Pervert alert: Kansas GOP overrides Governor's veto, allowing child genital inspections for sports

[DaleCooper]

maybe I'm missing something but I've looked over this bill repeatedly and can't find anything like what you describe.
http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/hb2238_enrolled.pdf

That's because Ferguson97 lied by misrepresenting a topic.

https://www.kcur.org/news/2023-04-05/kansas-lawmakers-override-democratic-governors-veto-enacting-ban-on-transgender-athletes

There's no indication that this would happen.

Women's sports should be for biological females.  Period.

If we are going by that then what happens when a person born intersex wants to play a sport?

Deal with that when it happens.  Trans women are biological males and should not be competing in women's sports, period. 

What about states with 0 transwomen athletes wanting to compete? Can we "deal with that when it happens" there too?

Wouldn't it be a lot more cruel to force transgender athletes to leave the sport after they attempt to join? This seems like a problem that should be dealt with ahead of time. 

[DaleCooper]

maybe I'm missing something but I've looked over this bill repeatedly and can't find anything like what you describe.
http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/hb2238_enrolled.pdf

That's because Ferguson97 lied by misrepresenting a topic.

https://www.kcur.org/news/2023-04-05/kansas-lawmakers-override-democratic-governors-veto-enacting-ban-on-transgender-athletes

There's no indication that this would happen.

Women's sports should be for biological females.  Period.

If we are going by that then what happens when a person born intersex wants to play a sport?

Deal with that when it happens.  Trans women are biological males and should not be competing in women's sports, period. 

What about states with 0 transwomen athletes wanting to compete? Can we "deal with that when it happens" there too?

Wouldn't it be a lot more cruel to force transgender athletes to leave the sport after they attempt to join? This seems like a problem that should be dealt with ahead of time. 

Personally, I would allow trans athletes in high school and only disallow them for Olympics and NCAA Division I championships, but it's a pretty low salience issue when red states are trying (and succeeding) to ban teenagers from being trans altogether.

I don't think trans athletes are a good hill for the Democratic Party to die on, but it would be an honor to die on a hill of trans existence.

College and pro athletes were all high school athletes at some point in time. I don't see how it's fair to take that away from the younger athletes but not the older ones. The implication is that the pro athletes are more important, which is a bit insulting. The real issue here is that young women and girls are entitled to fair athletic competition.

As for there being zero trans athletes in some states, there will be some eventually. It's pretty obvious that this is where the culture is headed, so why not set the boundary now?

[DaleCooper]

maybe I'm missing something but I've looked over this bill repeatedly and can't find anything like what you describe.
http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/documents/hb2238_enrolled.pdf

That's because Ferguson97 lied by misrepresenting a topic.

https://www.kcur.org/news/2023-04-05/kansas-lawmakers-override-democratic-governors-veto-enacting-ban-on-transgender-athletes

There's no indication that this would happen.

Women's sports should be for biological females.  Period.

If we are going by that then what happens when a person born intersex wants to play a sport?

Deal with that when it happens.  Trans women are biological males and should not be competing in women's sports, period. 

What about states with 0 transwomen athletes wanting to compete? Can we "deal with that when it happens" there too?

Wouldn't it be a lot more cruel to force transgender athletes to leave the sport after they attempt to join? This seems like a problem that should be dealt with ahead of time. 

Personally, I would allow trans athletes in high school and only disallow them for Olympics and NCAA Division I championships, but it's a pretty low salience issue when red states are trying (and succeeding) to ban teenagers from being trans altogether.

I don't think trans athletes are a good hill for the Democratic Party to die on, but it would be an honor to die on a hill of trans existence.

College and pro athletes were all high school athletes at some point in time. I don't see how it's fair to take that away from the younger athletes but not the older ones. The implication is that the pro athletes are more important, which is a bit insulting. The real issue here is that young women and girls are entitled to fair athletic competition.

As for there being zero trans athletes in some states, there will be some eventually. It's pretty obvious that this is where the culture is headed, so why not set the boundary now?

I am very comfortable saying that Olympics and NCAA national championships are more important than random high school matches. Sounds like a bunch of "woke" silliness to say otherwise.

Well, we definitely disagree on that. Girls shouldn't have to accept that they don't get a fair game just because they aren't in the NCAA. 

[DaleCooper]

There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that trans women have an advantage over cis women in sports, so the entire premise that conservatives are pretending to believe in is faulty.

If you disagree with that, take it up with the Scientific American.

The notion of transgender girls having an unfair advantage comes from the idea that testosterone causes physical changes such as an increase in muscle mass. But transgender girls are not the only girls with high testosterone levels. An estimated 10 percent of women have polycystic ovarian syndrome, which results in elevated testosterone levels. They are not banned from female sports. Transgender girls on puberty blockers, on the other hand, have negligible testosterone levels. Yet these state bills would force them to play with the boys. Plus, the athletic advantage conferred by testosterone is equivocal. As Katrina Karkazis, a senior visiting fellow and expert on testosterone and bioethics at Yale University explains, “Studies of testosterone levels in athletes do not show any clear, consistent relationship between testosterone and athletic performance. Sometimes testosterone is associated with better performance, but other studies show weak links or no links. And yet others show testosterone is associated with worse performance.” The bills’ premises lack scientific validity.

I will gladly take it up with Scientific American. If they're too stupid to know that males are stronger than females then that'll be a pretty easy argument for me to win. I may not be as articulate or educated as them, but this is basic enough that even an idiot from Nebraska like me can figure it. They can fall back to the technicality that a male castrated in early childhood won't have a strength advantage, but that's a totally separate argument. If you don't believe that men (including adolescent boys) have an unfair strength advantage over women then you are every bit as ridiculous as the creationist who believes that dinosaurs were on Noah's Ark.

[DaleCooper]

Why can’t sports just be done based on an assessed skill test? That is true meritocracy.
If some trans athlete can kick a soccer ball harder than Little Timmy, well then Little Timmy should go f**k himself and then learn to kick better.

Seriously, why not has skill classes in the same way wrestling has “weight classes”? If it’s a sport where it’s “not that serious”, then clearly it’s not serious enough to care about gender separated teams, right?

The issue to parents concerned about this type of thing is whether little Timmy has transitioned into little Tanya and is now kicking the ball harder then most or all of his cis female opponents, because youth athletics are almost entirely separated by gender with male and female teams for each sport.

Exactly! Ban gender segregated sports. From now on sports teams should be made based on skill level which can include strength tests. It’s just common sense.

Much much easier said than done. The problem is that will basically de facto repeal Title IX. While exceptions certainly exist, a pure physical meritocracy would effectively decimate female athletics. That not only robs young women and girls of the bonding and enjoyment Sports brings, but also potential Athletics scholarships as well.

Not true. You can have lower strength level sports still in this system. Females will just usually be in those. As for “bonding and enjoyment” they should be able to bond with their female AND male peers, the way I see it reducing the gender divisions in society is only a good thing given how polarized we are becoming in our generations.

The only point you are correct on is athletic scholarships…and yes girls will be at a disadvantage. Tough luck. Boys who want to get beauty pageant scholarships are also out of luck, and I would argue the entire modern school system is actually giving slight advantages to females for a variety of reasons (mainly boys develop mentally later which is a HUGE disadvantage) Math scholarships are rigged against those who have learning disabilities, that’s life.

Even the unimpressive male athletes will out-perform the best girls. I don't know if you're refusing to bite that bullet or if you're out of touch enough to not understand this. Regardless, what you are saying is that girls are not entitled to fair competition. There is no boy beyond maybe 6th or 7th grade with any athletic potential that would lose to his female peers.

[DaleCooper]

Why can’t sports just be done based on an assessed skill test? That is true meritocracy.
If some trans athlete can kick a soccer ball harder than Little Timmy, well then Little Timmy should go f**k himself and then learn to kick better.

Seriously, why not has skill classes in the same way wrestling has “weight classes”? If it’s a sport where it’s “not that serious”, then clearly it’s not serious enough to care about gender separated teams, right?

The issue to parents concerned about this type of thing is whether little Timmy has transitioned into little Tanya and is now kicking the ball harder then most or all of his cis female opponents, because youth athletics are almost entirely separated by gender with male and female teams for each sport.

Exactly! Ban gender segregated sports. From now on sports teams should be made based on skill level which can include strength tests. It’s just common sense.

Much much easier said than done. The problem is that will basically de facto repeal Title IX. While exceptions certainly exist, a pure physical meritocracy would effectively decimate female athletics. That not only robs young women and girls of the bonding and enjoyment Sports brings, but also potential Athletics scholarships as well.

Not true. You can have lower strength level sports still in this system. Females will just usually be in those. As for “bonding and enjoyment” they should be able to bond with their female AND male peers, the way I see it reducing the gender divisions in society is only a good thing given how polarized we are becoming in our generations.

The only point you are correct on is athletic scholarships…and yes girls will be at a disadvantage. Tough luck. Boys who want to get beauty pageant scholarships are also out of luck, and I would argue the entire modern school system is actually giving slight advantages to females for a variety of reasons (mainly boys develop mentally later which is a HUGE disadvantage) Math scholarships are rigged against those who have learning disabilities, that’s life.

Even the unimpressive male athletes will out-perform the best girls. I don't know if you're refusing to bite that bullet or if you're out of touch enough to not understand this. Regardless, what you are saying is that girls are not entitled to fair competition. There is no boy beyond maybe 6th or 7th grade with any athletic potential that would lose to his female peers.

As I said, that’s why we have strength tests and skill classes. They won’t “outperform” because if they are biologically stronger enough for it to be unfair, that would be reflected in a test. This really isn’t a tough concept.

Even the most pathetic young man on the planet (picture Wil Wheaton from Star Trek) is going to outperform his female peers in the same strength class because his potential is way higher than theirs. After a couple months of practice, he's going to be way out of their league as far as strength goes. Yeah, I'm sure some random nerd from Algebra Club would get his ass kicked by the girl athletes, but if you put him on an athletic team and make him practice for a while, he wouldn't be outmatched by them for long. That's all besides the point because people who try out for sports are going to be somewhat athletic to begin with. A whole team made up of rejects from the boys basketball tryouts would beat the girls team. This isn't a tough concept for most people, but for Atlas it clearly is. It's very embarrassing.

[DaleCooper]

I already stated why the Scientific American article seems to be out of sync with "common sense." It's comparing transwomen athletes who didn't go through male puberty at all to ciswomen. It's believable at least that that subset of transwomen wouldn't have advantages.

Yes, and this is why I said they are misrepresenting the science. I don’t know what percentage of transgenders begin puberty blockers from age 10 (or whatever it would take to be effective), but Fergie is acting like it’s 100%. More quackery from the anti-science left!

Well I wouldn't go so far as to say they're "misrepresenting" the science. I wouldn't be surprised if a transwomen who had 0% of male puberty had no advantage over ciswomen athletes (I don't know though). I just don't think those transwomen are the ones driving the controversy. (And they're about to be way less common as the red states illegalize teenage transitions and detransition the ones who've already started.)

Well, the title of the article is Trans Girls Belong on Girls’ Sports Teams: There is no scientific case for excluding them. So it sounds like we agree that, at the very least, this headline is deliberately misleading.

Stuff like this is why I don't trust any of the mainstream "science" that is put forward about other issues like puberty blockers or detransitioners. If they're brazen enough to lie about something as obvious as this, how you possibly trust them on more important issues?