All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Dalak]

IMO, ignorance is what keeps bigotry alive.

Considering the arguments made by racists back in the day and the studies on Trans Athletes that have been shared in this thread for anyone to search for and look up if they were interested in actual discussion and what those regularly posting thought about the matter, maybe the bigotry will come through if I replace 2 words:


"Haha, and why is that bigotry? I am not saying that Black/Latino/Asian/Middle Eastern people don't have rights or shouldn't exist, but they shouldn't compete with Whites. Simple."

[Tendrin]

And yet I am the only one posting interviews with scientists about this topic, while everyone just hurls insults. As said, happy to read scientific evidence on both sides.

Everything I said is straight from science on the issue. From bone density on. I realize some of this is new to you and your frantic googling is understandable, but I would be incredibly cautious of citing any UK media on trans issues. The history there is... poor. They don't call it 'TERF island' for no reason.

Anyway. I'm going to go to bed and leave with the knowledge that all you've done this morning is run around and eventually have the much predicted go at trans people who didn't ask for your opinion.

[hyped78]

Considering the arguments made by racists back in the day and the studies on Trans Athletes that have been shared in this thread for anyone to search for and look up if they were interested in actual discussion and what those regularly posting thought about the matter, maybe the bigotry will come through if I replace 2 words:


"Haha, and why is that bigotry? I am not saying that Black/Latino/Asian/Middle Eastern people don't have rights or shouldn't exist, but they shouldn't compete with Whites. Simple."

That's a silly comparison, not even worth commenting.

I posted a BBC article and a WebMD article - they are both clear that the topic is at least up for discussion. Are you so arrogant (are you even a scientist?) to say that it isn't?

[hyped78]

Everything I said is straight from science on the issue. From bone density on. I realize some of this is new to you and your frantic googling is understandable, but I would be incredibly cautious of citing any UK media on trans issues. The history there is... poor. They don't call it 'TERF island' for no reason.

Anyway. I'm going to go to bed and leave with the knowledge that all you've done this morning is run around and eventually have the much predicted go at trans people who didn't ask for your opinion.

WebMD isn't British, it's American.
And the BBC is "UK media" indeed but the interview is with two scientists, one of whom is trans.
I provided two articles/ links, I don't see anyone else doing the same.

You have as much right of criticizing the UK as I have of calling the US "Trumpland" haha

[Tendrin]

WebMD isn't British, it's American.
And the BBC is "UK media" indeed but the interview is with two scientists, one of whom is trans.
I provided two articles/ links, I don't see anyone else doing the same.

You have as much right of criticizing the UK as I have of calling the US "Trumpland" haha

I have every right to critique the UK and it's deep media emeshment with transphobia. Even asking a trans woman on to tv to negotiate her right to exist and live a life which includes athleticism is problematic in and of itself.

Yes, I was referring to the BBC link. Christ.

[hyped78]

But here, more:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31794605/ - peer reviewed. Trans women who underwent feminizing hormone therapy generally maintained their strength levels after one year.

DW: https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-do-...ort/a-58583988
"Pretty much any way you slice it, trans women are going to have strength advantages even after hormone therapy. I just don't see that as anything else but factual," said Joanna Harper, a medical physicist at Britain's Loughborough University.
""The big problem right now is that the [hormone] therapy itself doesn't really remove the advantage to an extent that you can claim that fairness has been achieved," Lundberg told DW. "And actually, the IOC (International Olympic Committee) states that the overriding objective is, and remains, the guarantee of fair competition. That's what they say in their guidelines. So that's the problem right now: They don't go hand-in-hand."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33289906/
Muscular advantage enjoyed by transgender women is only minimally reduced when testosterone is suppressed


And then you're saying it's not up for discussion/ debate? Who are YOU to say that? haha

And yes, I am conscious there is literature that points to other conclusions. That's why, at best, it remains largely inconclusive.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Here is another article from WebMD:
https://www.webmd.com/fitness-exerci...ave-advantages

Given the range, would you assume that there might be different advantages for trans women in different sports?
Harper: Absolutely. I've been saying since 2018 that we should be looking sport-by-sport on regulations for trans athletes.


But yes, hurl the insults instead of providing reading material and/ or data, makes you look great. At the very least, yes, this is a topic open for debate and for review of available scientific data.

From the same article you posted but didn't read through:

The important question isn't, “Do trans women have advantages?” What really matters is can trans women and cis women compete against one another in meaningful competition. There's no indication that trans women are anywhere close to taking over women's sport, it's not happening now. It's not likely to happen anytime in the future.

If you keep reading, there's more information on that article as to why trans women should be allowed to compete with cis women.

[hyped78]

I have every right to critique the UK and it's deep media emeshment with transphobia. Even asking a trans woman on to tv to negotiate her right to exist and live a life which includes athleticism is problematic in and of itself.

Yes, I was referring to the BBC link. Christ.

I've posted a few others now. Not related to the BBC, seeing as though you seem to dislike the UK and the BBC; I'm being more careful with my sources now, don't want to rile you.

Of course you have the right to criticize the UK. But if it was me doing that you would be quick to point out that I'm a "UK phobic"

[hyped78]

From the same article you posted but didn't read through:



If you keep reading, there's more information on that article as to why trans women should be allowed to compete with cis women.

As I said - it's up for debate, it's not a closed deal (and every sport might be a different case; those articles don't say "close the debate, don't allow trans in women's sports") or a slam dunk like some enlightened folks here are saying (at least I am not trying to pass myself as an expert on the topic). The issue is - if it's uncertain, then you shouldn't allow trans people in women's sports until it is certain they don't enjoy any advantage.

[Mister Mets]

I knew this is where it was heading last night but didn't want to say anything because...yeah, inevitable.

If you hold unpopular views, it's not surprising that some strangers will disagree with you.

[Tendrin]

I've posted a few others now. Not related to the BBC, seeing as though you seem to dislike the UK and the BBC; I'm being more careful with my sources now, don't want to rile you.

That the UK has a huge media issue with transphobia isn't up for debate. Transphobia is being weaponized by the torries there pretty explicitly, something that was imported into Australias elections too.

My friends in that neck of the woods would be very surprised to find out I don't like them ;(

[hyped78]

If you hold unpopular views, it's not surprising that some strangers will disagree with you.

It's not surprising but it's surprising the lack of democratic tolerance from people that say they represent tolerance and diversity

[shooshoomanjoe]

As I said - it's up for debate, it's not a closed deal (and every sport might be a different case; those articles don't say "close the debate, don't allow trans in women's sports") or a slam dunk like some enlightened folks here are saying (at least I am not trying to pass myself as an expert on the topic). The issue is - if it's uncertain, then you shouldn't allow trans people in women's sports until it is certain they don't enjoy any advantage.

It's up for debate when the article doesn't fit with your views but it's hard science when the article fits your views. Makes sense.

[hyped78]

That the UK has a huge media issue with transphobia isn't up for debate. Transphobia is being weaponized by the torries there pretty explicitly, something that was imported into Australias elections too.

My friends in that neck of the woods would be very surprised to find out I don't like them ;(

I honestly haven't seen much about that (media issues with transphobia here in the UK). Not saying that transphobia isn't bad - it is - but I just haven't seen many UK debates/ news around it (maybe a few articles in the Daily Mail - but the Daily Mail is like Fox News, can't take them seriously)

[hyped78]

It's up for debate when the article doesn't fit with your views but it's hard science when the article fits your views. Makes sense.

Now... Where did I say that? That's a weak interpretation of something I didn't say (or believe in). You're way off.

I said it's up for debate and that science is inconclusive on that topic, at least for now, there are scientific articles pointing in both directions (provided some). Clear now?