Walking back support in one area is walking back support.
It ain’t that complex. As soon as concessions are made, the far right demands more because there must always be an enemy to crush completely for the in-group. Who will then pick a new enemy when it comes politically convenient.
In many ways it is. The actual science on trans athletics supports policies like those sports agencies have typically used - allowing people to compete if they’ve been on certain hormonal treatments for a specific period of time. Cis athletes also have advantages and disadvantages, relative to each other, based on testosterone level. Trans women on HRT are well within that range of performance. In many sports, trans women are actually at a disadvantage to cis women, due to the fact that trans women tend to have lower testosterone levels than cis women.
In other words, the science is completely against sports bans. There is no logical reason to do them. The truly scientific solution is to consider sports on an individual basis, and let the sport figure out what advantage/disadvantage trans folks might have. Then, if that advantage/disadvantage is well within normal player ranges, then competing is fine. If not, if it’s an individual sport, maybe a handicap system. If it’s a group sport, well maybe rules about how many trans people can be on any one team. Etc. You start at a position of aiming for fairness. Then you only prevent people from competing if a clear advantage can be justified. In other words, the complete opposite of blanket sports bans.
With sports bans, you’re not meeting someone halfway on an issue of great scientific debate. You are simply caving to irrational bigotry. People think trans people are gross, so they want to hurt them. That’s really the root of this. And you can’t compromise with someone that isn’t actually trying to craft good public policy. Two people can compromise on tax rates or the generosity of government benefits. But how do you compromise with someone that just wants to hurt other people? Their desire to hurt others isn’t going to end. They’ll just want more. Compromising with bigots only emboldens them.
Also for god fucking sake it’s fucking evil to harass individual athletes who are abiding by those rules and participating in a sport they love. The fact that I scroll past virulent hatefests against Lia Thomas on Facebook, or that Imane Khalif’s personal medical history is apparently everyone’s personal business is gross and evil.
No.
If you fall back in front of the far right they will take that ground and demand more, as they always have done, and as they always will do. It’s how they win, it’s how they are winning, on trans rights, on immigration, on racial supremacy. Do not give them an inch. It’s not “all or nothing” it’s “give the bigots nothing”.
I honestly cannot fathom how you can be looking at the situation of the US currently and not realising how wedge issues based on lies and bigotry work and the absolutely deletrious effect it is having on minorities.
Why are you falling for wedge issues that are designed to wipe out a group of people in a way that absolutely parallels actions taken by Nazis? Is a discussion about 10 athletes out of hundreds of thousands that important?
The thing is you don’t align with the far right. At least I hope you don’t anyway. The far right either hate trans people, or they do not give a shit about them either way. They are using trans people as a political football to sow exactly this type of division. Yes, trans people in sport is an unresolved problem. No, I do not want the right wing to be the ones to resolve it. If you align superficially, you still don’t want to cede to them. Bear in mind “align” only goes as far as saying “we can agree about this one sentence”, not this whole issue.
Godwin’s law is fucked these days so let’s just use the third Reich as an analogy. You may agree that Germany has a legitimate territorial claim on Alsace-Lorraine. Does that mean you should let the Nazis take it? No, you fight them and then resolve it when someone more reasonable is asking. The reasons why should be obvious, and so should the analogy. It’s not about whether the extremely superficial claim is “correct”, it’s about why they are saying it and what they plan to do if they get enough people to agree with them.
In this case, where the war is one of ideas, you’re not a bigot if you agree in a very superficial way, but it’s completely redundant to be talking about trans women in sport when all trans people are being stripped of their rights and it looks like things are getting worse. A year ago we were hoping (again) for the first female president; long overdue. That’s not an issue anymore, as women are now being erased from history.
You’ve outlined exactly why allowing the far right to resolve perceived social issues isn’t the way forward, especially when it comes to any sort of “minority” (which seems to be anything that isn’t non-immigrant white Christian cis straight men) issues.
If you want to pretend there is nuance you will be fully aware that the evidence that supposedly supports banning trans athletes, which is an initial step of control used to further limit transgender people by e.g. preventing them for entering the country, are meta studies based on comparisons of cisgender men and cisgender women, right?
There isn’t a nuanced debate to be had and I’m sick of pretending that people like myself who just want to live our lives are a subject for debate.
So yes, worrying about tens out of hundreds of thousands of athletes when there isn’t clear evidence of an advantage is bigoted and not calling that out leads to situations where conservatives and the far right try to introduce bills like that which was recently struck down (thankfully) in Montana.
Now, question for you - why is it so important to you that a minority of people should have their basic humanity and ability to participate in society be questioned in the way that transgender people are? Why do you support that? Why do you consider that to be an okay thing to do, when the consequences of allowing it are so plain to see?
It’s honestly disappointing to see these sorts of expressions stated here on Lemmy. It was the shitty, uninformed, “I don’t care for the science or data”, reactionary right wing views that contributed to me leaving Reddit and here we are again.
I suppose continuing to dehumanise trans folk with the most important issue being a tiny number of trans people competing in a subset of activities, that are inherently unfair, is so much more important than avoiding demicide.
Got to placate the far right! They are really well known for being reasonable, not demanding more and having positions based wholly on logic without an ounce of hatred slipping through.
Walking back support in one area is walking back support.
It ain’t that complex. As soon as concessions are made, the far right demands more because there must always be an enemy to crush completely for the in-group. Who will then pick a new enemy when it comes politically convenient.
So in your opinion it’s an all or nothing thing? Like, you can’t question one area without going full bigot?
In many ways it is. The actual science on trans athletics supports policies like those sports agencies have typically used - allowing people to compete if they’ve been on certain hormonal treatments for a specific period of time. Cis athletes also have advantages and disadvantages, relative to each other, based on testosterone level. Trans women on HRT are well within that range of performance. In many sports, trans women are actually at a disadvantage to cis women, due to the fact that trans women tend to have lower testosterone levels than cis women.
In other words, the science is completely against sports bans. There is no logical reason to do them. The truly scientific solution is to consider sports on an individual basis, and let the sport figure out what advantage/disadvantage trans folks might have. Then, if that advantage/disadvantage is well within normal player ranges, then competing is fine. If not, if it’s an individual sport, maybe a handicap system. If it’s a group sport, well maybe rules about how many trans people can be on any one team. Etc. You start at a position of aiming for fairness. Then you only prevent people from competing if a clear advantage can be justified. In other words, the complete opposite of blanket sports bans.
With sports bans, you’re not meeting someone halfway on an issue of great scientific debate. You are simply caving to irrational bigotry. People think trans people are gross, so they want to hurt them. That’s really the root of this. And you can’t compromise with someone that isn’t actually trying to craft good public policy. Two people can compromise on tax rates or the generosity of government benefits. But how do you compromise with someone that just wants to hurt other people? Their desire to hurt others isn’t going to end. They’ll just want more. Compromising with bigots only emboldens them.
Also for god fucking sake it’s fucking evil to harass individual athletes who are abiding by those rules and participating in a sport they love. The fact that I scroll past virulent hatefests against Lia Thomas on Facebook, or that Imane Khalif’s personal medical history is apparently everyone’s personal business is gross and evil.
No.
If you fall back in front of the far right they will take that ground and demand more, as they always have done, and as they always will do. It’s how they win, it’s how they are winning, on trans rights, on immigration, on racial supremacy. Do not give them an inch. It’s not “all or nothing” it’s “give the bigots nothing”.
Removed by mod
I honestly cannot fathom how you can be looking at the situation of the US currently and not realising how wedge issues based on lies and bigotry work and the absolutely deletrious effect it is having on minorities.
I suppose you’ll still be equivocating and making excuses when it’s gone past travel bans (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/marco-rubio-state-transgender-visa-b2704734.html), erasure of LGBT literature (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/banned-books-lgbtq-transgender-black-people-of-color-pen-america-rcna193879), banning of social and medical transition (https://www.hrc.org/resources/attacks-on-gender-affirming-care-by-state-map, https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/texas-not-for-freedom-house-bill-could-ban-gender-affirming-care-for-transgender-adults/ar-AA1AjTF5), the creation of specific crimes for the existence of transgender people (https://msmagazine.com/2025/03/03/montana-hb-446-criminalizes-trans-existence-social-contagion/), the removal of protections in law (https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/01/23/trump-administration-moves-reject-transgender-identity-rights) and we’re in camps waiting to be “purified”.
Why are you falling for wedge issues that are designed to wipe out a group of people in a way that absolutely parallels actions taken by Nazis? Is a discussion about 10 athletes out of hundreds of thousands that important?
The thing is you don’t align with the far right. At least I hope you don’t anyway. The far right either hate trans people, or they do not give a shit about them either way. They are using trans people as a political football to sow exactly this type of division. Yes, trans people in sport is an unresolved problem. No, I do not want the right wing to be the ones to resolve it. If you align superficially, you still don’t want to cede to them. Bear in mind “align” only goes as far as saying “we can agree about this one sentence”, not this whole issue.
Godwin’s law is fucked these days so let’s just use the third Reich as an analogy. You may agree that Germany has a legitimate territorial claim on Alsace-Lorraine. Does that mean you should let the Nazis take it? No, you fight them and then resolve it when someone more reasonable is asking. The reasons why should be obvious, and so should the analogy. It’s not about whether the extremely superficial claim is “correct”, it’s about why they are saying it and what they plan to do if they get enough people to agree with them.
In this case, where the war is one of ideas, you’re not a bigot if you agree in a very superficial way, but it’s completely redundant to be talking about trans women in sport when all trans people are being stripped of their rights and it looks like things are getting worse. A year ago we were hoping (again) for the first female president; long overdue. That’s not an issue anymore, as women are now being erased from history.
Thank you for making this post.
You’ve outlined exactly why allowing the far right to resolve perceived social issues isn’t the way forward, especially when it comes to any sort of “minority” (which seems to be anything that isn’t non-immigrant white Christian cis straight men) issues.
Thanks for saying so, I’m glad that the message came across.
I am not sure what you don’t understand about the statement that walking back support is, in fact, walking back support.
Removed by mod
What conversation do you want exactly?
If you want to pretend there is nuance you will be fully aware that the evidence that supposedly supports banning trans athletes, which is an initial step of control used to further limit transgender people by e.g. preventing them for entering the country, are meta studies based on comparisons of cisgender men and cisgender women, right?
There isn’t a nuanced debate to be had and I’m sick of pretending that people like myself who just want to live our lives are a subject for debate.
So yes, worrying about tens out of hundreds of thousands of athletes when there isn’t clear evidence of an advantage is bigoted and not calling that out leads to situations where conservatives and the far right try to introduce bills like that which was recently struck down (thankfully) in Montana.
Now, question for you - why is it so important to you that a minority of people should have their basic humanity and ability to participate in society be questioned in the way that transgender people are? Why do you support that? Why do you consider that to be an okay thing to do, when the consequences of allowing it are so plain to see?
Removed by mod
It’s honestly disappointing to see these sorts of expressions stated here on Lemmy. It was the shitty, uninformed, “I don’t care for the science or data”, reactionary right wing views that contributed to me leaving Reddit and here we are again.
I suppose continuing to dehumanise trans folk with the most important issue being a tiny number of trans people competing in a subset of activities, that are inherently unfair, is so much more important than avoiding demicide.
Got to placate the far right! They are really well known for being reasonable, not demanding more and having positions based wholly on logic without an ounce of hatred slipping through.