you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There seems to be two positions coming from the transactivists side: one that says suppressing testosterone levels for a certain period of time is enough to erase any athletic advantage they have over females, and other that says lowering testosterone is not needed because males don't have any athletic advantage. The first position seems to be used to gain the favour of the general public. However, as trans activists in general support self-ID, it seems the second position is the ultimate aim, which it would reduce the first position as a stepping-stone.

Yes, it appears that the second position is the goal. Over the weekend, CNN gave a platform for Veronica Ivy/Rachel McKinnon to argue that testosterone suppression requirements are a human rights violation as well as unnecessary coz testosterone and going through male puberty give males absolutely no advantages in sports.

The CNN host asked, “Veronica, what’s your answer to the Connecticut moms who say ‘my daughter can’t compete, my kids have no shot, they can’t compete with these trans female [sic] athletes?’” And Ivy responded, “It’s not because they’re trans that these cis athletes couldn’t win, it’s that they weren’t fast enough.”

(BTW, CT allows boys to compete in girls school sports without any T suppression; and the two trans athletes in the CT case were not on any kind of hormone treatment during the time they competed in girls' sports. However, in the federal lawsuit the two trans athletes said they have since started some kind of hormone treatment. This was immaterial to the case coz by then they'd finished HS. Moreover, in making the disclosure, their lawyer slipped up, implying that being on T suppression should make males eligible for female sports when all along those on the side of the CT trans athletes have said that male T levels & male puberty don't give them any benefits to begin with.)

Meanwhile, Ivy, who is 38 and is still officially a college professor, has recently gone on a Twitter tirade slagging off Selina Soule, one of the teenage female athletes who has sued in the CT case, disparaging her as "slow" and "sore loser" & laughing at her for not making the track team in college. (My hunch is that Soule's sports performance & mental wellbeing have probably been adversely affected by all the constant abuse she's gotten over the past couple of years. Being called a bigot, Nazi & hater is not good for anyone, nor are all the rape, death & battery threats girls & women who speak out publicly get.)

[–]valleyoftherogue 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This man is full of it. No matter how good women are athletically, they can never compete with out-of-shape, over-the-hill men in dresses like he is. That is because women are built completely different from men. Testosterone levels don't mean squat. You have size, weight, done density, heart size, hemoglobin differences, center of gravity differences, pelvic size and shape differences, leg bone differences and literally thousands and thousands of other physical differences between the sexes. Feminists knew this DECADES ago that women could never bridge the gap with men in athletic competition because of the biological realities of the two sexes. That is why separate categories based on sex were created, to give women a chance at fair competition.