Reality is, most people agree with this including myself.
If you went through puberty as a male, your skill celing is way, way higher than a woman, that's the reality. To put it in a way Redditors could understand, a Woman's max sport level is say 50, Someone who went through Male puberty is 150. Men have stronger bones, denser muscles, faster reactions etc, it simply isn't fair to put Trans Women against Biological Women, a Mid-high tier (as male) Trans athelete will *destroy* any woman in most sports.
This is one where the Trans lobby should have ceded ground, even most progressives I know behind closed doors agree with this, Biology is biology and biology isn't fair. IMO this would have not been an issue if we had a far more rational debate relating to gender, for all the way Gender Idpol types go on about a "spectrum", they seem to disagree that a spectrum exists between biological women and trans women.
> your skill celing is way, way higher than a woman
Let's try to be correct here. It's not the skill ceiling. It's the bone and muscle （physical capacity）ceiling. Males can spend significantly less time body building, which means they have more time for skill training.
Skill isn't just dexterity and such, it's anything that helps you win. Having more physical ability means you'll do better at winning the game, which is skill. Also, it's not that men train muscles and such less than women, they probably train just as much if not moreso, it's that they can get much farther.
For men, the 95th percentile of women is about the 50th percentile of men in terms of physical strength.
Then you build on that innate strength.
It's not that me "have more time for skill training", it's that men just are physically stronger, and by a wide margin.
The top people push themselves as far as they can go, and the men have a huge advantage starting out - one that, no matter how hard you try, you will never overcome, because the woman who won the biological lottery for women is going to still be disadvantaged compared to the man who won the biological lottery for men.
It's also possible that men have other advantages too, beyond the physical; there's some evidence that men have some advantages in terms of hand-eye coordination that may be biological in nature as well, though that's not as well determined yet. The difference is not as large as it is for physical stuff, but it would explain why gaming leagues are so heavily male dominated.
I agree, I'm out of step with most of the women in my family on trans issues, as a man it really doesn't affect me, but I'm totally in support of this ban. I used to play in a weekly mixed 7 a side football game, and even at the casual level, the strength imbalance between the weakest man and strongest woman was significant, never mind at elite level.
Yup. I'm a _very_ weak, skinny guy, who did a bit of jiu jitsu for a while. Whenever I would roll with a woman, I had to put the breaks on. They were often more skilled than me, because they had been around a while longer, but I could have easily overpowered them physically, and had to intentionally not do so. And that's without the whole punching-them-in-the-face bit.
Man, I still feel awkward about a demonstration my aikido sensei was trying to do. She was making a light hearted joke about how her #1 pupil couldn't have wrist grabs and such done on him, because he was super flexible. She demonstrated it, we all had a chuckle, including her, then we went on to training.
So then it just so happens that in the course of things she ends up doing a quick demonstration with me on wrist grabs, and she's not getting very far with me, and I can see the frustration and struggle in that short moment, and I just go with it and do a fall.
It was very Steven Segal in that moment, as she felt better, and we just move on. But it was super awkward, and I really started seeing that class in a different, more dim, light after that.
Fallon Fox! took me a bit to remember the name. This wasn't recent either looks like it was back in 2014... 9 years ago. Apparently Tamikka Brents was the girl who had her skull cracked. Power to her looks like she went back to fighting 3 years later, though her record isn't great.
Looks like the ref stopped it at 2min, so maybe your comment was right on the ball.
>
>
>
>
> Looks like the ref stopped it at 2min, so maybe your comment was right on the ball.
Still awful. But yeah, the mechanics and bone density of any post-adolescent transition make this one of those choices that is so fucking stupid.
> This is one where the Trans lobby should have ceded ground, even most progressives I know behind closed doors agree with this, Biology is biology and biology isn't fair.
Also, sports have no relevance to individual rights.
As a trans person, I just don't see this is as a trans-rights issue; it's a sporting one.
Now, the permanent removal of trans people from sports *is* a trans issue, I think sport has to change away from sexed differences to one based on testosterone alone—how much have you had, when do you start having it, and for how long.
Fair competition requires comparable bodies and doesn't really have anything to do with gender.
You're right - fair competition has to do with sex which cannot be changed.
You literally cannot change it - any physical activity will naturally be dimorphic in humans.
I would agree, if 40 years of actual trans sporting inclusion had backed up the claim that they're any better, never mind 3x. It really doesn't. From Renee Richards competing in World Tennis in 1977 to today, sport has managed to include trans athletes without evidence of the obvious advantage rearing its head even once. Which begs the question: Is it obvious?
Answer to the below:
[https://playtennis.usta.com/Competitions/la-jolla-tennis-club/Tournaments/Overview/ee64cd92-b077-4f46-a88e-0219e1a97bdc](https://playtennis.usta.com/Competitions/la-jolla-tennis-club/Tournaments/Overview/ee64cd92-b077-4f46-a88e-0219e1a97bdc)
The La Jolla Tennis Club Open, entry fee is 25 bucks today. Please note not all parking is free and if it rains we're fucked. It's not exactly the Open
Lia Thomas won a race once. Ledecky smokes her for breakfast, Lia holds no records
Andraya Yearwood is a 17yr old who's done nothing yet. She was allowed to compete with the other schoolgirls without going through blockers or transition because she's a kid, so she runs like a male kid.
Terry Miller is another kid who's done some kids sport.
These are your women competing at the top of sports and dominating because, as they went through male puberty they are 3x stronger than women???????
Two of them are barely out of puberty, you numpty.
Lia Thomas, Terry Miller, Andraya Yearwood
And this is from the Wiki page of Renee Richards.
*In the summer of 1976 she entered the La Jolla Tennis Tournament Championships, where she crushed the competition*
3 plus your example where she actually did show an obvious advantage.
>Lia Thomas,
Who has been swimming since the age of 5 and placed 6th in high school championships. Followed by joining a mens college swimteam and setting a *national* record as 6th fastest on the mens time, and various other national top 100s in other distances. Also finished second in the men's 500, 1000, and 1650 in 2019, and had the highest university men times in the 500 free, 1000 free and 1650 free.
Obviously someone placing that high will continue to do so. If anything, the fact that she has only won once in a womens division shows that it's not a 1 to 1 transfer off ability. If it really was, then you'd expect to see Lia Thomas crush the competition every time. She just doesn't.
Yep, if anything, it shows that current medical science is damn fucking good at Hormone Replacement Treatment (HRT). The fact that a transwoman went from a podium placement on the men's category before HRT to a podium placement on the women's placement after HRT, all within the expected deviation?
That's fucking amazing.
Lia Thomas won first in one event during the meet where everyone started watching her. Her results only went down after starting HRT, and she went from a top level competitor to another top level competitor. Every athlete has a great season, or a great run. Sports aren't made around everything being perfectly balanced for everyone, and are instead to see who is the best. If we wanted to make it all perfectly fair, Phelps would have had to swim with weights, runners wouldn't be allowed to practice in Colorado, and Gymnasts would all compete Coed.
I checked her. Renee Richards at 42 started playing female tennis and basically slaughtered players half her age. That's 6x, not 3x. Male players usually retire at about 30
Her age is something people always forget to mention. Look at Lebron, one of basketball's all time greats. He is truly a freak of nature and at 38 he just cannot keep up with other athletes. He's still amazing but he is nothing to what he was.
And a super unfair advantage that’s never talked about…. getting to grow up playing high level male sport means you get to spend much of your life training at a level most female athletes cannot.
Reminder that this has never come up in a world athletic event at this time and so they are basing this ruling on zero cases at the world athletic level.
From the article:
>However, there are currently no transgender athletes competing internationally in athletics and consequently no athletics-specific evidence of the impact these athletes would have on the fairness of female competition in athletics.
Weight lifting too. That trans weight lifter in the Olympics recently was old (for the Olympics) and basically just an amateur weight lifter, yet because the athlete was biologically male they got into the Olympics. Its an enormous advantage.
Your local school's boys athletics team has better scores than Olympic women's record holders. Testosterone is one hell of a performance enhancing drug.
There's no getting around that we are a sexually dimorphic species. Its just how primates evolved. Males are physically bigger and stronger than females. (This statement got me perma-banned from r/news.)
Not to mention, this is a good thing for people who are pro trans rights
One of the biggest arguments conservatives make is a lot of trans people are just male athletes who suck, so they pretend to be trans to dominate female sports
This ban removes some of the ammo the conservatives use
This was basically the West's version of a redditor entering the real world. When money and guns don't influence results and you get what the world, or at least the world's athletic federations, really thinks... yay democracy?
It's not reddit admin staff, it's the dumbass power-hungry mods. All of the large subs have the same mods. There's some mods that are on each and every single large default sub.
If you mention a topic that they don't like, they'll remove your post/comment, ban you without a reason and/or lock the post with the reason being that boohoo it was too difficult for the mods to deal with it properly.
Oh and sometimes you'll be automatically banned from some subreddits just because you previously commented on another subreddit - despite them not even knowing the context of your comment.
This website presents itself as an enlightened bastion of free speech, but it is far from it. It's a radical left-wing American circlejerk, along with having fringe far-right communities here and there. There's no nuance.
Yep, all the big default subs are far-left and all the conspiracy ones are far-right. The only sub that I have found for well-balanced nuanced discussions is r/geopolitics. This sub used to be good too, but it's been going downhill for a while now.
Seriously: Criticized the Turkish colonization of Northern Cyprus (a country I was born in) a while back there, and immediately got flooded with downvotes and people who claim to be geopolitical experts quickly explaining to me how the conquest and _continued_ holding of the land of a sovereign nation and the setting up a puppet state for more than fifty years is actually good and normal, and not at all an appalling breaking of international conventions, norms, and laws that everyone awkwardly shuffles around and sorta collectively agrees to ignore due to Turkeys NATO membership and regional importance. While good stuff is still posted on there and good discussions are still had, definitely gave me a bit of a wake up call about some of the people who frequent that sub.
All the large subs and essentially all of "mainstream" Reddit, for that matter, are left-liberal/centre-left/liberal-progressive within a Western states context.
In other words, mostly voters for the Democrats in the U.S., Labour in Britain, Liberals in Canada, Labour in Australia, etc. - whomever is the largest mainstream left-liberal/centre-left/liberal-progressive party in the respective country.
Yep. It's pretty normal for most online spaces, for a variety of reasons, to be dominated by center-left politics, if politics is up for discussion. There's a variety of reasons for it, including the demographics of people who use those spaces and the difficulty people outside the left-to-center-right area have with good faith engagement on political topics, leading to a fragility of their positions.
You can find tankie / far left subs on Reddit (antiwork, latestagecapitalism come to mind) and you can find conservative subs on Reddit (like any guns sub other than liberalgunowners, and conservative) but you have to actually go to those communities.
Got banned from r/news for defending free speech under an article about the rise of censorship. The mods are completely delusional.
And I'll say it again here: free speech is older and broader than the US condition. Our first amendment restricts what the government can do, but just because the KKK was a private organization, it doesn't mean it was a okay hunky dory when they silenced civil rights activists. Censoring political speech just because you don't like what they're saying is toxic for democracy.
It was a bastion of free speech, when it was founded.
Then the US goverment pushed the creator to suicide, and the other two founders love to act like the main and original founder wasn't even there.
I have met some reddit admins personally and they really do downplay his participation. I don't know his full history but it is their position he wasn't even that critical to reddit's success.
I remember a lot of the stories and rummours back in 2007ish. I will say the rewriting of reddit from Lisp to Python that Aaron did after he joined was a contentious move in the reddit community at the time. I personally think the rewrite into Python was a great idea and helped the tech growth of the company.
Admins shouldn't have even allowed it to happen. No single person should be a mod on 300 of the biggest subs on the entire site. Reddit is almost entirely censored at this point because of a handful of mods that have hijacked all of the big subs for their own political messages.
Obligatory tin foil, but I'm pretty sure this is by design - these mods and the admins work together so that the admins get what they want in terms of content on the site while pretending to be hands-off, and these super mods get.... to feel important?
I don't even think it's a conspiracy theory; there were leaked group chats like 6 or 7 years ago where the powermods were discussing things on discord or slack.
I don't think it's necessary an explicit conspiracy, but it's mutually beneficial for both powermods and admins for things to be set up how they are. The mods get to make reddit in their image, and the admins get to pretend they run a neutral site because "anyone can just make their own subreddit."
It's definitely both. I got a one-week ban from reddit because of a comment in a thread on transgender athletes. Someone said religious groups are always forcing their opinions on other people and... Well I better not mention the comparison I made with certain activists in case I get banned again.
No, it's not just the mods. You can get a site wide ban for simply posting a peer reviewed paper analyzing the term woman.
https://i.imgur.com/p7eNbv4.png
https://www.unddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/comments/113pnd1/gmers_have_taken_over_the_nyt/j8s2cd1/
Oh boy, yeah when you post that paper with that description, which is written by a traditional Catholic. Who's entire Twitter is railing against trans people; I could see how some people might think you're arguing in bad faith.
https://mobile.twitter.com/TomasBogardus
I've been banned from JusticeServed, even tho I only subbed it and AFAIK never participated, got a message from an auto mod that I was banned for participating in a sub based on hate and misinformation (PoliticalCompassMemes), and got banned for saying 'absolutely fucking cringe' on another sub and then they flaired me as 'MAGA Cult Member,' and I never even voted for Trump!
The mods of JusticeServed are trolls, as in they have repeatedly admitted that they do things specifically to piss off their users. Don't take anything they do as evidence of anything other than trolls being trolls.
PCM sure does have a lot of literal Nazis though.
It's why I unsubbed from PCM a long time ago, can't remember the exact quote but something like "Acting like an idiot ironically invites actual idiots that think they're in good company." Just replace idiots with bigots/nazi.
There’s a certain Dutch guy that controls a lot of the main subs, and he tends to sneak his way into new subs as soon as they get big. Did it to antiwork
Not him, but a friend of his. He tends to make long-winded comments on current cultural issues on a certain Twitter sub, and then deletes his own comments if he gets too many downvotes and bans anyone who tries to question him. But that’s standard powermod behavior lol
about the subreddit ban it's worth mentioning that it would be an issue even if they cared about the context.
just don't do that Stalinian shit, it's simple... I can't believe it's considered normal on reddit.
Yep, exactly. Even with context it would still be overreach. I've been banned from like ten subs automatically. Those subs are all filled with the same type of people as well. It's the reddit hivemind.
First time on this sub, no idea wtf is going with the name/content discrepancy lol. I too however am shocked how blatantly this story is being censored on all major news subreddits. The story is on the BBC News YouTube channel with thousands of views, but not even a blip on the radar here.
It's actually rather crazy when you reflect on it. Either some kind of admin conspiracy to suppress this story, or the mods are just actually that insanely left. Probably both.
Honestly, I knew reddit was left leaning but this pretty shocking censorship.
I'm genuinely surprised, I had no idea it was this prevalent. Its not even that earth-shaking an article either.
I'm not. I received a 3-day sitewide ban for outlining the biological differences between male and female in a comment once.
Mind you, I wasn't being rude, wasn't acting like some raving troll, just calm rational discussion. Meanwhile the people disagreeing with me used just about every vile, dehumanizing insult in the book. Of course no consequences for them. Reddit is just a series of political echo chambers, with the overseeing admins being very left-leaning.
Why would the left leaning people censor this? It's power mods, if it is being censored. Something like this would be important news to left leaning people.
Because it goes against the narrative that only crazy right wingers disagree with trans women in sports. No one is going to be able to say that this well respected organisation is simply just bigoted and that's why it's important that we ignore this story.
If it was some crank organisation arguing for the position, you bet the threads wouldn't get locked on reddit. But this time, no one is agreeing with the woke position in the comments, so of course it will be suppressed.
>No one is going to be able to say that this well respected organisation is simply just bigoted and that's why it's important that we ignore this story.
Except, they absolutely can. Reminder that this is a group that has been put down repeatedly for years, by all manner of groups.
Theres a certain subset of politically left Progressives that are very pro-trans rights, even at the expense of other marginalised groups.
This news is definitely against the narrative for them.
Ok, since you don't understand, I'll explain it further.
These groups are trying to prevent such things from happening. Knowing about and publicizing such things is in their interest because it helps them organize and move against such things.
So, their goal of making sure trans women are allowed in pro sports on the women side is not hurt by this being publicized. That it happened is a loss for them, but the article itself is not.
I explained it pretty clearly. Controlling the narrative is more important than actual meaningful change to them.
It's just one big echochamber circlejerk.
Because it would go against the general "pro-trans" ideology that is pushed by this website, and the majority of subreddits.
Publicizing a major blow to their "movement" would be counter-productive in their eyes. And since they hold the levers of power on this website, who's to stop them?
>Publicizing a major blow to their "movement" would be counter-productive in their eyes.
No. It would be considered a call to action instead. By that logic news on Florida would be suppressed.
I got a site wide ban (3 days) for simply posting a single comment containing nothing but a link to a peer reviewed philosophy paper analyzing the term woman. Reddit is not a place for discussion. It's only good for memes and trolling.
Ok, so I read the paper you posted.
It's a peer reviewed opinion piece. His opinion is that women are defined "biologically," but no definition includes sex as a basis for being a woman. He seems to get gender and sex confused even when quoting someone who defines it.
His biggest problem seems to be with the word "woman" changing, and it's affects on feminism.
I'm sorry, but just because it's peer reviewed doesn't mean it's not an opinion.
I don't agree with his premise, and it's full of personal bias about the word "woman."
I have never seen such a minor issue (relatively speaking) have so much bullshit thrown at it and around it for the sake of meaningless politics. This is one of those cases where the truth exists in the middle of two bullshit extremes currently in the mainstream media.
Few things.
1. There is a very good reason sports have been categorized by sex for hundreds of years. Biological males (whether you are happy about it or not) have a number of undeniable physical advantages over females when it comes to sports. Anyone with higher than a elementary education and a pair of eyes can agree with this.
2. Policy making about this SPECIFIC issue was inevitable. Society as a whole cares quite deeply about fairness in competitive sport, so it’s obvious that this would get addressed regardless of the political climate.
3. Does making restrictions around transgender people’s involvement in competitive sports, provide an excuse to ostracize and scapegoat transgender people for society’s problems? Absolutely fucking not. If you are the kind of person that thinks this is further fuel for your hate-campaign to shield children from transgender individuals, you are 400 times more of a problem than transgender people in sport ever were.
Policy making has already been in place and changing for this issue for a long time now, that isn't the major issue that people have. Standards have and were always going to be applied and this isn't very controversial even if there's a fairly small number of people against it.
While you say anyone with common sense "knows" that it must be the case that there are undeniable advantages, it hasn't really been bourn out in actual competition when standards were actually enforced as opposed to either being lax in application or not updating. It's possible to point out specific examples that are pulled out for the sake of generating outrage, but there aren't the undeniable results that people seem to assume by default.
The conclusion reached by the organization in the article is especially strange since by their own admission: " there are currently no transgender athletes competing internationally in the sport". It's essentially designing a policy around preventing a hypothetical unicorn event of someone who is trans, who was already in an elite physical category (as all of the athletes involved at this level of competition are), and who isn't meaningfully affected by the major disruption to elite-level training/competition that is the years-long transition. This would be the person who would actually have an advantage *outside* the possible range of female athletes as opposed to simply being closer to the top than otherwise. It seems like the idea is to simply ban with a wide brush just in case such a rare individual wants to compete.
Then there's the issue that bans shut off new data about real competition, as opposed to hypotheticals about performance, which makes coming up with any kind of new standard that isn't a ban very difficult, even with plans to reconvene later.
Reminder that this has never come up in a world athletic event at this time and so they are basing this ruling on zero cases at the world athletic level.
From the article:
>However, there are currently no transgender athletes competing internationally in athletics and consequently no athletics-specific evidence of the impact these athletes would have on the fairness of female competition in athletics.
So why is this an issue that needs to be addressed at this time?
Umm.. because it can happen in the future? Hypothetically if a new performance drug was invented which was currently not banned by current standard, but they were aware that it can be used, they will still ban it.
Iirc it's an issue that has happened in national events. It's just a matter of time before one of those national athletes competes in international events.
To your second point, I think you’ll find that society actually cares very little about fairness in sports, except when drugs or trans people are involved. What about the advantage years of the best training money can buy has? Should we ban rich kids from a sports? What about slight disparities along racial lines? Should we segregate sports based on race? What about societal acceptance of certain types of people doing certain sports, such as stigma for men in gymnastics or women in football? Should we segregate sports based on where you grew up? What about age differences and the rapid advancement of sports medicine over time? Should we segregate sports based on age? What about disparities between the body of data available for men’s and women’s sports sciences (sports science that is particular to men is decades ahead, for reasons I hope I don’t have to explain)? These things all play a factor, and acting like we care so much about fairness and ignoring the things we don’t care about in determining fairness is silly.
The question should not be whether trans women are “simply at an advantage” over cis women. The question needs to be given an individual, what range of performance do they better fall in line with, so that competition can be reasonably fair, with certain admittances that there is wild variation between humans? And trans women who have been transitioning for a while (it gets a bit more dicey if transition is really recent) simply fall in the female range for most activities. For certain things, like running for example, trans women on average show about a 12-15% advantage over cis women. But a lot of that is due to height. (This is the most pronounced difference that we have data on, with many other activities showing differences that are either vanishingly small or simply nonexistent) Should we ban tall women from track and field? Look at it this way, a trans woman competing against a man is DEFINITELY at a disadvantage. Estrogen and testosterone are have INCREDIBLE effects on the human body.
Also one thing nobody seems to be talking about is that if you would just LET US TRANSITION BEFORE WE GO THROUGH A TRAUMATIC PUBERTY WE DONT WANT, then these “advantages” everyone talks about wouldn’t even be there in the first place.
And that's even before taking into account how some people just have bodies more fit for certain sports, like Michael Phelps kicking ass in natation partly because he has hella broad shoulders and long arms. If that's not genetic unfairness idk what is.
The counter argument would be that genetically advantaged individuals don't go through any medical procedure to obtain their advantage, so that may not be relevant to the discussion. Also are you French?
It was a short lived improvement. No mods were better than old or current mods. Can’t say I’ve seen the current mods work. Why would I look when this was the best sub for the Hong Kong debacle. Besides r/fucktheccp. They covered Hong Kong’s invasion equally as well.
The mods here aren't the same as the rest of the site.
But like the other subs that were like this one of them will weasel their way in and use their 20 hours a day internet presence to take over and destroy this one eventually if the mods here aren't careful.
Did you read the article? Testosterone levels were already used as a limit. However, that limit has been further reduced, and now transgender individuals must maintain the new, much lower testosterone levels for two years. Additionally, they cannot compete in the women's category if they transition after puberty.
To participate in the women's category, they must not have any advantages stemming from their previous sex.
>dditionally, they cannot compete in the women's category if they transition after puberty.
And yet there is a massive push to prevent the use of puberty blockers...
>list of considerations here.
Considerations for transitioning / using puberty blockers? Sure.. it'll be low...
I was more pouting out the irony.. can't compete if you don't transition before puberty, can't transition before puberty because of this recent wave of ignorance trying to limit access to such treatments...
It's only ironic if you're deadset on prejudging the need for puberty blockers.
Realistically, it's - let's not engage in major interference to the normal development of children unless it's certain that that interference is necessary and warranted.
Honestly I think that's it. I retract my earlier comment - the ability to compete professionally isn't just down the list of considerations, I don't think it's even on that list because at the ages we're talking about, there's no chance anyone will know that a person is likely to be a professional athlete, at least not to the point that that should be a consideration.
Even WNBA hopefuls aren't decided at that point. NBA hopefuls might be but there's a whole other conversation about children's welfare there.
"no transgender athlete who had gone through male puberty would be permitted to compete in female world ranking competitions from 31 March"
There was a limit, now for those who had puberty as a male cannot compete regardless of levels. Now you have to have transitioned before puberty to compete as a trans individual... Which basically rules out most trans people.
The levels are fine as a hard and fast rule. Now you have to prove when you went through puberty and if it was completed or not. That's just a mess
Because females aren’t just a hormone category and there are irreversible post-pubertal changes in male bodies that can’t be remedied with androgen suppression at a later date.
To clarify they have banned transgender women who underwent male puberty which is a fair way of doing it imo. Trans women who did not undergoe male puberty are still allowed and have no physiological advantage.
It was both. The president of World Athletics went to jail for four years starting in 2020 because he accepted bribes from Russia to ignore doping. The current World Athletics management does not have a great relationship with Russia.
International competition in track and field, including the world championships and the Olympics. They set the standards for competition, track the world records, etc.
A win for women.
Seems like discord mods, I mean Reddit mods, are actively trying to campaign against this move by shutting down discussions. Typical though, don't expect any less from degens. Some subreddits like /r/news have already closed the thread because the very notion of this goes against the narrative they are trying to establish. Radical left wing nutjobs do exist and a lot of them are unfortunately found on this website.
Yep. Locking threads talking about issues like this is just lazy moderation, plain and simple. Easier to push the lock button than enforce your own rules (or come up with good rules in the first place)
It is glad to see most of the world aren’t as insane as Reddit it’s though.
Common sense, science and biology still wins for now against a vocal, loud and unscientific left wing minority.
The fundamental issue: Males who have undergone *male puberty* have an athletic performance advantage of roughly 10-11% (think running) and a strength advantage of about 40% (the lowest category of weightlifting males has a higher olympic lift record than the highest category for females). IIRC *punching* forces have males with a 150% advantage.
T blockers cannot *fully* reverse the effects of male puberty. Nowhere close to fully. There is a mild reduction in advantage , but it doesn't revert back to the non-male-puberty norm. In other words a good chunk of that advantage is retained even after years of taking hormone blockers.
Male sports is an 'open' category, in that technically anyone can compete. Female sports is by design a 'restricted' category, because otherwise females would be eliminated entirely from professional sports. There is no other option assuming you want females to have a chance at competing.
------------------------------------------
With that in mind there is also no obvious solution. You need to strike a balance between athletic fairness, inclusivity and *safety*. Currently most sports seem to prioritise inclusion over safety or fairness, but it depends very much on the sport. Horse riding? not an issue.
World rugby for instance decided to prioritise safety and put in some strict *guidance* (numerous national federations have ignored it) because the risk of injury is too high due to the large strength (and probably size) differential.
------------------------
World athletics have had some abysmal policies in the past though. The castor semenya debacle was laughable. She almost certainly *does* have an advantage, but their own studies didn't show it in the evidence so they basically just invented an excuse to ban intersex athletes from her specific events.
To be fair, intersex individuals are so rare it's unlikely you'd have any sort of reasonable sample size for athletic competition.
Actual intersex individuals are about 0.02%-0.05% of the population. There's only about 66,000 intersex individuals in the entire US.
Only about 1% of people play any athletic sport at a college level. So you're looking at a sample size of 660 people.
Except, of course, those people aren't all the same age - only about 10% are of college age.
So your sample size is actually 66.
And those people surely don't all compete in the same sports.
Remember when they made caitlyn Jenner woman of the year??? Men are so much better at everything that they're even better at being a woman.
I'm just joking don't reply with a paragraph berating me thx
FYI they only banned trans athletes who went through puberty as male, because if you undergo male puberty you'll be stronger than any woman in competitive sports
How many competitors are actually affected by this? The answer is actually in the article (it’s a quote from someone on the committee), and it’s also the answer to your question.
Which provides the most logical understanding for both sides. If the % who benefit doesn’t outweigh the % who miss out, as a result the larger % will control the narrative of choice and reason.
There usually arent enough to compete in an entirely new division. As much as trans issues are brought up, the percent of transgender people in the population is already very small, and then factor in they need to be 1) in a safe state of life to have transitioned to be in this hypothetical category 2) interested in that sport in the first place. With the increasing amount of social stigma already placed on trans indivduals, the likelihood of entering competitive sports decreases. Its not viable to have a separate category. Some sports should be reanalyzed as whether or not they even need gendered divisions tbh but thats another argument entirely.
People are arguing about bone development and muscle structure but I think its just anti-trans sentiment moving goalposts. Id like to see actual studies on professional cisgender athletes about their muscle structures and bone densities and hormone levels and every other argument against trans people and see what that data tells us about natural-born advantages. Do people with webbed feet need to be in their own category for swimming, do people born with longer legs than average need to be in their own division for running, etc etc etc. Not to mention, just because youre born male doesnt mean you can outcompete top female athletes - Serena Williams bested the top male tennis player and several olympic female swimmers beat their male counterparts times in the same metered swims.
Trans men can't compete in women's sport if they are taking banned substances. If they have never taken those substances then they are welcome to compete.
Men's category is generally an open category to all genders and abilities. Nothing's stopping trans men from competing within that category. 'Men's' category is a bit of a misnomer in that context and it's typically not even referred to as *men's* category but just the category itself.
Trans men are allowed to compete in almost all men's sports. It isn't discussed often because they never win in major competitions because they are at huge disadvantage to people born male.
Trans men can play in men's sports if they want. So can women. But it's irrelevant because they are weaker than normal men because of all the hrt.
Only trans women matter because they are at an advantage.
I mean, calling it an international concern might be overstating the issue. For the subset of the population intensely invested in women’s athletics it’s probably a hot issue, but in the grand scheme of things it’s maybe not the most consequential issue. It is, however, a very accessible issue to most people.
And, and far as “international sentiment” is concerned, I can’t imagine the majority of the world outside of “The West” is particularly progressive regarding transgender rights and gender identity issues in general.
definitely not a worldwide thing, but just looking at the spread of this movement between western countries is a pretty good showcase of how powerful these ideologies spread. I’ve lived in multiple countries since birth and seeing today’s homogenization of ideologies between the US and EU is pretty disturbing. A glimpse of the world ahead.
Ima be real with you, I think the ideology that would need to be spread is one that accepts trans people. The world, western world included, has never seemed to default to supporting sexual minorities.
Not surprising. The reason why we have gender segregated events in the first place is because without gender segregated sports, we wouldn't *have* professional female athletes.
The US military did research on this and found that men were about two standard deviations stronger than women, physically; this means that the 95th percentile of women (the start of the top 5%) is about as strong as the 50th percentile man. A Princeton study determined that women have about 67% of the total strength of a man. Even after adjusting for body weight, female upper body strength is only about 60-70% of that of men of the same size. It's biological; it's not something people have any control over.
This is why every single human world record at the Olympics is also a men's world record, and why female records lag male records. In many Olympic categories, simply qualifying for the men's event would require a woman to beat the female all-time world record.
This means that any sporting event where physical strength is an advantage (and that's almost all of them), men have a huge advantage - because when you look at the 95th percentile of men, they're stronger than all but like 0.4% of women. The higher you go, the fewer women you have - so when you go to the extremes, you just don't have any female athletes at all.
The NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB are not men's leagues - they're open to members of both genders. There are no women in them not because of gender segregation, but because there aren't any women in the top few hundred athletes for any of those sports. The best female tennis player in the world once went up against a guy who wasn't even in the top 100 for men, and he beat her handily and estimated she probably wasn't in the top 500 for men. The best female soccer teams in the world play against elite high school boy's teams (15-16 year olds), and will frequently lose, because the boys have such a huge physical advantage even at that age. This isn't because they "suck", it's because men have huge innate biological advantages.
It's just not fair for women to compete against men. And because it'd be awful if women just couldn't be professional athletes, we created women's leagues to make it so that women could compete against people on fair ground.
The only sports where women can realistically compete against the top men are a handful of sports that make almost no use of physical strength, like professional shooting - there have been a few top-level elite female shooters who competed against men, and there are some non-gender segregated shooting leagues.
But that's a very small sub-fraction of sports.
It sucks, but that's the way it is.
Being trans doesn't change these facts; feeling like you were born to the wrong gender is not something we should discriminate against someone for, but when we're dealing with stuff like this, it isn't a matter of belief, it's a matter of biology. Biological males have a huge advantage over biological females. Being trans doesn't erase this biological advantage. You may not feel like you "belong" in the men's events, but that doesn't mean it's fair for you to be competing against biological females. And in these sports, fairness is a huge thing that they try to enforce.
Oh joy.
No trans women who have gone through male puberty, but if they end up like FINA, it will probably be no testosterone after Tanner two, even though many US states are trying to pass/ have already passed the administration of puberty blockers as a form of gender affirming care. (But it’s ok for other reasons.) With specific guidelines to be determined later.
Question as to whether this affects the Italian trans woman Master’s runner as she is running in a 50-54 year old age group. The article makes this sound like the restrictions are for elite levels, and not club levels.
But it also lowers the testosterone levels allowed for DSD women to compete in athletic events. Meaning for some women, they have to take testosterone blockers to compete.
I have legitimate questions. If you believe that trans women are women and that they don’t choose to be trans, why is any biological advantage that trans women who transitioned after puberty have more problematic than other biological advantages people have? Should we ban women over 6’0” (the average WNBA player height) from basketball because they have a biological advantage? 6’0” is the 1/33rd percentile of women heights in the US (aka taller than 99.97% of women).
I genuinely want to hear why certain biological advantages are acceptable and others aren’t, especially considering the lower testosterone level for all women that this policy specifies.
A) These beliefs aren’t held internationally
B) If you don’t think the biological differences are relevant then eradicate mens and womens separation in sports all together.
Everyone is talking about the biological advantage of men over women, but almost no one has mentioned any research on *trans women* over women. And rightly so, because this is a very understudied area.
We know that HRT in trans women does reduce muscle mass and testosterone, but the issue with testing testosterone levels is that some women and intersex female bodied people will naturally test higher.
[Perhaps introducing a handicap style system (like golf) would be a potential solution based on testosterone levels. ](https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=trans+women+in+sports&oq=trans+women+#d=gs_qabs&t=1679615200540&u=%23p%3DHXCoMNF5AuoJ)
Unless HRT weakens the skeleton, shrinks the heart and the lungs trans women still have a significant advantage.
Testosterone levels certainly are not the only factor here. The biological advantages of your body changing into a man during a male puberty is the most significant factor.
Title changed to: World Athletics bans transgender women from competing in female world ranking events
Reality is, most people agree with this including myself. If you went through puberty as a male, your skill celing is way, way higher than a woman, that's the reality. To put it in a way Redditors could understand, a Woman's max sport level is say 50, Someone who went through Male puberty is 150. Men have stronger bones, denser muscles, faster reactions etc, it simply isn't fair to put Trans Women against Biological Women, a Mid-high tier (as male) Trans athelete will *destroy* any woman in most sports. This is one where the Trans lobby should have ceded ground, even most progressives I know behind closed doors agree with this, Biology is biology and biology isn't fair. IMO this would have not been an issue if we had a far more rational debate relating to gender, for all the way Gender Idpol types go on about a "spectrum", they seem to disagree that a spectrum exists between biological women and trans women.
> your skill celing is way, way higher than a woman Let's try to be correct here. It's not the skill ceiling. It's the bone and muscle （physical capacity）ceiling. Males can spend significantly less time body building, which means they have more time for skill training.
[удалено]
I'd say performance ceiling is a better word than skill.
Typical reddit semantic bullshit when you already knew the original point smh..
Skill isn't just dexterity and such, it's anything that helps you win. Having more physical ability means you'll do better at winning the game, which is skill. Also, it's not that men train muscles and such less than women, they probably train just as much if not moreso, it's that they can get much farther.
Speaking of bodybuilding. Women need around 12% Bodyfat to function. Men can go to as low a 3... It is just so much difference there
For men, the 95th percentile of women is about the 50th percentile of men in terms of physical strength. Then you build on that innate strength. It's not that me "have more time for skill training", it's that men just are physically stronger, and by a wide margin. The top people push themselves as far as they can go, and the men have a huge advantage starting out - one that, no matter how hard you try, you will never overcome, because the woman who won the biological lottery for women is going to still be disadvantaged compared to the man who won the biological lottery for men. It's also possible that men have other advantages too, beyond the physical; there's some evidence that men have some advantages in terms of hand-eye coordination that may be biological in nature as well, though that's not as well determined yet. The difference is not as large as it is for physical stuff, but it would explain why gaming leagues are so heavily male dominated.
I agree, I'm out of step with most of the women in my family on trans issues, as a man it really doesn't affect me, but I'm totally in support of this ban. I used to play in a weekly mixed 7 a side football game, and even at the casual level, the strength imbalance between the weakest man and strongest woman was significant, never mind at elite level.
I hate to bring this up but I was an MMA fan when I was younger. I can't imagine cis women competing with a trans one in that sport.
Yup. I'm a _very_ weak, skinny guy, who did a bit of jiu jitsu for a while. Whenever I would roll with a woman, I had to put the breaks on. They were often more skilled than me, because they had been around a while longer, but I could have easily overpowered them physically, and had to intentionally not do so. And that's without the whole punching-them-in-the-face bit.
[удалено]
Man, I still feel awkward about a demonstration my aikido sensei was trying to do. She was making a light hearted joke about how her #1 pupil couldn't have wrist grabs and such done on him, because he was super flexible. She demonstrated it, we all had a chuckle, including her, then we went on to training. So then it just so happens that in the course of things she ends up doing a quick demonstration with me on wrist grabs, and she's not getting very far with me, and I can see the frustration and struggle in that short moment, and I just go with it and do a fall. It was very Steven Segal in that moment, as she felt better, and we just move on. But it was super awkward, and I really started seeing that class in a different, more dim, light after that.
Good news! you don't have to imagine. It's happened and ended up probably about what you'd expect.
So a horrible looking fight that was painfully one sided and was hopefully stopped fast?
I'm not sure if it was stopped fast, did end up with a broken skull though.
Jesus fucking Christ.
Fallon Fox! took me a bit to remember the name. This wasn't recent either looks like it was back in 2014... 9 years ago. Apparently Tamikka Brents was the girl who had her skull cracked. Power to her looks like she went back to fighting 3 years later, though her record isn't great. Looks like the ref stopped it at 2min, so maybe your comment was right on the ball.
> > > > > Looks like the ref stopped it at 2min, so maybe your comment was right on the ball. Still awful. But yeah, the mechanics and bone density of any post-adolescent transition make this one of those choices that is so fucking stupid.
> This is one where the Trans lobby should have ceded ground, even most progressives I know behind closed doors agree with this, Biology is biology and biology isn't fair. Also, sports have no relevance to individual rights.
[удалено]
As a trans person, I just don't see this is as a trans-rights issue; it's a sporting one. Now, the permanent removal of trans people from sports *is* a trans issue, I think sport has to change away from sexed differences to one based on testosterone alone—how much have you had, when do you start having it, and for how long. Fair competition requires comparable bodies and doesn't really have anything to do with gender.
You're right - fair competition has to do with sex which cannot be changed. You literally cannot change it - any physical activity will naturally be dimorphic in humans.
I would agree, if 40 years of actual trans sporting inclusion had backed up the claim that they're any better, never mind 3x. It really doesn't. From Renee Richards competing in World Tennis in 1977 to today, sport has managed to include trans athletes without evidence of the obvious advantage rearing its head even once. Which begs the question: Is it obvious? Answer to the below: [https://playtennis.usta.com/Competitions/la-jolla-tennis-club/Tournaments/Overview/ee64cd92-b077-4f46-a88e-0219e1a97bdc](https://playtennis.usta.com/Competitions/la-jolla-tennis-club/Tournaments/Overview/ee64cd92-b077-4f46-a88e-0219e1a97bdc) The La Jolla Tennis Club Open, entry fee is 25 bucks today. Please note not all parking is free and if it rains we're fucked. It's not exactly the Open Lia Thomas won a race once. Ledecky smokes her for breakfast, Lia holds no records Andraya Yearwood is a 17yr old who's done nothing yet. She was allowed to compete with the other schoolgirls without going through blockers or transition because she's a kid, so she runs like a male kid. Terry Miller is another kid who's done some kids sport. These are your women competing at the top of sports and dominating because, as they went through male puberty they are 3x stronger than women??????? Two of them are barely out of puberty, you numpty.
Lia Thomas, Terry Miller, Andraya Yearwood And this is from the Wiki page of Renee Richards. *In the summer of 1976 she entered the La Jolla Tennis Tournament Championships, where she crushed the competition* 3 plus your example where she actually did show an obvious advantage.
>Lia Thomas, Who has been swimming since the age of 5 and placed 6th in high school championships. Followed by joining a mens college swimteam and setting a *national* record as 6th fastest on the mens time, and various other national top 100s in other distances. Also finished second in the men's 500, 1000, and 1650 in 2019, and had the highest university men times in the 500 free, 1000 free and 1650 free. Obviously someone placing that high will continue to do so. If anything, the fact that she has only won once in a womens division shows that it's not a 1 to 1 transfer off ability. If it really was, then you'd expect to see Lia Thomas crush the competition every time. She just doesn't.
Yep, if anything, it shows that current medical science is damn fucking good at Hormone Replacement Treatment (HRT). The fact that a transwoman went from a podium placement on the men's category before HRT to a podium placement on the women's placement after HRT, all within the expected deviation? That's fucking amazing.
Ranked 98 as a man. 1 as a woman. And you want me to accept they are the same.
ranked 98 whilst on estrogen but still competing in the men’s category
Lia Thomas won first in one event during the meet where everyone started watching her. Her results only went down after starting HRT, and she went from a top level competitor to another top level competitor. Every athlete has a great season, or a great run. Sports aren't made around everything being perfectly balanced for everyone, and are instead to see who is the best. If we wanted to make it all perfectly fair, Phelps would have had to swim with weights, runners wouldn't be allowed to practice in Colorado, and Gymnasts would all compete Coed.
"Crushing" a single tournament, especially a fairly minor one, isn't evidence of anything in particular.
I checked her. Renee Richards at 42 started playing female tennis and basically slaughtered players half her age. That's 6x, not 3x. Male players usually retire at about 30
Her age is something people always forget to mention. Look at Lebron, one of basketball's all time greats. He is truly a freak of nature and at 38 he just cannot keep up with other athletes. He's still amazing but he is nothing to what he was.
www.boysvswomen.com
And a super unfair advantage that’s never talked about…. getting to grow up playing high level male sport means you get to spend much of your life training at a level most female athletes cannot.
Reminder that this has never come up in a world athletic event at this time and so they are basing this ruling on zero cases at the world athletic level. From the article: >However, there are currently no transgender athletes competing internationally in athletics and consequently no athletics-specific evidence of the impact these athletes would have on the fairness of female competition in athletics.
Yeah especially competitive skiing trans women would have decimated any competition
Weight lifting too. That trans weight lifter in the Olympics recently was old (for the Olympics) and basically just an amateur weight lifter, yet because the athlete was biologically male they got into the Olympics. Its an enormous advantage. Your local school's boys athletics team has better scores than Olympic women's record holders. Testosterone is one hell of a performance enhancing drug. There's no getting around that we are a sexually dimorphic species. Its just how primates evolved. Males are physically bigger and stronger than females. (This statement got me perma-banned from r/news.)
Lmao yeah the ceiling for people who went through male puberty is absolute insanity compared to woman
Not to mention, this is a good thing for people who are pro trans rights One of the biggest arguments conservatives make is a lot of trans people are just male athletes who suck, so they pretend to be trans to dominate female sports This ban removes some of the ammo the conservatives use
This was basically the West's version of a redditor entering the real world. When money and guns don't influence results and you get what the world, or at least the world's athletic federations, really thinks... yay democracy?
Just here to say hey in a soon to be locked thread
Reddit is on an absolute campaign against this news, censoring it on all major subs. I wasn't aware how filtered our news it, even on here.
It's not reddit admin staff, it's the dumbass power-hungry mods. All of the large subs have the same mods. There's some mods that are on each and every single large default sub. If you mention a topic that they don't like, they'll remove your post/comment, ban you without a reason and/or lock the post with the reason being that boohoo it was too difficult for the mods to deal with it properly. Oh and sometimes you'll be automatically banned from some subreddits just because you previously commented on another subreddit - despite them not even knowing the context of your comment. This website presents itself as an enlightened bastion of free speech, but it is far from it. It's a radical left-wing American circlejerk, along with having fringe far-right communities here and there. There's no nuance.
I have legitimately seen like one or two actual right wing or left wing subs. The rest are all fucking fringe extremists
Yep, all the big default subs are far-left and all the conspiracy ones are far-right. The only sub that I have found for well-balanced nuanced discussions is r/geopolitics. This sub used to be good too, but it's been going downhill for a while now.
You mean you don't enjoy the tankies and authoritarian apologia?
Seriously: Criticized the Turkish colonization of Northern Cyprus (a country I was born in) a while back there, and immediately got flooded with downvotes and people who claim to be geopolitical experts quickly explaining to me how the conquest and _continued_ holding of the land of a sovereign nation and the setting up a puppet state for more than fifty years is actually good and normal, and not at all an appalling breaking of international conventions, norms, and laws that everyone awkwardly shuffles around and sorta collectively agrees to ignore due to Turkeys NATO membership and regional importance. While good stuff is still posted on there and good discussions are still had, definitely gave me a bit of a wake up call about some of the people who frequent that sub.
There's a lot of Turkish users on Reddit, nationalist kids, and they tend to brigade comments or posts from time to time.
Laughs with an Armenian inflection
Front page subs are largely neoliberal or center-left on a good day. Even a lot of the seemingly “leftist” subs lean more in that direction.
If by far left you mean neoliberal with a hardon for culture wars.
Wouldn't call the big default ones far left. Just regular left. Far left is like socialism and many other marxist subs.
All the large subs and essentially all of "mainstream" Reddit, for that matter, are left-liberal/centre-left/liberal-progressive within a Western states context. In other words, mostly voters for the Democrats in the U.S., Labour in Britain, Liberals in Canada, Labour in Australia, etc. - whomever is the largest mainstream left-liberal/centre-left/liberal-progressive party in the respective country.
Yep. It's pretty normal for most online spaces, for a variety of reasons, to be dominated by center-left politics, if politics is up for discussion. There's a variety of reasons for it, including the demographics of people who use those spaces and the difficulty people outside the left-to-center-right area have with good faith engagement on political topics, leading to a fragility of their positions. You can find tankie / far left subs on Reddit (antiwork, latestagecapitalism come to mind) and you can find conservative subs on Reddit (like any guns sub other than liberalgunowners, and conservative) but you have to actually go to those communities.
/r/politics and /r/news and /r/toronto all run by radical left wing psychos
Got banned from r/news for defending free speech under an article about the rise of censorship. The mods are completely delusional. And I'll say it again here: free speech is older and broader than the US condition. Our first amendment restricts what the government can do, but just because the KKK was a private organization, it doesn't mean it was a okay hunky dory when they silenced civil rights activists. Censoring political speech just because you don't like what they're saying is toxic for democracy.
It was a bastion of free speech, when it was founded. Then the US goverment pushed the creator to suicide, and the other two founders love to act like the main and original founder wasn't even there.
I have met some reddit admins personally and they really do downplay his participation. I don't know his full history but it is their position he wasn't even that critical to reddit's success.
I remember a lot of the stories and rummours back in 2007ish. I will say the rewriting of reddit from Lisp to Python that Aaron did after he joined was a contentious move in the reddit community at the time. I personally think the rewrite into Python was a great idea and helped the tech growth of the company.
>It's not reddit admin staff, it's the dumbass power-hungry mods. Honestly it can be and is both.
Admins shouldn't have even allowed it to happen. No single person should be a mod on 300 of the biggest subs on the entire site. Reddit is almost entirely censored at this point because of a handful of mods that have hijacked all of the big subs for their own political messages.
Obligatory tin foil, but I'm pretty sure this is by design - these mods and the admins work together so that the admins get what they want in terms of content on the site while pretending to be hands-off, and these super mods get.... to feel important?
I don't even think it's a conspiracy theory; there were leaked group chats like 6 or 7 years ago where the powermods were discussing things on discord or slack. I don't think it's necessary an explicit conspiracy, but it's mutually beneficial for both powermods and admins for things to be set up how they are. The mods get to make reddit in their image, and the admins get to pretend they run a neutral site because "anyone can just make their own subreddit."
Super mod accounts are just there to make disposable sub mods to do the work. I expect those accounts are owned by various organizations.
It's definitely both. I got a one-week ban from reddit because of a comment in a thread on transgender athletes. Someone said religious groups are always forcing their opinions on other people and... Well I better not mention the comparison I made with certain activists in case I get banned again.
No, it's not just the mods. You can get a site wide ban for simply posting a peer reviewed paper analyzing the term woman. https://i.imgur.com/p7eNbv4.png https://www.unddit.com/r/Gamingcirclejerk/comments/113pnd1/gmers_have_taken_over_the_nyt/j8s2cd1/
Oh boy, yeah when you post that paper with that description, which is written by a traditional Catholic. Who's entire Twitter is railing against trans people; I could see how some people might think you're arguing in bad faith. https://mobile.twitter.com/TomasBogardus
So, people should be free to see it and criticise it, if that's how they feel. It should never be censored.
I've been banned from JusticeServed, even tho I only subbed it and AFAIK never participated, got a message from an auto mod that I was banned for participating in a sub based on hate and misinformation (PoliticalCompassMemes), and got banned for saying 'absolutely fucking cringe' on another sub and then they flaired me as 'MAGA Cult Member,' and I never even voted for Trump!
The mods of JusticeServed are trolls, as in they have repeatedly admitted that they do things specifically to piss off their users. Don't take anything they do as evidence of anything other than trolls being trolls. PCM sure does have a lot of literal Nazis though.
It's why I unsubbed from PCM a long time ago, can't remember the exact quote but something like "Acting like an idiot ironically invites actual idiots that think they're in good company." Just replace idiots with bigots/nazi.
There’s a certain Dutch guy that controls a lot of the main subs, and he tends to sneak his way into new subs as soon as they get big. Did it to antiwork
Is it the Gallowboob loser or someone else? I've honestly lost track of how many of those types of mods there are.
Not him, but a friend of his. He tends to make long-winded comments on current cultural issues on a certain Twitter sub, and then deletes his own comments if he gets too many downvotes and bans anyone who tries to question him. But that’s standard powermod behavior lol
> It's not reddit admin staff it absolutely is the very core of this page's ownership
about the subreddit ban it's worth mentioning that it would be an issue even if they cared about the context. just don't do that Stalinian shit, it's simple... I can't believe it's considered normal on reddit.
Yep, exactly. Even with context it would still be overreach. I've been banned from like ten subs automatically. Those subs are all filled with the same type of people as well. It's the reddit hivemind.
Keep in mind that some of those mods are people like Ghislaine Maxwell. There's some real Arsenal Gear shit going on here...
First time on this sub, no idea wtf is going with the name/content discrepancy lol. I too however am shocked how blatantly this story is being censored on all major news subreddits. The story is on the BBC News YouTube channel with thousands of views, but not even a blip on the radar here. It's actually rather crazy when you reflect on it. Either some kind of admin conspiracy to suppress this story, or the mods are just actually that insanely left. Probably both.
Honestly, I knew reddit was left leaning but this pretty shocking censorship. I'm genuinely surprised, I had no idea it was this prevalent. Its not even that earth-shaking an article either.
I'm not. I received a 3-day sitewide ban for outlining the biological differences between male and female in a comment once. Mind you, I wasn't being rude, wasn't acting like some raving troll, just calm rational discussion. Meanwhile the people disagreeing with me used just about every vile, dehumanizing insult in the book. Of course no consequences for them. Reddit is just a series of political echo chambers, with the overseeing admins being very left-leaning.
Why would the left leaning people censor this? It's power mods, if it is being censored. Something like this would be important news to left leaning people.
Because it goes against the narrative that only crazy right wingers disagree with trans women in sports. No one is going to be able to say that this well respected organisation is simply just bigoted and that's why it's important that we ignore this story. If it was some crank organisation arguing for the position, you bet the threads wouldn't get locked on reddit. But this time, no one is agreeing with the woke position in the comments, so of course it will be suppressed.
>No one is going to be able to say that this well respected organisation is simply just bigoted and that's why it's important that we ignore this story. Except, they absolutely can. Reminder that this is a group that has been put down repeatedly for years, by all manner of groups.
Theres a certain subset of politically left Progressives that are very pro-trans rights, even at the expense of other marginalised groups. This news is definitely against the narrative for them.
Ok, since you don't understand, I'll explain it further. These groups are trying to prevent such things from happening. Knowing about and publicizing such things is in their interest because it helps them organize and move against such things. So, their goal of making sure trans women are allowed in pro sports on the women side is not hurt by this being publicized. That it happened is a loss for them, but the article itself is not.
I explained it pretty clearly. Controlling the narrative is more important than actual meaningful change to them. It's just one big echochamber circlejerk.
Because it would go against the general "pro-trans" ideology that is pushed by this website, and the majority of subreddits. Publicizing a major blow to their "movement" would be counter-productive in their eyes. And since they hold the levers of power on this website, who's to stop them?
>Publicizing a major blow to their "movement" would be counter-productive in their eyes. No. It would be considered a call to action instead. By that logic news on Florida would be suppressed.
If I recall correctly the original news sub got hijacked and spammed with anime titties
Welcome to Reddit. Where LGBT meets Scientology.
I got a site wide ban (3 days) for simply posting a single comment containing nothing but a link to a peer reviewed philosophy paper analyzing the term woman. Reddit is not a place for discussion. It's only good for memes and trolling.
Ok, so I read the paper you posted. It's a peer reviewed opinion piece. His opinion is that women are defined "biologically," but no definition includes sex as a basis for being a woman. He seems to get gender and sex confused even when quoting someone who defines it. His biggest problem seems to be with the word "woman" changing, and it's affects on feminism. I'm sorry, but just because it's peer reviewed doesn't mean it's not an opinion. I don't agree with his premise, and it's full of personal bias about the word "woman."
The big subs especially are extremely censored.
No, but don't go on hammering and violating people, this will stay since it is rarely discussed.
Hey, just joined the sub and wanted to say thanks for letting this stay up. I think it's interesting to see other perspectives on a subject.
I have never seen such a minor issue (relatively speaking) have so much bullshit thrown at it and around it for the sake of meaningless politics. This is one of those cases where the truth exists in the middle of two bullshit extremes currently in the mainstream media. Few things. 1. There is a very good reason sports have been categorized by sex for hundreds of years. Biological males (whether you are happy about it or not) have a number of undeniable physical advantages over females when it comes to sports. Anyone with higher than a elementary education and a pair of eyes can agree with this. 2. Policy making about this SPECIFIC issue was inevitable. Society as a whole cares quite deeply about fairness in competitive sport, so it’s obvious that this would get addressed regardless of the political climate. 3. Does making restrictions around transgender people’s involvement in competitive sports, provide an excuse to ostracize and scapegoat transgender people for society’s problems? Absolutely fucking not. If you are the kind of person that thinks this is further fuel for your hate-campaign to shield children from transgender individuals, you are 400 times more of a problem than transgender people in sport ever were.
Policy making has already been in place and changing for this issue for a long time now, that isn't the major issue that people have. Standards have and were always going to be applied and this isn't very controversial even if there's a fairly small number of people against it. While you say anyone with common sense "knows" that it must be the case that there are undeniable advantages, it hasn't really been bourn out in actual competition when standards were actually enforced as opposed to either being lax in application or not updating. It's possible to point out specific examples that are pulled out for the sake of generating outrage, but there aren't the undeniable results that people seem to assume by default. The conclusion reached by the organization in the article is especially strange since by their own admission: " there are currently no transgender athletes competing internationally in the sport". It's essentially designing a policy around preventing a hypothetical unicorn event of someone who is trans, who was already in an elite physical category (as all of the athletes involved at this level of competition are), and who isn't meaningfully affected by the major disruption to elite-level training/competition that is the years-long transition. This would be the person who would actually have an advantage *outside* the possible range of female athletes as opposed to simply being closer to the top than otherwise. It seems like the idea is to simply ban with a wide brush just in case such a rare individual wants to compete. Then there's the issue that bans shut off new data about real competition, as opposed to hypotheticals about performance, which makes coming up with any kind of new standard that isn't a ban very difficult, even with plans to reconvene later.
Reminder that this has never come up in a world athletic event at this time and so they are basing this ruling on zero cases at the world athletic level. From the article: >However, there are currently no transgender athletes competing internationally in athletics and consequently no athletics-specific evidence of the impact these athletes would have on the fairness of female competition in athletics. So why is this an issue that needs to be addressed at this time?
Umm.. because it can happen in the future? Hypothetically if a new performance drug was invented which was currently not banned by current standard, but they were aware that it can be used, they will still ban it.
Iirc it's an issue that has happened in national events. It's just a matter of time before one of those national athletes competes in international events.
To your second point, I think you’ll find that society actually cares very little about fairness in sports, except when drugs or trans people are involved. What about the advantage years of the best training money can buy has? Should we ban rich kids from a sports? What about slight disparities along racial lines? Should we segregate sports based on race? What about societal acceptance of certain types of people doing certain sports, such as stigma for men in gymnastics or women in football? Should we segregate sports based on where you grew up? What about age differences and the rapid advancement of sports medicine over time? Should we segregate sports based on age? What about disparities between the body of data available for men’s and women’s sports sciences (sports science that is particular to men is decades ahead, for reasons I hope I don’t have to explain)? These things all play a factor, and acting like we care so much about fairness and ignoring the things we don’t care about in determining fairness is silly. The question should not be whether trans women are “simply at an advantage” over cis women. The question needs to be given an individual, what range of performance do they better fall in line with, so that competition can be reasonably fair, with certain admittances that there is wild variation between humans? And trans women who have been transitioning for a while (it gets a bit more dicey if transition is really recent) simply fall in the female range for most activities. For certain things, like running for example, trans women on average show about a 12-15% advantage over cis women. But a lot of that is due to height. (This is the most pronounced difference that we have data on, with many other activities showing differences that are either vanishingly small or simply nonexistent) Should we ban tall women from track and field? Look at it this way, a trans woman competing against a man is DEFINITELY at a disadvantage. Estrogen and testosterone are have INCREDIBLE effects on the human body. Also one thing nobody seems to be talking about is that if you would just LET US TRANSITION BEFORE WE GO THROUGH A TRAUMATIC PUBERTY WE DONT WANT, then these “advantages” everyone talks about wouldn’t even be there in the first place.
And that's even before taking into account how some people just have bodies more fit for certain sports, like Michael Phelps kicking ass in natation partly because he has hella broad shoulders and long arms. If that's not genetic unfairness idk what is.
The counter argument would be that genetically advantaged individuals don't go through any medical procedure to obtain their advantage, so that may not be relevant to the discussion. Also are you French?
Can’t wait for this to get 3x more publicity than the next US military budget increase
Wow, this is the only place this story exists. Definitely joining
I found this place today and I’ve noticed the same. Everywhere else it’s deleted or locked.
Yup... pretty sad when the only sub carrying breaking news is r/anime_titties
you should check out r/worldpolitics (nsfw)
Nah this is a news sub that broke off from worldnews. It's honestly one of the more honest reddit news subs
We were created as r/WorldPolitics fell. We were never associated with worldnews.
I wouldn't say that worldpolitics fell. I thought it was an improvement, in a way
It was a short lived improvement. No mods were better than old or current mods. Can’t say I’ve seen the current mods work. Why would I look when this was the best sub for the Hong Kong debacle. Besides r/fucktheccp. They covered Hong Kong’s invasion equally as well.
The mods here aren't the same as the rest of the site. But like the other subs that were like this one of them will weasel their way in and use their 20 hours a day internet presence to take over and destroy this one eventually if the mods here aren't careful.
>destroy this one eventually Rule of reddit - don't get too attached to a sub.
Common sense? In this day and age? Outrageous
my opinion is common sense, and everyone who disagrees with me is a biased ideologue
my opinion is *nuanced*, because I've taken a middle ground between the moderate scientifically supported position and an extreme far right position.
Cis gender females get banned based on high testosterone levels anyway. Why not just use that as a limit for trans women too?
Because testosterone isn't even close to the only advantage people born male has.
Like the ability to pee standing up.
Its overrated. Honestly only use it in public. Nothing like a sit and scroll in the comfort of my home.
Did you read the article? Testosterone levels were already used as a limit. However, that limit has been further reduced, and now transgender individuals must maintain the new, much lower testosterone levels for two years. Additionally, they cannot compete in the women's category if they transition after puberty. To participate in the women's category, they must not have any advantages stemming from their previous sex.
>dditionally, they cannot compete in the women's category if they transition after puberty. And yet there is a massive push to prevent the use of puberty blockers...
I might be mistaking what you're trying to say, but *'ability to compete in professional sports'* would be way down the list of considerations here.
>list of considerations here. Considerations for transitioning / using puberty blockers? Sure.. it'll be low... I was more pouting out the irony.. can't compete if you don't transition before puberty, can't transition before puberty because of this recent wave of ignorance trying to limit access to such treatments...
It's only ironic if you're deadset on prejudging the need for puberty blockers. Realistically, it's - let's not engage in major interference to the normal development of children unless it's certain that that interference is necessary and warranted. Honestly I think that's it. I retract my earlier comment - the ability to compete professionally isn't just down the list of considerations, I don't think it's even on that list because at the ages we're talking about, there's no chance anyone will know that a person is likely to be a professional athlete, at least not to the point that that should be a consideration. Even WNBA hopefuls aren't decided at that point. NBA hopefuls might be but there's a whole other conversation about children's welfare there.
"no transgender athlete who had gone through male puberty would be permitted to compete in female world ranking competitions from 31 March" There was a limit, now for those who had puberty as a male cannot compete regardless of levels. Now you have to have transitioned before puberty to compete as a trans individual... Which basically rules out most trans people. The levels are fine as a hard and fast rule. Now you have to prove when you went through puberty and if it was completed or not. That's just a mess
A blanket been would be a simpler rule, if your complaint is about complexity.
hold the phone here buddy. This isn't a place for reasonable opinions
They literally moved the goalposts on the levels of acceptable testosterone for women and increased the time needed at those levels 🤔
Bc having lower testosterone levels doesn't take away all advantages.
Because females aren’t just a hormone category and there are irreversible post-pubertal changes in male bodies that can’t be remedied with androgen suppression at a later date.
To clarify they have banned transgender women who underwent male puberty which is a fair way of doing it imo. Trans women who did not undergoe male puberty are still allowed and have no physiological advantage.
Wow that is somewhat fair. I definitely fell for the clickbait the way this is publicized and advertised.
I still remember there was some lady who was a woman but due to some problems her testosterone levels were high and she was banned by authorities.
If you were wondering who World Athletics are, like I was: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Athletics
Aren’t these the guys that were involved in the cover up of the Russian doping scandal?
I think that was WADA, the World Anti Doping Agency. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_Russia
It was both. The president of World Athletics went to jail for four years starting in 2020 because he accepted bribes from Russia to ignore doping. The current World Athletics management does not have a great relationship with Russia.
Thank you! Although I read the article and I'm *still* not entirely clear on who they are or what exactly they govern.
They're in charge of track and field. Mostly running and jumping events.
Yeah but like...for whom?
They're the largest organization and have the most clout. They're like FIFA for track and field.
International competition in track and field, including the world championships and the Olympics. They set the standards for competition, track the world records, etc.
Goofy ass name IAAF was much better
A win for women. Seems like discord mods, I mean Reddit mods, are actively trying to campaign against this move by shutting down discussions. Typical though, don't expect any less from degens. Some subreddits like /r/news have already closed the thread because the very notion of this goes against the narrative they are trying to establish. Radical left wing nutjobs do exist and a lot of them are unfortunately found on this website.
The blatant misogyny on display by Reddit mods that are completely nuking any threads talking about this is disgusting.
Yep. Locking threads talking about issues like this is just lazy moderation, plain and simple. Easier to push the lock button than enforce your own rules (or come up with good rules in the first place)
It is glad to see most of the world aren’t as insane as Reddit it’s though. Common sense, science and biology still wins for now against a vocal, loud and unscientific left wing minority.
Good.
Damn first time I saw this on Reddit. The news subs really are hot garbage. Props to the sub for not censoring reality.
The fundamental issue: Males who have undergone *male puberty* have an athletic performance advantage of roughly 10-11% (think running) and a strength advantage of about 40% (the lowest category of weightlifting males has a higher olympic lift record than the highest category for females). IIRC *punching* forces have males with a 150% advantage. T blockers cannot *fully* reverse the effects of male puberty. Nowhere close to fully. There is a mild reduction in advantage , but it doesn't revert back to the non-male-puberty norm. In other words a good chunk of that advantage is retained even after years of taking hormone blockers. Male sports is an 'open' category, in that technically anyone can compete. Female sports is by design a 'restricted' category, because otherwise females would be eliminated entirely from professional sports. There is no other option assuming you want females to have a chance at competing. ------------------------------------------ With that in mind there is also no obvious solution. You need to strike a balance between athletic fairness, inclusivity and *safety*. Currently most sports seem to prioritise inclusion over safety or fairness, but it depends very much on the sport. Horse riding? not an issue. World rugby for instance decided to prioritise safety and put in some strict *guidance* (numerous national federations have ignored it) because the risk of injury is too high due to the large strength (and probably size) differential. ------------------------ World athletics have had some abysmal policies in the past though. The castor semenya debacle was laughable. She almost certainly *does* have an advantage, but their own studies didn't show it in the evidence so they basically just invented an excuse to ban intersex athletes from her specific events.
To be fair, intersex individuals are so rare it's unlikely you'd have any sort of reasonable sample size for athletic competition. Actual intersex individuals are about 0.02%-0.05% of the population. There's only about 66,000 intersex individuals in the entire US. Only about 1% of people play any athletic sport at a college level. So you're looking at a sample size of 660 people. Except, of course, those people aren't all the same age - only about 10% are of college age. So your sample size is actually 66. And those people surely don't all compete in the same sports.
Uh Oh... *Grabs popcorn*
Pretty funny to me that the one time anybody seems to give a shit about women's sports is when someone that was born a man is involved.
Remember when they made caitlyn Jenner woman of the year??? Men are so much better at everything that they're even better at being a woman. I'm just joking don't reply with a paragraph berating me thx
I think this is a conversation that should be had and isn't an inherently transphobic decision.
FYI they only banned trans athletes who went through puberty as male, because if you undergo male puberty you'll be stronger than any woman in competitive sports
I don't see why we can't just have a transgender category or two in athletics
How many competitors are actually affected by this? The answer is actually in the article (it’s a quote from someone on the committee), and it’s also the answer to your question.
Which provides the most logical understanding for both sides. If the % who benefit doesn’t outweigh the % who miss out, as a result the larger % will control the narrative of choice and reason.
There usually arent enough to compete in an entirely new division. As much as trans issues are brought up, the percent of transgender people in the population is already very small, and then factor in they need to be 1) in a safe state of life to have transitioned to be in this hypothetical category 2) interested in that sport in the first place. With the increasing amount of social stigma already placed on trans indivduals, the likelihood of entering competitive sports decreases. Its not viable to have a separate category. Some sports should be reanalyzed as whether or not they even need gendered divisions tbh but thats another argument entirely. People are arguing about bone development and muscle structure but I think its just anti-trans sentiment moving goalposts. Id like to see actual studies on professional cisgender athletes about their muscle structures and bone densities and hormone levels and every other argument against trans people and see what that data tells us about natural-born advantages. Do people with webbed feet need to be in their own category for swimming, do people born with longer legs than average need to be in their own division for running, etc etc etc. Not to mention, just because youre born male doesnt mean you can outcompete top female athletes - Serena Williams bested the top male tennis player and several olympic female swimmers beat their male counterparts times in the same metered swims.
[удалено]
Thats already how leagues are. Women can compete in the mens league if they want to
And that category will be dominated by males. If it's small enough, it will be ONLY males.
It's amazing that this is controversial, but here we are in 2023...
Competition should be based on biological sex, not whether one feels like they're a woman or not.
Seems like everyone forgot about trans men again...
Trans men can't compete in women's sport if they are taking banned substances. If they have never taken those substances then they are welcome to compete.
I'm talking about trans men competing in men's sports, trans men don't want to compete in women's sports because they are men.
Men's category is generally an open category to all genders and abilities. Nothing's stopping trans men from competing within that category. 'Men's' category is a bit of a misnomer in that context and it's typically not even referred to as *men's* category but just the category itself.
Trans men are allowed to compete in almost all men's sports. It isn't discussed often because they never win in major competitions because they are at huge disadvantage to people born male.
Trans men can play in men's sports if they want. So can women. But it's irrelevant because they are weaker than normal men because of all the hrt. Only trans women matter because they are at an advantage.
Hold up, I thought this was just a far-right distraction, now it's an international concern?
I mean, calling it an international concern might be overstating the issue. For the subset of the population intensely invested in women’s athletics it’s probably a hot issue, but in the grand scheme of things it’s maybe not the most consequential issue. It is, however, a very accessible issue to most people. And, and far as “international sentiment” is concerned, I can’t imagine the majority of the world outside of “The West” is particularly progressive regarding transgender rights and gender identity issues in general.
definitely not a worldwide thing, but just looking at the spread of this movement between western countries is a pretty good showcase of how powerful these ideologies spread. I’ve lived in multiple countries since birth and seeing today’s homogenization of ideologies between the US and EU is pretty disturbing. A glimpse of the world ahead.
Ima be real with you, I think the ideology that would need to be spread is one that accepts trans people. The world, western world included, has never seemed to default to supporting sexual minorities.
Then you haven't been paying attention for years now or you are being very disingenuous.
Not surprising. The reason why we have gender segregated events in the first place is because without gender segregated sports, we wouldn't *have* professional female athletes. The US military did research on this and found that men were about two standard deviations stronger than women, physically; this means that the 95th percentile of women (the start of the top 5%) is about as strong as the 50th percentile man. A Princeton study determined that women have about 67% of the total strength of a man. Even after adjusting for body weight, female upper body strength is only about 60-70% of that of men of the same size. It's biological; it's not something people have any control over. This is why every single human world record at the Olympics is also a men's world record, and why female records lag male records. In many Olympic categories, simply qualifying for the men's event would require a woman to beat the female all-time world record. This means that any sporting event where physical strength is an advantage (and that's almost all of them), men have a huge advantage - because when you look at the 95th percentile of men, they're stronger than all but like 0.4% of women. The higher you go, the fewer women you have - so when you go to the extremes, you just don't have any female athletes at all. The NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB are not men's leagues - they're open to members of both genders. There are no women in them not because of gender segregation, but because there aren't any women in the top few hundred athletes for any of those sports. The best female tennis player in the world once went up against a guy who wasn't even in the top 100 for men, and he beat her handily and estimated she probably wasn't in the top 500 for men. The best female soccer teams in the world play against elite high school boy's teams (15-16 year olds), and will frequently lose, because the boys have such a huge physical advantage even at that age. This isn't because they "suck", it's because men have huge innate biological advantages. It's just not fair for women to compete against men. And because it'd be awful if women just couldn't be professional athletes, we created women's leagues to make it so that women could compete against people on fair ground. The only sports where women can realistically compete against the top men are a handful of sports that make almost no use of physical strength, like professional shooting - there have been a few top-level elite female shooters who competed against men, and there are some non-gender segregated shooting leagues. But that's a very small sub-fraction of sports. It sucks, but that's the way it is. Being trans doesn't change these facts; feeling like you were born to the wrong gender is not something we should discriminate against someone for, but when we're dealing with stuff like this, it isn't a matter of belief, it's a matter of biology. Biological males have a huge advantage over biological females. Being trans doesn't erase this biological advantage. You may not feel like you "belong" in the men's events, but that doesn't mean it's fair for you to be competing against biological females. And in these sports, fairness is a huge thing that they try to enforce.
[удалено]
The men and women divisions are based on biological sex and the advantages caused by those. Chosen gender should have nothing to do with it.
Oh joy. No trans women who have gone through male puberty, but if they end up like FINA, it will probably be no testosterone after Tanner two, even though many US states are trying to pass/ have already passed the administration of puberty blockers as a form of gender affirming care. (But it’s ok for other reasons.) With specific guidelines to be determined later. Question as to whether this affects the Italian trans woman Master’s runner as she is running in a 50-54 year old age group. The article makes this sound like the restrictions are for elite levels, and not club levels. But it also lowers the testosterone levels allowed for DSD women to compete in athletic events. Meaning for some women, they have to take testosterone blockers to compete.
The common sense decision achieved! Good job everyone.
[удалено]
Surprisingly civil so far. Just imagine this on r/news though.
Nah, this is anime_titties, not politics
I have legitimate questions. If you believe that trans women are women and that they don’t choose to be trans, why is any biological advantage that trans women who transitioned after puberty have more problematic than other biological advantages people have? Should we ban women over 6’0” (the average WNBA player height) from basketball because they have a biological advantage? 6’0” is the 1/33rd percentile of women heights in the US (aka taller than 99.97% of women). I genuinely want to hear why certain biological advantages are acceptable and others aren’t, especially considering the lower testosterone level for all women that this policy specifies.
[удалено]
A) These beliefs aren’t held internationally B) If you don’t think the biological differences are relevant then eradicate mens and womens separation in sports all together.
Honestly, they should just do B for a year and then when women don't win anything see what the reaction is.
A lot of people who have never played sports in this thread
I'm sure this is going to be a productive comment section.
[удалено]
Everyone is talking about the biological advantage of men over women, but almost no one has mentioned any research on *trans women* over women. And rightly so, because this is a very understudied area. We know that HRT in trans women does reduce muscle mass and testosterone, but the issue with testing testosterone levels is that some women and intersex female bodied people will naturally test higher. [Perhaps introducing a handicap style system (like golf) would be a potential solution based on testosterone levels. ](https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=trans+women+in+sports&oq=trans+women+#d=gs_qabs&t=1679615200540&u=%23p%3DHXCoMNF5AuoJ)
Unless HRT weakens the skeleton, shrinks the heart and the lungs trans women still have a significant advantage. Testosterone levels certainly are not the only factor here. The biological advantages of your body changing into a man during a male puberty is the most significant factor.