- Moderator
- #361
Offline
his take/mini rant was predicated on men being physically superior to women
there was no caveat (bc the caveats would upend his argument)
I'm lost here, what caveat are you referring to?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
his take/mini rant was predicated on men being physically superior to women
there was no caveat (bc the caveats would upend his argument)
You know that he didn't mean every man is physically more gifted than every woman.his take/mini rant was predicated on men being physically superior to women
there was no caveat (bc the caveats would upend his argument)
So, why should we care if one girl was born a boy? And I don't mean that in the literal sense. I mean if we don't make exceptions for others who can't compete for reasons that are out of their control, then why should we make exceptions for trans athletes?We also don't care if the reason one girl has greater talent is her well off parents hire the best trainers, sends her to camps etc. vs. the girl whose parents work two jobs and she's the oldest who takes care of her younger siblings so she barely has time to practice
so you're saying there is not a woman on this planet who is not faster and/or stronger than you
you could beat any woman in tennis, basketball, soccer, skiing, track & field, etc?
But those comparing professional women with the men on this board is just silly. That's not an apt comparison. Compare those same women with professional male athletes and get back to me. Compare male to female trans with other athletes their own age and level of skill and see what kind of difference that makes. I'm seeing several people here making false equivalencies and comparisons that really don't make much sense to me.
I don't see how it's false equivalence. The point is that it's not about your gender, it's about what physical advantages you were born with and how hard you work at your craft. At the upper levels of any sport there are people who just have greater physical talents and men will always have the advantage in any sport based on pure physical force. But, in the middle and lower levels, there likely isn't much difference in physical talent between men and women besides men just having a brute force advantage.
I mean, I recall watching a 12 year-old girl throw a softball 70 MPH. Imagine had she been allowed and trained to throw a baseball instead? I would bet she would have been just as good as any other 12 year-old boy pitching baseball.
On the other hand, my daughter who did not have those physical talents or drive to be great, had to try to hit that 70 MPH pitch and she had no chance at it. What's the difference if that 70 MPH pitch comes from a girl or a girl that was born a boy? I mean, maybe there is a difference, but I'm struggling to see it.
Flip that scenario and let all the boys try out for girls softball. What do you think the ratio would be of boys to girls on the softball team?I don't see how it's false equivalence. The point is that it's not about your gender, it's about what physical advantages you were born with and how hard you work at your craft. At the upper levels of any sport there are people who just have greater physical talents and men will always have the advantage in any sport based on pure physical force. But, in the middle and lower levels, there likely isn't much difference in physical talent between men and women besides men just having a brute force advantage.
I mean, I recall watching a 12 year-old girl throw a softball 70 MPH. Imagine had she been allowed and trained to throw a baseball instead? I would bet she would have been just as good as any other 12 year-old boy pitching baseball.
On the other hand, my daughter who did not have those physical talents or drive to be great, had to try to hit that 70 MPH pitch and she had no chance at it. What's the difference if that 70 MPH pitch comes from a girl or a girl that was born a boy? I mean, maybe there is a difference, but I'm struggling to see it.
I don't see how it's false equivalence. The point is that it's not about your gender, it's about what physical advantages you were born with and how hard you work at your craft. At the upper levels of any sport there are people who just have greater physical talents and men will always have the advantage in any sport based on pure physical force. But, in the middle and lower levels, there likely isn't much difference in physical talent between men and women besides men just having a brute force advantage.
I mean, I recall watching a 12 year-old girl throw a softball 70 MPH. Imagine had she been allowed and trained to throw a baseball instead? I would bet she would have been just as good as any other 12 year-old boy pitching baseball.
On the other hand, my daughter who did not have those physical talents or drive to be great, had to try to hit that 70 MPH pitch and she had no chance at it. What's the difference if that 70 MPH pitch comes from a girl or a girl that was born a boy? I mean, maybe there is a difference, but I'm struggling to see it.
maybe you don't understand science factsYou know that he didn't mean every man is physically more gifted than every woman.
This is not that hard... biological males are physically different because they went though a testosterone driven puberty and developed differently... This is science fact... regardless of how you mentally identify... there will nearly always be an unfair advantage in favor of a biological male... ignoring this fact is insane, and unfair to biological females wanting to compete in sports.
I think the difference is there are going to be lots and lots of boys that throw 70, but only a handful of girls. So if it doesn't matter if its a boy or a girl that throws that hard imagine a coed league where your daughter is facing that velocity nearly every at bat and not just when she faced the Best Player in the League. It's not the outliers, its the rest of the field that's at issue.
I think a good question also to ask about professional competition is what permanent advantages are gained in the developmental stages while being a biological male and what advantages, such as bone density & reflexes are things that cannot be reversed with any amount of therapy?I would argue that the difference would be significant enough at the mid and lower levels. Maybe not as apparent because I suspect people pay less attention to those levels. But it's there. And for someone who is already skilled making the transition will have the added advantage of being that much stronger physically than her peers, at least initially. I don't know if it should be 12 months or 24 months after, but even after all of the treatments there still is a small advantage, and maybe arguably skill can overcome that.
And this is coming from someone who is sympathetic to trans being able to fit in. I think it can work, but it's going to be a lot of trial and error before we settle on something that works for most everyone involved.
I do think expanding rosters could be a starting point. But every team is going to have to play by the same rules and agree on what's fair to everyone involved.