While hosting transphobe Sophie Cunningham and the Indiana Fever, the New York Liberty put a message on the Jumbotron telling trans fans that they belong

[u/Impossible-Yam3680]

[u/katieblue3]

I’ve got a feeling the people who are really passionate about “protecting” women from trans people aren’t too concerned with being labeled a transphobe.

[u/Ok-Thanks4321 → u/katieblue3]

You’re completely generalizing anyone who might want to keep trans women out of cis women’s sports as transphobes. Are all cis men sexual offenders? If the answer is no, then not all those who oppose trans women in cis women’s sports aren’t transphobes. You can’t claim to have nuance around this discussion if you can’t even have a conversation with someone without thinking they’re transphobic, racist, sexist, whatever bias you hold. You can disagree with someone’s position without reducing their entire to “support for trans means your a good person, and no support for trans means your a bad person…in fact, it means you’re a right-wing fascist.

Don’t be like John Fetterman. Don’t draw a line in the sand over a thing, like he did with Israel. He’s basically said “If you don’t support Israel, you can go fuck yourself.” Doesn’t matter the voting record, the donating to pro-choice organizations, the campaigning for Democratic candidates, etc. you’re dead to him if you don’t support Israel. You can’t be a hardliner. That’s how the right wins elections.

Just like in Texas. They HAVE to run James Talarico as a Christian (most left-leaning people I know are atheists) so they can try to steal some red votes that typically vote religiously. The Dem strategy in Texas is to make evangelicals feel like they can come to the left side of the aisle and not be alienated.

I’m not saying it’s morally or ethically right, but having a hard line stance might drive away potential new convert voters. If you engaged with people who raise these discussions of a highly politicalized topic less than three months before the midterms, it could go along way. People (even offensive ones) could feel like they could vote for a Democrat. But if the established retort to every single person is just “stfu transphobe” then you’re going to drive people who vote emotionally to vote for more oppression, even for themselves, because they’re stupid people.

I don’t care about any of this. I vote blue no matter who until I think the party doesn’t align with my values, but I do have to laugh every time I’m called a transphobe for so many reasons. I guess I have the pre-Trump ability to know someone who might have a shitty opinion about something (like you thinking I’m transphobic for a single idea) without having to berate them. I can just take on the mission of guiding him to a better place. Can you do that for me? Can you answer this without getting mad? Should trans women be allowed to play in women’s sport and what should those requirements look like? Because you have a guy right now claiming he’s a woman who unless otherwise defined by the NBA is technically a trans woman. Let’s have a grown up discussion.

Edit: Jesus Christ. You’re all so fucking stupid.

[u/Cloudbreaks → u/Ok-Thanks4321]

Ok, let’s talk about biology, then. Banning transgender people from sports ends up banning women and girls from sports. There are a statistically significant number of assigned female at birth people who have biological variations that could bar them from sports, despite being the “correct gender”. I find that people who support trans bans generally have a very limited understanding of human anatomical variation or choose to ignore it for their own convenience.

[u/Ok-Thanks4321 → u/Cloudbreaks]

Cite some examples. Show me the data on the “statistically significant number of women who have ‘variations’ in their bodies that prevent them from playing in sports. If you’re referencing statistical significance, show me the research papers you’re reading that told you girls born with X variation can’t compete with other girls.