed against men (King, Zaharias, Kathrine Switzer, etc). To my knowledge this is the first transgender.  Also boxing is a contact sport unlike running, golf or tennis.