Current Events > Male powerlifter (Avi Silverberg) enters women's event, breaks record

(+) Yeah! (+)

good for him, women dont have a place in women sports

s0nicfan posted...

Then stop bringing up numbers as if you're making some kind of point. I understand that you don't care how many there are, but youve repeatedly brought up quantity as if it's some sort of point in favor of your argument. Then, when it turns out you haven't even done a superficial level of research into the issue you just turn around and get angrier. Oh, that person is a transphobe. Oh, that person doesn't care about women's sports. Oh,... The list of disingenuous excuses you throw out there in order to avoid actually talking about the issue is endless, because you don't actually care what the details are. You don't give a shit if no female will ever be able to break these records in some of these events. You have your opinion, and it's set in stone, and no amount of evidence is going to change your mind.

TBF based on the shit I've seen you post you absolutely are a transphobe

s0nicfan isn't a transphobe, they just don't want trans people competing in sports. How could you possibly read their posts and think their arguments aren't being made in good faith, especially when they say "no female will ever be able to break these records", because their mask accidentally slipped off and they just admitted via Freudian slip that they still view trans women as being men?

TMOG posted...

s0nicfan isn't a transphobe, they just don't want trans people competing in sports. How could you possibly read their posts and think their arguments aren't being made in good faith, especially when they say "no female will ever be able to break these records", because their mask accidentally slipped off and they just admitted via Freudian slip that they still view trans women as being men?

If we're talking about trans women in women's sports, then I really don't have a choice except to use female to differentiate because I have no problems saying trans women are women. The issue is the physiological difference between males and females, which was the entire basis for creating women's sports in the first place. Somebody's gender expression doesn't automatically grant them access to sex segregated resources, and denying somebody access to those spaces does not mean you're denying their humanity or failing to recognize their gender expression. Sex and gender are different. So we need to differentiate when we're talking about sex versus when we're talking about gender if we're going to use a word like woman which is being applied to both simultaneously.

If I had said cis women instead, would anything about what you said change in your mind? Of course not. Because even though people say over and over again that sex and gender are different, people refuse to acknowledge that sex and gender are different when it comes to sports.

UnfairRepresent posted...

makes you look so dishonest

I find it funny how this is selectively applied to the people who have a pretty simple and common sense request to let trans women compete in women's sports, but an argument against that propped up on dubious scientific evidence and a very small handful of instances of trans women excelling in women's sports relative to the total number of competitions isn't viewed as dishonest? How very fair and unbiased of you

This is certainly a topic

So he proved cis men are stronger than trans women?

Stunning and brave

Let's see..

Dumb ideology
Dumb reason
Dumb plan
Dumb execution
Dumb result

Seems like a bright guy.

He only got in because he has a woman's name

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Literally victims if anything, they got brought here en masses by rich assholes chasing a fad then unceremoniously dumped and made a non-native pest :(

Whatever you think about equality in sports, TC is intentionally misgendering the person in the topic title. I'm surprised the mods haven't closed this already

indica posted...

Whatever you think about equality in sports, TC is intentionally misgendering the person in the topic title. I'm surprised the mods haven't closed this already

But Avi identifies as male...

Some people ITT are just too eager to call other posters transphobes.

*Spider-Man pointing at Spider-Man.jpg*

I liked it better when we just didn't care about women's sports at all.

I like women's volleyball for the tiny outfits they wear. Those birds are fit af

EDIT - Specifically beach volleyball. Not that indoor shit where they have on biker shorts or even pants. Blasphemy!

indica posted...

Whatever you think about equality in sports, TC is intentionally misgendering the person in the topic title. I'm surprised the mods haven't closed this already

How am I misgendering the person? It is LITERALLY the title of the article.

k1zzl3_82 posted...

How am I misgendering the person? It is LITERALLY the title of the article.

You know what you're doing >_>

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


the peer reviewed studies show that after like 12-16 months of HRT trans athletes have 0 advantage compared to cis women.

all this talk of "skeletons" and "muscles developed as a man" are bullshit

the truth is society actively trains women to be physically weak by scaring them into thinking that if they are strong no man would ever find them attractive. yet those strong girls at the gym are so obviously swimming in it.

NOM posted...

I like women's volleyball for the tiny outfits they wear. Those birds are fit af

EDIT - Specifically beach volleyball. Not that indoor shit where they have on biker shorts or even pants. Blasphemy!

You'd probably like the DOA volleyball game

indica posted...

You know what you're doing >_>

I don't think you do. I think you are scratching at the bit wanting to call me a transphobe rather than talk about the topic

Robot2600 posted...

the peer reviewed studies show that after like 12-16 months of HRT trans athletes have 0 advantage compared to cis women.

Press X to doubt

all this talk of "skeletons" and "muscles developed as a man" are bullshit

the truth is society actively trains women to be physically weak by scaring them into thinking that if they are strong no man would ever find them attractive. yet those strong girls at the gym are so obviously swimming in it.

Are you implying here that the reason women are around 40% weaker than men is because they're scared to be strong, because of sexism?

https://www.cces.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/pdf/transgenderwomenathletesandelitesport-ascientificreview-e-final.pdf

literally google "trans athletes have no advantage study finds"

Robot2600 posted...

the peer reviewed studies show that after like 12-16 months of HRT trans athletes have 0 advantage compared to cis women.

all this talk of "skeletons" and "muscles developed as a man" are bullshit

the truth is society actively trains women to be physically weak by scaring them into thinking that if they are strong no man would ever find them attractive. yet those strong girls at the gym are so obviously swimming in it.

Not sure if satire

like, are you fucking kidding me i linked to the fucking study can you even read

Robot2600 posted...

https://www.cces.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/pdf/transgenderwomenathletesandelitesport-ascientificreview-e-final.pdf

literally google "trans athletes have no advantage study finds"

One could read only the conclusion in the abstract and see that what it says and what you said are not even nearly the same thing

my bad u guys CANT read

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/9/0/AABHfBAAEayS.jpg

Robot2600 posted...

my bad u guys CANT read

I can read, but I wonder how well you are extrapolating from what you are reading.

There is no firm basis available in evidence to indicate that trans women have a consistent and measurable overall performance benefit after 12 months of testosterone suppression.

In other words, we have found a lack of positive evidence confirming the difference, which is very wildly not the same thing as saying that all the evidence shows that there is no difference

While an advantage in terms of Lean Body Mass (LBM), Cross Section Area (CSA) and strength may persist statistically after 12 months, there is no evidence that this translates to any performance advantage as compared to elite cis-women athletes of similar size and height.

More of the same but this time it admits an actual mechanism and basis to say that an advantage may exist

This is contrasted with other changes, such as hemoglobin (HG), which normalize within the cis women range within four months of starting testosterone suppression. For pre-suppression trans women it is currently unknown when during the first 12 months of suppression that any advantage may persist. The duration of any such advantage is likely highly dependent on the individual's pre-suppression LBM which, in turn varies, greatly and is highly impacted by societal factors and individual circumstance.

"Well gee it's complicated so we just don't know, but we know for sure that there's no advantage no take backsies." The Study.

There is a reason this review is...controversial, at best.

https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/transgender-women-athletes-and-elite-sport-misleading-at-best-intellectually-dishonest-at-worst/

Weird, in the topic about the rapist in Britain who claimed they identified as a woman mid trial and I said that it was ultimately unfair to transpeople to allow it and in specific situations it should be questioned, I was told I'm a transphobe.

Lot of people questioning whether this person is legitimate now though. Funny how the biggest defender of "Never ever question someone's identity" is conspicuously absent from this topic though.

The person in the article is a bigot and a scumbag, but people who claimed you can never question someone's identity, no matter how suspicious the circumstances, really brought this on themselves. I'm just surprised it took a weightlifter rather than a literal rapist to make it clear.

Yeah it's pretty well documented at this point that sufficient time on HRT significantly narrows the physical gap between trans and cis women. What's considered sufficient varies from person to person, and for many the changes can keep happening for 5+ years. The amount of people to come into these discussions without the most rudimentary understanding of the biological effects of HRT is pretty alarming

Either way that's the true area of nuance in this discussion imo; not whether or not trans women should be allowed to compete, but for how long prior to competing should they be medically transitioning

pinky0926 posted...

There is no firm basis available in evidence to indicate that trans women have a consistent and measurable overall performance benefit after 12 months of testosterone suppression.

In other words, we have found a lack of positive evidence confirming the difference, which is very wildly not the same thing as saying that all the evidence shows that there is no difference

Okay yeah I'll just go ahead and apply a tag to you so I know never to mistakenly take anything you say seriously.

TMOG posted...

Okay yeah I'll just go ahead and apply a tag to you so I know never to mistakenly take anything you say seriously.

"There is not firm evidence to support X" =/= "X does not exist"

Wild that we are at a point where that's a flagrant take

pinky0926 posted...

"There is not firm evidence to support X" =/= "X does not exist"

Wild that we are at a point where that's a flagrant take

"We didn't find anything at all to support this theory, but I guess that doesn't mean it's been proven wrong" is a really dumb thought process.

If the evidence to support something doesn't exist or is incredibly flimsy at best, then that doesn't mean "it just hasn't been proven wrong yet." It's not capable of proving itself right because reality is reality.

You're literally trying to force somebody to prove your own point for you even they've already done all the heavy lifting to support their own side of the argument.

I mean when you're using the religious "You can't prove God doesn't exist " style logic you know you're in trouble

Robot2600 posted...

my bad u guys CANT read

I was able to read this part of what you linked, why werent you?

Further research is needed to ensure a foundation in sound evidence, a foundation which does not currently exist. Specifically, additional research is needed with sample populations of trained trans women and trained cis women as a comparison group, as current studies tend to focus on sedentary populations.

TMOG posted...

"We didn't find anything at all to support this theory, but I guess that doesn't mean it's been proven wrong" is a really dumb thought process.

How about "we understand sound mechanistic principles that support this hypothesis, but a lack of good dataset of elite trans athletes pre/post transition", because that's actually what's going on here.

The burden of proof is on the other foot. It is way stranger to suggest that a year of HRT erases decades of androgenisation.

The problem is that regulations and restrictions on trans athletes are being put in place based on findings with inconclusive evidence. Why is it okay to draw conclusions that enact widespread reactionary policies, but not those that say "let's stay the course until more data is present"?

Gwynevere posted...

The problem is that regulations and restrictions on trans athletes are being put in place based on findings with inconclusive evidence. Why is it okay to draw conclusions that enact widespread reactionary policies, but not those that say "let's stay the course until more data is present"?

Yeah. Essentially this entire problem boils down to "should you exclude before evidence, or include before evidence". If you start every argument on this topic with that question it goes a long way to show where your principles lie on this topic.

I agree with your previous post. But figuring out where to drop the pin in terms of time on HRT is tricky, thats all.

Let's see how homie does after a few years of hormone replacement.

Gwynevere posted...

Why is it okay to draw conclusions that enact widespread reactionary policies, but not those that say "let's stay the course until more data is present"?

Staying the course until we have more data would be continuing to segregate sports by sex, not gender, as the whole point of womens leagues to begin with was to allow female athletes to compete without being dominated by male athletes.

Desegregation of sports is needed and will stop all debates

Priere posted...

Desegregation of sports is needed and will stop all debates

people drive me mad when they say this

The "male" league is desegregated.

Women are allowed to play in the NFL or NBA or MLB. It's just that the best female WNBA player in the world is signifcantly worse than the weakest male NBA player.

This is why they made a female league in the first place.

Saying "I want to desegregate all sports" it's literally the same as saying "I want to end all womens sports leagues and just have men in sports."

If there was a girl who could run as fast as Usian Bolt that chick would be a billionaire inside a year from all the sponsorships she'd get and movies and modeling contracts.

Sports are so stupid

UnfairRepresent posted...

Women are allowed to play in the NFL or NBA or MLB.

Im pretty sure the NHL too.

UR has a rather iffy support of trans people, and will easily trot out "but sportsmanship. but male bodies" in these topics and shame you if you point no one mad cares about women's sports until it's feigning concern for trans women ruining the fairness.

hockeybub89 posted...

if you point no one mad cares about women's sports until it's feigning concern for trans women ruining the fairness.

Well that is an illogical and all around bad argument so you should probably just stop using it.

hockeybub89 posted...

UR has a rather iffy support of trans people, and will easily trot out "but sportsmanship. but male bodies" in these topics

It's almost like that's what the topic is about or something.

and shame you if you point no one mad cares about women's sports until it's feigning concern for trans women ruining the fairness.

Because it's a fucking dumb point to make

I'm not a fan of the "You don't like womens sports so you can't care about this!" argument, it seems dumb to me.

I like UFC (womens and mens) so am I allowed to care about that but not womens racing or volleyball?

If the WNBA annouced that now all games would have 17 balls on the court at the same time are only WNBA fans allowed to comment on it?

It just seems like a lazy evasion to me.

Do you have to love Twitter to comment on the Blue checkmark scheme?

It's just basically saying "I'm too immature to have this conversation so instead I just want to say complete nonsense and derail the adults."

I don't get how you can't see the parallel between that and talking to religious nuts. It's literally the same fallacy.

I mean according to you I'm allowed to comment on trans athletes in MMA since I'm a fan but I'm not to comment on soccer.... That doesn't make sense. You know that doesn't make sense.

Your point has to be that the statement is wrong, not speculation about the person saying it.

"The house is on fire! You need to call the 9/11 to get the firefighters to put out the fire."
"You only want to put out that fire because you're secretly a China shill! You don't really care about that house, it's not your house, you didn't even know it existed until it was set on fire."
You know how bonkers that logic is... Either the house is on fire or it's not. Once that's established everything else is clear.

NO. There should only be 1 league where the best of the best are allowed to rise to the top. If you dont make the cut, then it sucks to suck.