this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
380 points (95.7% liked)

News

22838 readers
3614 users here now

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.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 31 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If a 5ft trans woman who started transitioning when she was a teen faces off against a 6ft cis volleyball player, should the cis woman be not allowed to compete?

What about cis olympians? They all have natural advantages that make their ability to compete at high levels possible, why are you not calling for them to be banned? Britney Griner is a giant at nearly 7ft, surely she shouldn't be allowed to compete when she has such a innate advantage over your average cis woman, right?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Didn't you read what they wrote? The men would always win. I'm a 5'9" 180-pound cishet man and if I play basketball against Britney Griner, I will definitely win. For sure.

Oh, they meant professional sports? Well I guarantee you that there's literally no possibility that Britney Griner could beat the worst player out of the ~550 men in the NBA. No possibility. Britney Griner is definitely worse than all of those 550 men. Because she has a vagina.

Edit: The blatant sarcasm in my post was undermined by a mod deleting the post I was replying to. Oh well.

[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

It kind of borders on delusion if I'm being honest.

Remember when everyone was completely losing their shit about Laurel Hubbard, the trans powerlifter who had qualified for the olympics? Remember how everyone was claiming she was going to smash records and take the gold etc.?

Now, what did we see in reality? Laurel Hubbard didn't even place. She got beat out by her cis competitors, she broke no records, she fell within the same range of ability as cis women.

Where does this fact leave people's theory about "the men will always win"?

Edit: I see now you were being sarcastic. In any case I'll leave the response as is, since people do think like that. Changed it to be a less pointy, lol.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes, very much sarcastic. I am always annoyed by this 'men will always beat women in sports' talking point.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The problem with sarcasm here is that most men believe they can play tennis on par with the Williams sisters. At least according to some survey I saw years ago.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I don't think I can play tennis on par with the Williams brothers. 92-year-old John Williams and his brother Jerry, who may or may not be alive, but who is apparently younger than him. And even if he was dead, he'd still probably beat me at tennis.

I assume Serena or Venus Williams would just serve the ball at such a speed that, when I fail to hit it back and accidentally stand in its way, it will go straight through my skull and embed itself into the wall behind me and she'd just win by automatic forfeit.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

What the fuck is this sexist bullshit?

Girls beat boys at basketball all the time. Boys are too fucking fragile to accept it: https://www.npr.org/2023/03/07/1161727783/a-girls-basketball-team-had-to-play-boys-then-werent-allowed-trophies-after-winn

Griner would wipe the floor with you.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I would have thought the sarcasm was blatantly obvious.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Mods removed the original comment, so now your comment reads as sincere.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

That explains it then. Thanks.

[–] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Even if he wasn't being sarcastic, these are children. Not full grown adults

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com 1 points 3 months ago

Girls mature faster than boys

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Britney Griner is definitely worse than all of those 550 men.

You understand the WNBA all stars would be beat handily by an 8th grade all star team right? It wouldn't be close.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Do I understand that your imaginary scenario is true?

No, I really don't.

[–] Marcbmann@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Okay? So what are the rules then? Only trans people that started transitioning before a certain age? Or has been transitioning for a certain number of years? Or should we measure bone density, muscle density, estrogen, testosterone, other various hormones, etc? What if they were a competitive athlete before transitioning? Is it transphobic to ask a person to prove they meet these requirements? Because apparently, based on the mods here, it's transphobic to even consider that a person who was born a man might have a physical advantage over someone born a woman.

It's not like all athletes taking PEDs are better than all of their natural counterparts. But it does afford them an unfair advantage. So we ban their use. A trans person could have an advantage that is the result of them being born a man. This is real and has happened. The existence of that possibility is no different than the possibility an athlete would be superior as a result of PEDs.

[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, the rules that have been in place about transition time have served fine since even before right-wingers politicized trans people's existence.

The irrational part is to try and create blanket bans based solely on the fact that an athlete is trans.

It completely ignores the fact that trans biology falls on a very wide spectrum and is dependent on numerous factors. It doesn't make sense to treat trans athletes as their assigned at birth sex because their biology is literally no longer that of their birth gender. It varies by degrees, but it is no more fair to ban a cis woman for being tall than it is to ban a trans woman for being the same height.

So no, it is not transphobic to have rules and regulations specific to trans athletes when it comes to competitive level sports (whatever experts and committees decide is fair based on actual data) it is transphobic to just outright ban trans people based solely on that status and ignore the biological reality of the individual and whether or not they fall within the range of cis competitors (spoiler, most do).

It's really stupid for people to get this outraged about a tiny percentage of the population, an even smaller percentage of which actually compete at high levels.