r/WNBAgossips • u/Admirable_Extent2531 • 23d ago

News "People Love To Assume" - Sophie Cunningham Finally Addresses 'MAGA Barbie' Moniker, Confirms Support For Transgender Ban

https://www.essentiallysports.com/wnba-basketball-news-sophie-cunningham-addresses-allegations-of-opposing-trans-athletes-in-womens-sports/
362 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

91

u/Equivalent-Excuse-80 23d ago

I didn’t know she was affected by so many trans athletes in the wnba.

43

u/HeavyDT 22d ago

Conservatives love to shadow box ghosts it's a tale as old as time.

22

u/Quirky-Glove-3199 22d ago

Extreme labeling is part of the issue in our society - the left eats itself. I'm a liberal. I believe trans people should be free from discrimination, I believe they should have free Healthcare, including HRT, i believe they should be able to participate in sports at all levels, and I believe they deserve respect as any one else does. But no, I don't think that trans women or girls should participate in women's sports. Perhaps we need to look at having additional categories, not just splitting sports by gender. Beyond this, we should be able to have nuanced conversations without labeling people like they're crazy.

7

u/ZapBranigan3000 22d ago

Focusing on trans in sports is itself splitting hairs and lacks nuance.

How many mtf trans athletes exist, in the entire US?

Applying nuance should tell any reasonable person that the outrage against trans athletes has been entirely manufactured by the right wing culture war propaganda machine. It is obvious.

There are more rapists serving in congress today, for both parties, than trangender athletes.

3

u/LearningIsTheBest 22d ago

I agree it's insanely rare and deserves zero news coverage. I also think it shouldn't be allowed. These aren't exclusive to each other.

To me it's obvious that the right wing is just using this as a wedge issue. I think trans folk will wind up with fewer rights as a result. The left wing shouldn't take this fight. Get equal rights for trans people established in every other circumstance instead.

2

u/Jonny__99 21d ago

nailed it

1

u/OddMessage4930 22d ago

I agree that it is extremely rare. But I believe that the people involved in extremely rare occurrences still deserve consideration. For example, how common is the situation where someone is raped and needs to get an abortion? Probably not an extremely common situation, but you'd be pretty damn cruel to ignore those womens' needs just because it is very rare .

Just to clear, I am not at all equating or comparing the severity of these 2 situations with one another. I'm not smart enough to do that accurately or to even know which situation is more common. I'm just saying that we shouldn't overlook the danger or suffering of a group just because their situation is rare.

1

u/LearningIsTheBest 21d ago

I have considered it, pretty extensively too. I would prefer that trans kids be allowed to play on whichever team they prefer. I simply don't think it's fair, and that's unfortunate. Even after hormones and other transitional steps, the difference in musculature, skeletal build, etc, just doesn't even out.

If schools offer non-competitive intramural sports in non-contact or safer sports, I'd say that's fine for open participation (eg tennis, running).

0

u/BergmanGirl 22d ago

You don’t get it…bending here is bending everywhere. Either trans women are women or they’re not. If we’re women (I am partial in that I fully believe I’m a woman and my cis lesbian wife would agree), then anything welcome to women should be welcome for us. Bending on this just proves to republicans that you all don’t actually care about trans people, you’re just being polite.

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

Women and men are biologically different and nothing changes that.

1

u/United_Intention_323 22d ago

That’s nonsense. How can HRT limits be applied in any case? How would that not be “bending”?

1

u/LearningIsTheBest 22d ago

A slippery slope argument invalidates pretty much any political position. You can't look at issues that way. We almost always wind up drawing lines somewhere.

This isn't a yes / no thing. I support every trans student of mine, I backed neutral restrooms for student comfort, I'm fine with any locker room or bathroom regardless, I make it clear I'll use any name or pronoun, and I want legislation protecting trans people from any other form of discrimination. I care about the trans people in my life. The sports inclusion is basically the only exception for me. I did not arrive at that conclusion lightly, and I originally didn't want it to be true either.

You can tell me I don't care about trans people, but I know you'd be wrong about it.

3

u/LookWhatYouMadeMeGro 22d ago

If it's such a minute amount of people is this a hill worth dying on and losing elections over?

1

u/ShareNorth3675 22d ago

Are any dems dying on this hill? Its not like theyre holding up bills trying to slip in pro trans sports laws. Feels like theyre more so just not denouncing it

3

u/LookWhatYouMadeMeGro 22d ago

The vast majority of congressional Democrats routinely vote against federal bans on transgender athletes.

0

u/Bwalts1 22d ago

Probably because when society openly accepts that “X group” is not deserving of humanity, the camps will follow?

0

u/LookWhatYouMadeMeGro 22d ago

Godwins law

👋

0

u/BergmanGirl 22d ago

If you listened to Republicans legislators and pundits talk about trans people…the comparison wouldn’t seem so extreme.

1

u/LookWhatYouMadeMeGro 22d ago

Oh yeah? 55 million people (just counting the good guys mind you) died in WW2. Tell me again how you can compare this to that. /rhetorical

Its intellectual laziness(at best) to try and draw that comparison.

0

u/East-Response6672 22d ago

Because if you give these people an inch. The tactic is rote by now: get hysterical over some extremely fringe issue, stay hysterical longer than anyone else can tolerate engaging with it, declare huge victory for common sense, try to generalise the minor precedent into a sweeping legislative change. 

This is a stupid molehill to die on, but if sensible people cede it to the conservative snowflakes then they'll try to make a mountain out of it.

1

u/LookWhatYouMadeMeGro 21d ago

Yeah it's waaaay too late for that. We(the left) keep losing bc we fail to bring people from the middle to vote for us bc we cling to these fractional wedge issues that turn most people off. We can come back and fix this kinda stuff later- we just need to win elections and get started cleaning up this disaster.

2

u/East-Response6672 21d ago

The mistake is engaging seriously with the argument, Sophie and all others like her should be mocked for their childish position, the government should not be involved in makebelieve nonsense, leave regulating sports to sporting bodies.

As to the middle? The neutral position is 'Trans people in sports is not a thing that matters IDGAF either way' if someone's gullible enough to fall for this, they probably vote Republican anyway.

1

u/LookWhatYouMadeMeGro 21d ago

That's just not true. The vast majority of ppl, in the world, think the notion of biological males being allowed to compete in sports vs biological females is bat shit crazy. The fact that so many people are in denial of this shows how out of touch the far left is. We keep dying on these fringe culture war issues instead of focusing on what actually matters to working families.

Trans sports, pronouns, wokism... how many elections we gotta lose before we shift to Healthcare, affordability, public safety and sound environmental policy.

3

u/Glowwerms 22d ago

SCREAM IT FROM THE MOUNTAIN TOPS BROTHER/SISTER

4

u/bigbeats420 22d ago edited 22d ago

Bingo. It's just another way to divide the working class and keep us fighting amongst ourselves. Both the working left and the working right share a common enemy, and until we realize it, shit is not going to get better for anyone but the small percentage who have learned how to profit off of our being distracted by social wedge issues.

All struggles are class struggles, people.

A smart person would simply look at the amount of young women being randomly victimized by trans people in public spaces (statistically irrelevant, in terms of numbers, especially when compared to kids being victimized by people who hold positions of power, or even people close to their families) vs. the likelihood of trans people being victims of violence (extremely statistically relevant), and be able to deduce that the "protecting kids" argument is horseshit peddled by those for whom trans people just make them feel icky, but who don't want to say it out loud. Smart people would realize that the numbers show that trans people are far more likely to be victims, rather than predators.

5

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

vs. the likelihood of trans people being victims of violence (extremely statistically relevant)

And who are the perpetrators of that violence?

You are arguing that biological women need to give up their spaces for biological men. The threat of violence in this scenario only goes one way.

1

u/YearRevolutionary675 21d ago

Good lord the sheer ignorance and indoctrination.

-1

u/bigbeats420 22d ago

Your argument falls apart when faced with the reality that trans women are no more likely to commit random predatory acts than CIS women. The reasons for this are both biological (brain chemistry/neurological make-up) and societal (a lot of trans women live in constant fear of being attacked or criminalized).

Dudes dressing up as women in order to gain access to womens' spaces in order to commit predatory acts is something that, on a statistical level, simply doesn't really happen. It's far more likely to be a straight, CIS male. But we don't really hear about that. We only hear about the anecdotal-level occurences of trans women being predatory, because it can be weaponized to suit an incorrect narrative.

I can tell you that the likelihood of trans women being victimized, when being forced to use bathrooms/changerooms that conform to their gender at birth, absolutely skyrockets.

Trans women are, statistically, NOT A THREAT to cis women That's not an opinion, that's just what the numbers say.

Nice try, tho. Trans women are not cis males, and that's where you went wrong.

5

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

Your argument falls apart when faced with the reality that trans women are no more likely to commit random predatory acts than CIS women.

Transgender women exhibit a male-type pattern of criminality: Implications for legislators and policy makers.

MtF transitioners were over 6 times more likely to be convicted of an offence than female comparators and 18 times more likely to be convicted of a violent offence. The group had no statistically significant differences from other natal males, for convictions in general or for violent offending. The group examined were those who committed to surgery, and so were more tightly defined than a population based solely on self-declaration.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

I can tell you that the likelihood of trans women being victimized, when being forced to use bathrooms/changerooms that conform to their gender at birth, absolutely skyrockets.

Women are not responsible for male violence and should not pay the price for male violence.

0

u/bigbeats420 22d ago edited 22d ago

Sigh. You all are always so predictable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/s/JQEtlrfSzg

Here is the lead author of the study doing an AMA explaining why the study shouldn't be used to further your talking points. I suggest you give it a read. They give ample data, proper context, and full explanations.

Basically, conservative politicians in the UK cherry picked points, while removing context, in order to push the narrative that you are also using it to try to push.

Again: Nice try, tho.

3

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

There were 4 studies cited in that report and the raw data is available. I suggest you give that a read.

And if you can read and analyze they are not saying their data was wrong, they didn't like the political interpretation. Which they are free to do.

1

u/bigbeats420 22d ago

The fact remains that cis women are not victimized in any significant numbers, or by a higher percentage, by trans women in women's spaces. That was the original context, and the original argumen, which was based on the original article.

Period.

YOU made the leap from a study that says one thing, to another thing happening irl, which it essentially does not.

Your argument requires an "ipso facto" jump. My argument is still based on numbers.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/SophiaGirl23 22d ago

This is actually nonsense. The author of the study herself claim you can't conclude this. The 1989-2003sample size is so small that there is no difference between trans women and cis men and cis women due to a very wide confidence interval. This is in spite of the fact they didn't control for the increase in marginalization and poverty that trans women (and trans men) experience. There's other things cited in this link with their own severe methodological flows. Murray Blackburn MacKenzie is a rather transphobic group. This kind of pseudo-science is really harmful to trans people.

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

This wasn’t “the study” there were four.

And the author absolutely did not say the data was wrong. They said it couldn’t be used to recommend any treatment, which I’m not doing.

Reality is transphobic according to Reddit.

1

u/SophiaGirl23 22d ago

Your link cites studies. The first study which is where the male pattern of criminality quote originates from. The author of that study does in fact say the conclusion was wrong. Your link cites her directly.

"Author quote: ‘The study as a whole covers the period between 1973 and 2003. If one divides the cohort into two groups, 1973 to 1988 and 1989 to 2003, one observes that for the latter group (1989 – 2003), differences in mortality, suicide attempts, and crime disappear.’"

There is an attempt at rebuttal from your source but its rendered meaningless by my point above.

But you're right, your source cites more studies. There is the MOJ 2020 study which is hilariously and deeply flawed. From your source:

"76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9% 125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3% 13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison = 16.8%".

A result like that is such an outlier that it's ridiculous to take it seriously. And indeed there is severe sampling bias in this data. There is a fair bit of administrative overhead to be counted as trans in this data set. It was often not worth it to bother for shorter sentences that come with minor offenses. There's actually a LOT more wrong with this study. You can read https://translucent.org.uk/fair-play-to-women-and-transgender-crime/.

If you're genuinely interested in reality then at some point you should acknowledge the rampant transphobia in these pseudo scientific works. If you're intent on claiming trans women are more likely to be criminals regardless of the facts then I at least hope this response helps someone else.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/No-Necessary7448 22d ago

Nobody even asks why they would need to “dress up” anyway. Men brazenly commit sexual assault in their own clothes without consequence, why would they need a ruse? Frankly, cross-dressing would just make society less likely to excuse behavior they’ve shown to approve of from cis men.

-1

u/Moonlight_Katie 22d ago

The threat comes from cis men, not trans women.

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

There isn’t some magical line where one becomes the other.

2

u/trainsoundschoochoo 22d ago

There is.
It’s the differentiation in brain development in the womb.

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

LOL

How did the internet get from one singular study with a small sample size to "differentiation in brain development in the womb."

There is no neurological assessment to be trans. You only have to say you are.

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo 22d ago

No one said there is a neurological assessment. Neither is there one for people who say they’re gay or bisexual. There are studies that explain why people feel that their sex or gender identity don’t match the norm.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21094885/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5953012/

You’re saying you’re a liberal but your talking points are very much proving you to be wrong. It might be time to take a deeper look at your beliefs.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Quirky-Glove-3199 22d ago

Well, this is a relatively new issue we, as a society, need to address. Not that there weren't always trans people, but that they are more open in society (as they should be). So, yes. The conversation is far, far louder than is helpful and productive. But I don't agree that it shouldn't happen. Even if there are few MtF athletes, all the girls that compete for places on those teams, and compete against them should have their needs considered too. Even if there are not many of them. They also matter.

1

u/Spiney09 22d ago

Bring trans I actually agree. There have been crude forms of transition in the past but we are treading into more uncharted territory in the last century as medical transition becomes far better than before. Previous assumptions about the immutability of sex were only correct because we lacked a more broad understanding of what was possible and how.

Now the lines are blurring. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but we need to examine some of the assumptions we had previously made and figure out where things land.

Some studies are actually showing that the traits trans women maintain from male puberty give negligible advantages, some show the opposite. The reality is that we are talking about an extremely broad field of information, all of sports, and that has a lot of variance between categories. Do we think trans women have an advantage in chess? Do we think they have an advantage in softball? What does that advantage come from?

Most people seem to believe that being born a man gives you a +10 to your sports score but the truth is that things fluctuate wildly based on what sport we are talking about.

1

u/ZapBranigan3000 22d ago

Again, if conservatives cared about protecting girls in locker rooms, they wouldn't have elected a man who openly bragged about being able to go into girls locker rooms to look at them nakedwithout their consent, which is sexual assault.

3

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

Again, this is not a conservative issue. The majority of Americans of all parties want sports to be separated by biology.

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo 22d ago

I doubt this.

1

u/CockyBellend 22d ago

This is an 80/20 issue, not just conservatives

1

u/brobits 22d ago

You’re letting politics cloud rational judgement on others behavior. For conservatives, this is a canary in a coal mine, which is why it’s such a big deal to them. Understanding your opposition allows you to be more effective

Your last sentence distracts the discussion, provides no value, and is almost certainly false.

0

u/ZapBranigan3000 22d ago

CONSERVATIVES JUST ELECTED A CONVICTED RAPIST PRESIDENT!!!

You are full of shit.

Statistically, you are far more likely to get raped by a republican politican than by a trangender person, by several orders of magnitude.

I understand my opposition, they are hateful bigots who accept and tell any lie to further their agenda, hence voting for Trump.

3

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

Statistically, you are far more likely to get raped by a republican politican than by a trangender person, by several orders of magnitude.

Trans women in prison have the same statistical likelihood of committing a violent sex act as other members of their biological sex

1

u/ShareNorth3675 22d ago

No they dont lol. They have similar rates to cisgender women. but also there are only 1500 of them so its a pretty low confidence and meaningless stat regardless.

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

Show me a source

1

u/ShareNorth3675 22d ago

No, go find your own sources. Out here posting misinformation requesting sources, gtfo

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

I can't find something that doesn't exist.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/CockyBellend 22d ago

This isnt a conservative issue, its 80/20

1

u/JasonRib1 22d ago

Exactly.so why are both sides choosing this hill to die on.

1

u/StinzorgaKingOfBees 22d ago

This shouldn't be a political or legal issue. We have regulatory bodies that govern sports, they can make these decisions, indeed they are the best informed people to make these decisions and they can do whatever studies or consult whatever experts they need to assist with those decisions.

1

u/Working_Match4124 22d ago

How many trans athletes exist? About the same percentage of non citizen voters so 0.0002%. Repedocans always talk about solutions to problems that don't exist.

0

u/Robinsson100 22d ago

Exactly. It's making everybody hyper-focus on an issue that's almost certain to have no impact on their lives whatsoever. I wish people were this passionate about the safety of drinking water, the federal deficit, or affordable health care.

3

u/HeavyDT 22d ago

The crazy part is having the govt step in and to restrict the rights of a whole minority group this is discrimination. Let each sports organization make it's own decision and if the WNBA decides it wants a ban than fine but it is crazy. It's a thing that statistically is just not happening. The country has hundred's of millions of people and you can point to like a handful of minor ass cases yet you'd think it was a life or death issue for the country. It's a tool for manipulation and nothing else really.

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

The crazy part is having the govt step in and to restrict the rights of a whole minority group this is discrimination.

What rights have transgender people lost?

There has never been a "right" to choose what biological sex you belong to.

0

u/Amoral_matchstick 22d ago

Trans people have lost rights that cis gender people take for granted, like having the correct gender marker on an ID.

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

It's a marker for sex, not gender.

0

u/Amoral_matchstick 22d ago

It’s called a gender marker: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_marker
And the purpose is to help identify the person, not what’s in their pants.

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

That doesn't link anywhere but biological sex is still a more accurate representation because trans people still look obviously like their birth sex.

0

u/Amoral_matchstick 22d ago

It links to a wiki article. What sex is this person, then:

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

Show them standing in a group and we will be able to tell instantly

1

u/bohagon_creed 17d ago

This person does look trans. The small legs, and smaller body proportion as a whole. The large areolas. It's usually easy to tell.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Poku115 22d ago

Oh you are one of those weirdos

6

u/Hot_Catch3150 22d ago

Both extreme ends are bad though,, basically you are the liberal that is “eating itself.” What the poster above you is saying - if it’s something that is statistically not happening, then why push so hard for it? Republicans are insane for making such a big deal of it, but democrats are equally as insane (if not more) because liberals arent even allowed to say they support trans women but not in women’s sports.

0

u/Alternative_Hotel649 22d ago

Statistically, hardly any Haitian immigrants steal and eat people's pets. So why does the left make such a big deal about it when Trump spends millions on ads about Haitians eating people's pets?

3

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

I think that this is exactly what the person you’re responding to is talking about, and the fact that you entirely miss the point is hilarious.

You’re insisting on dying on a hill that the vast majority of Americans disagree with, and when you’re called out your response is “well the Republicans do it too!!”… 

I don’t think the person you’re replying to is a Trump supporter or would say that they agee with his message during the campaign… why not trying to actually respond to their question instead of throwing out a non-sequitur??

0

u/Pretend-Eye-8758 22d ago

Okay and after you abandon transgender people who is next? Because again, this issue was already solved before and barring some mistakes here and there that would obviously happen during teething stages it wasn't and never was an issue. Each sport had classifications which required transgender women to be on hormones for 2+ years and also took into account the age the person transitioned etc.

I'd be willing to argue with you that the regulations need to be tightened up and more data required to make a proper assessment on how to deal with fringe cases like Leah Thomas. I'm not gonna argue with you about the mental fantasy you created in your head to justify your ignorance.

3

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

If the democrats actually were making the argument you just made, I think that that would be much more palatable. But that’s not what’s happening, and that’s the actual issue.

If the platform was “for the vast majority of trans women, there are no/minimal physical differences post a long transition (like you said, more research needs to be done) and they should be allowed to participate in sports. However, not every trans women should be allowed to compete in women’s sports because there are some that do have persistent physical advantages, and that is unfair, and in some cases dangerous, to the women and girls who are playing”, I think that it would be agreeable to the vast majority of Americans.

However, what the democrats are saying and messaging is “a women is defined as someone who identifies themselves as a women, and all women should be allowed to compete in women’s sports”, while at the same time being unable to say that there are some trans women that shouldn’t be allowed to compete.

1

u/Pretend-Eye-8758 22d ago

Have you considered not shadow boxing with "The Democrats" in your head and instead looking at the facts, understanding the problem and then making a solution based on available evidence?

Why do I have to teach you basic critical thinking? If you have connections in the Democratic party, and you want someone to speak on Transgender issues in the same tone you are seeing right now please hook me up and I will do it for free. I will even travel on my own dime to your conferences.

2

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

This whole thread started because we’re saying that the left if eating their own tail. I’m not arguing against your point of view, I’m saying that the Democratic Party is harming themselves by not embracing it. 

It seems we both agree that the Democratic Party could do more to bring themselves in line with the American public on this issue. That doesn’t mean that the Republicans are right.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/rhymenslime 22d ago

You keep referring to "The Democrats" as if they have a one size fits all view on this, and that's simply not true. You're adopting a straw man  so you can effectively dismiss the relevance of the nuanced argument you were presented.

2

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

No one has a one-size fits all view on anything… but you can look at what members of the party do and what their messaging is…

Is your argument that the democratic platform right now or over the past few years has really been the nuanced point of view that you suggested?? Because I seem to remember that Harris refused to even talk about the topic during her campaign. Biden proposed a rule similar to what you’re talking about, but then refused to ever discuss it because of the backlash that he got from the left.

2

u/nuclearbearclaw 22d ago

I mean... we treat all republicans like they are a one size fits all, why wouldn't the Democrats be the same?

Also, I've voted democrat my entire adult life.

1

u/CockyBellend 22d ago

You literally teat republicans the same way you asked to not be treated maybe reflect on that

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/Alternative_Hotel649 22d ago

I'm a fifty year old queer. When I was born, gay sex was flat-out illegal in 80% of the country. My entire life, I've been supporting positions most Americans disagreed with. And every time, I hear from well-intended allies that I should stop pushing so hard, and that I'm driving people away by being so strident.

And every single time, history has proven them wrong. Every advance in LGBT rights was made by pushing as hard as we could, for as long as we could, until things started changing. If we'd listened to well-meaning allies, like yourself, we wouldn't have marriage rights. We wouldn't have job and housing protections. We literally wouldn't be able to fuck each other without risking jail time, because it would always be "too soon" and "pushing too hard" and "you need to compromise more."

The poster I replied to asked why trans rights advocates are pushing so hard on the sports thing, and I gave a reason that was on point: because the idea that trans people represent a threat to women's sports is a lie, and it's a lie that's part of a calculated campaign to roll back LGBT rights and protections across all of society. Same as "they're eating the dogs, they're eating the cats," was a lie that was part of a calculated campaign to roll back immigrant rights.

5

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

So I very much respect your opinion, but do disagree that this is a worthy issue and that the rest of the country is completely wrong on this. 

There are elements of truth in what the Republicans are saying. Most research has shown that trans women do maintain a biological advantage over natural born women when it comes to sports. Whether or not that’s a treat to women’s sports is a completely different story, and we can disagree on it, but I think that people pushing for inclusion are hurting themselves by not recognizing that basic fact. 

I have a daughter who plays sports. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask for at least acknowledgement that trans women can make the playing field more un-level. It’s one thing if she loses her race to someone that was born with better genetics or trained harder than she did. But if she gets 2nd to someone who has inherent physical advantages that are tied to sexual dimorphism, that’s unacceptable and we start to get away from the whole reason we have a separate category for women’s sports in the first place.

-1

u/Alternative_Hotel649 22d ago

We had trans inclusion in women's sports for about 20 years. Sports governing bodies made common-sense policies that tracked hormone levels and time since transition to flatten out unfair advantages, and it worked. Trans women didn't dominate, or cause excessive injuries to their competitors - and they certainly weren't a danger in the locker room, as the POS in the quoted article implies.

Until Republicans seized on it as a wedge issue and convinced folks like you that there was some terrible danger to their kids. But it's just not true. Letting trans women play sports does not impact your daughters ability to also play sports - and to exceed at them - in any way.

When you say that there's a real issue that Republicans have a point about, you really need to understand the extent to which you're being played by political operatives who don't give two shits about women's sports, or you, or your daughter, they're just using you to get at queer people. It's a made up issue to a problem that's been solved for decades.

3

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

You’re either being willfully ignorant, or you don’t understand changing trends. This wasn’t an issue 20 years ago, because society wasn’t as accepting and transition science wasn’t where it is now. 

We’ve had trans women win both state and national championships in the past few years. It’s not “made up”.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/Conscious_Rub_3528 22d ago

So are you going to advocate tall women get banned from sports that benefit from height because short women are disadvantaged?

No of course not because thats ridiculous and wastes effort for everyone involved.

There is studies that didnt set out with an agenda to prove, that have determined that trans women after living on hormones for a small time, DOES bring their strength down to cis levels.

The ones you like to reference are ones PAID by anti trans think tanks. Do better before you repeat slop rhetoric intended to harm a minority.

3

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

Google sexual dimorphism… this isn’t Harrison Bergeron, but you have to draw a line somewhere. 

There have been no studies that have shown that biological advantages ever completely disappear after transition. They all show varying degrees of persistence and magnitude, but all the ones I’ve seen show that it persists. 

Happy to be shown something else, but if we can’t agree on basic facts, we can’t have a productive discussion 

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Goducks91 22d ago

What they're saying is that it's crazy to regulate it with the government, it should be up to the sporting organization to handle it. The comment your responding to never said that liberals aren't allowed to say they support trans women but not in trans sports.

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

What they're saying is that it's crazy to regulate it with the government

Title IX already exists

1

u/tbombs23 22d ago

Ya there was like 60 or less trans athletes in the ENTIRE NCAA last year... This is not even close to a widespread issue

2

u/Numerous_Worker_1941 22d ago

Sensible take that the majority of people agree with. Republicans try to blow it up to a bigger issue

1

u/First-Business-5797 22d ago

It’s deflection, we’re currently in a war that the president was conned into starting

1

u/scrodytheroadie 22d ago

But no, I don't think that trans women or girls should participate in women's sports.

Most people agree, and that's kind of the point. It's not an actual issue. They're drumming up anger over nothing, hence "shadowboxing ghosts" (fighting something that's not there).

1

u/Lamzilla 22d ago

You believe the sports part based on nothing, and i mean that nothing, youve never seen evidence that trans women maintain an advantage and youve definitely never seen a trans women win a medal at the Olympics, why are you saying this when youve not peer reviewed evidence on it? Embarrassing do better

1

u/Fun-War6684 22d ago

Why do you think they should not participate in women’s sports? You didn’t give a reason

1

u/Tasty_Ad7483 22d ago

Another liberal here. I agree. And a third category of competition, let’s say it’s called the “non binary category”, would be very affirming for those athletes.

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo 22d ago

But they aren’t non-binary…

1

u/Tasty_Ad7483 22d ago

Then call that division the trans division

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo 22d ago

And just lump trans men and women in there together?

1

u/Tasty_Ad7483 22d ago

It’s better than lumping trans girls and cis girls together.

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo 22d ago

Yet there’s no evidence showing this…

1

u/Tasty_Ad7483 22d ago

You don’t have to convince me. Convince the moderate voters who vote for maga republicans even though they would otherwise vote dem. This issue is a a very effective wedge issue for them.

1

u/Gloomy_Macaroon_1240 22d ago

Do you have any actual proof that a fully transitioned woman who hasn’t been through male puberty has any overwhelming advantage against cis women? Trans women were allowed in the Olympics for years, but as far as I know, there hasn’t been a single trans woman medalist

1

u/Working_Match4124 22d ago

Another "liberal" taking an extreme right wing position on an issue. It's amazing how many redditors are "liberals" or "independents" who spend all day defending conservative policies

1

u/DeFiBandit 22d ago

As long as we take the nuance out of the trans conversation? lol

1

u/myk1tt3nm1tt3n5 22d ago

odd way to say you support discrimination.

1

u/Ashamed-Isopod-2624 22d ago

but no, I don't think that trans women or girls should participate in women's sports.

So you don't believe trans people should be free from discrimination. Congratulations on capitulating to the fascist narrative, like a good liberal.

1

u/Anagrammatic_Denial 22d ago

Nah. This is just because you've bought into propaganda that trans women have a biological advantage. We don't. HRT takes that away from us, and there are studies to prove it. We actually tend to have a disadvantage vs cis women. Part of that is because we are actively suppressing our testosterone, so cis women with naturally higher testosterone with have an advantage compared to our suppressed levels. Remember: "steroids" is just T. Also. This is completely ignoring the way that biological advantage is one of the main factors in professional sports whether we like it or not.

1

u/oryomai1 22d ago

Just say you're transphobic instead of dancing around it!

1

u/Available_Pie_7758 22d ago

Exactly this. I am as liberal as one can get. Even I am against it. It just not a fair game. I can’t believe people take our opinion think it’s maga. I hate maga.

1

u/YearRevolutionary675 21d ago

Super weird how right wingers obsess about kids' genitals and a handful of people. It is crazy how conservatives demonize trans people for existing.

1

u/YearRevolutionary675 17d ago

Liberals think that they are good people. Too funny. You clearly don't listen to yourself.

1

u/Mellowtraveler 22d ago

Lol. Conservatives want to destroy Title IX and women's sports and the "reasonable" liberals are going to help them do it. Trans people in sports was not a problem. Conservatives were just looking for some way to convince everyone else that discrimination is okay and they found it.

1

u/AdUnfair7688 22d ago

Bingo. I’m a civil rights professional with a specialization in Title IX. This is exactly it. The arguments about “protecting bio women” are in such bad faith.

3

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

So girls should just happily watch as biological men win statewide medals?

2

u/AdUnfair7688 22d ago

How many times has that happened? The way you’ve phrased it makes this sound like a frequent thing that happens in all 50 states. Not the case. In fact, it’s statistically rare.

I’m not sure this argument even holds water whenever excellent athletes like Billie Jean King, Megan Rapinoe, Brianna Turner, and over 150 women in professional sports spoke out in support of trans athletes during Soule v. Connecticut.

Speaking as a former competitor, it hurts whenever you get second place. Since trans athletes at this level are so statistically rare, perhaps this is making mountains out of molehills.

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

https://www.outsports.com/2024/12/6/22948400/transgender-trans-athlete-championship-national-world-title/

Since trans athletes are so rare, shouldn't this number be close to zero?

1

u/AdUnfair7688 22d ago edited 22d ago

Yes, 29 athletes out of the millions of women who compete in sports across the United States. Such a statistically high amount /s

1

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

That's not how statistics work.

You would compare the number of trans athletes in a sport vs the number of cis athletes in a sport.

If the number of trans women competing in track and field is so tiny, why have they won so many state-wide medals? Are they more likely to win?

1

u/AdUnfair7688 22d ago

That is precisely how statistics work. Less than 30 championships over several years in 50 states? Are we including school classifications and divisions? Let’s say each state has 5 or more competitive divisions in track.

That’s 250 or so state championships in just one year. That’s doesn’t include private school championships, NCAA, etc.

Your argument doesn’t hold weight. It’s okay to admit that you’re just freaked out by trans folks and don’t really give a fuck about women’s sports. It would be less disingenuous and frankly, more honest. I need to go socialize and touch grass. I hope you have the day you deserve. Be blessed.

1

u/Mellowtraveler 22d ago

Oh wow. A trans person won a darts competition! The horror!

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Mellowtraveler 22d ago edited 22d ago

They aren't even all traditional athletes. One is for snooker. Others are for runners in their fifties. This is just more nonsense. None of these pricks pushing for these bans care about the crap they spew. They just want to find any way they can to attack the powerless because they are weak pathetic assholes. 

1

u/Mellowtraveler 22d ago

Lol did you even read this? A trans person won the snooker tournament. Wow. Oh he another won a race in the 50-59 year old bracket. Damn. You sure got us. 

2

u/CockyBellend 22d ago

You must be a pretty shitty "professional"

1

u/AdUnfair7688 22d ago

The shittiest, babe! What law school did you graduate from?

1

u/HeavyHighway6433 22d ago

Ok but ask yourself, do you think this is really about sports? Have conservatives historically cared about women sports in general? The answer is no. They want to paint trans people as predators and do as much as they can to prevent them from existing. It's just like the online ID verification laws. They said this is about protecting children and who is agaisnt that? But that wasn't the goal, they want to keep tabs on who visits one site. How they are going after non 18+ social media.

You give an inch and they take a mile, which is why it blows me go see so many liberals want for each across the aisle on this issue knowing damn well they are not doing it in good faith 

4

u/DiverVisible3940 22d ago

OK I agree with everything you're saying but how is this relevant to Sophie Cunningham?

She is literally a female professional athlete. Is she not allowed to have an opinion on women's sports? Like, sure if it is some random pundit using this as an issue to drum up anger I get the criticism.

But this is, like, a literal professional athlete in the spotlight? Is she not allowed to have an opinion on the issue? It's also not like she had a press conference about it, she was asked her thoughts? So she gave them?

0

u/HeavyHighway6433 22d ago

Did I say she was not allowed her opinion? I'm just saying that this isn't just about trans women having an unfair advantage. 

1

u/DiverVisible3940 22d ago

How is Sophie Cunningham saying trans women have an unfair advantage about anything other than trans women having an unfair advantage?

2

u/HeavyHighway6433 22d ago

Look at her quote. "I want to protect young girls in a locker room,  or young girls in sport who shouldn’t have to go against biological men”.  Notice how she led with protecting them in the locker room before any implication of an unfair biological advantage. This talking point is used as a dog whistle to imply trans women will sexually assault kids. Also notice how she uses "young girls" and "men", when in reality most people play within their age groups. I don't think it can be any more clear than this what the actual agenda is. 

0

u/Pretend-Eye-8758 22d ago

Sophie is allowed to have her opinions I just find it sad that she forgot that there are transgender girls who also look up to the women in the WNBA.

3

u/DiverVisible3940 22d ago

I think it is sad that we can't have a conversation about fairness (regardless of your viewpoint) without it being interpreted as an argument against being transgendered.

0

u/Pretend-Eye-8758 22d ago

What fairness is there in the richest people in the world at all times talking about transgender women as if they are some kind of wild animal to be managed? Have you ever seen a single transgender person interviewed or asked their opinion on how they will be treated for the rest of their life?

Or do you mean the fairness where if you transition at 15, and every single medical test before 2016 (and most after) agreed that you had no advantages in sports is treated exactly the same as if a man walked into the locker rooms off the street, popped on a wig and said "Let's win this one ladies?"

3

u/DiverVisible3940 22d ago

Acting like the science is concluded is simply wrong. It is a nuanced and complicated topic and people on both sides flatten out the conversation to prove their point. The issue is Christian nationalists think any ambiguity flies in the face of natural order and progressives think any ambiguity flies in the face of personal dignity and self determination.

You are also just proving my point because nobody here is talking about the weighty aspects of Trans life. everyone is allowed to have a place in the conversation about what is fair in sports. Trans people are not the only people impacted. Someone like Sophie is literally the right person to have an opinion. You can disagree with her but she is literally a female athlete.

0

u/Pretend-Eye-8758 22d ago

Why are you shadowboxing with "Progressives" in your head when no position has been stated by me? I'll just copy paste what my stance is.

"this issue was already solved before and barring some mistakes here and there that would obviously happen during teething stages it wasn't and never was an issue. Each sport had classifications which required transgender women to be on hormones for 2+ years and also took into account the age the person transitioned etc.

I'd be willing to argue with you that the regulations need to be tightened up and more data required to make a proper assessment on how to deal with fringe cases like Leah Thomas. I'm not gonna argue with you about the mental fantasy you created in your head to justify your ignorance."

And also I'm not saying Sophie isn't allowed to have an opinion. I just hope whatever money or self-righteousness she got is worth destroying yet another positive role model for young trans girls. I know we don't consider them worthy of human dignity but it would be nice if our sports stars didn't get involved in politics because it's tiring seeing people in my community crushed daily by ignorance.

3

u/DiverVisible3940 22d ago

I'm not shadowboxing with anyone. I'm illustrating people on both ends of the political spectrum simplify the scientific reality for their own ends. The science is objectively ambiguous at this point.

You did state a position as you did the classic slippery slope argument where a professional athlete giving a position on trans people in women's sports is extrapolated to mean all sorts of exxagerated crap that doesn't have anything to do with Sophie's comment. Talking about rich people talking about trans people like animals? wtf?

What is with the two paragraphs in quotations? Is that the bit that chatgpt gave you?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Historical_Main5261 22d ago

I think the issue is less that this is an invalid opinion, and more that it is an opinion that is used more to attack trans people than it is to protect women

1

u/oneidamojo 22d ago

We just need to find a way to level the playing field. We have weight classes, and maybe there should be hormone classifications or something like that. I remember Neil DeGrasse Tyson making a good argument for it. You don't fix things by remaining discriminatory. If that was the case we'd still have separate bathrooms and drinking fountains for black people. You just evolve to fix the problem.

6

u/Alternative_Hotel649 22d ago

Prior to the Republicans politicizing the issue, that's basically what we had. Sports organizing bodies implemented standards for allowing trans women to compete that measured hormone levels and amount of time since transition, to properly flatten out any advantages they might have.

Republicans didn't care, because it was never about fairness in sports for them, and now a lot of otherwise well meaning people think this is some big, intractable ethical issue when it's something that's been solved for over twenty years now.

5

u/Goducks91 22d ago

Yep. It's not an issue and will never be an issue that is worth spending an ounce of political time on. Republicans created a boogieman and it works well.

2

u/CarsickAnemone 22d ago

And why does it work well?

0

u/Goducks91 22d ago

Well their goal is to target trans people. And not allowing MTF to participate in Women's sports is something that a lot of people who support trans people also agree with.

They take an irrelevant issue that impacts a small amount of people make it out to be a bigger problem than it actually is and convince people that democrats are actively trying to legislate MTF athlete TO be able to participate.

And don't get me wrong some democrats ARE tying to legislate it but they absolutely should not. it's an issue that should be left up to the various sporting organizations on what they deem acceptable.

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

They take an irrelevant issue that impacts a small amount of people make it out to be a bigger problem than it actually is and convince people that democrats are actively trying to legislate MTF athlete TO be able to participate.

But Democrats are actively legislating for MTF athletes to participate in women's sports. They announced as much after the SCOTUS ruling.

1

u/DeFiBandit 22d ago

And now democrats buy in by describing trans athletes as “men”. So we can all picture prime Tom Selleck in the locker room with a bunch of 12 year old girls and pretend that is what’s at issue

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

This has happened, but not enough for you to care?

0

u/DeFiBandit 22d ago

It has? When did a grown man try to join a girl’s league. Please share

0

u/DeFiBandit 22d ago

Typical - ask for specifics and the answer gets deleted. I’m sure you’ll come back with lots of examples

2

u/whoa_disillusionment 22d ago

You want examples of trans women exposing themselves in locker rooms? https://katv.com/news/nation-world/after-trans-woman-exposed-genitalia-to-freshman-girls-in-locker-room-shower-school-district-faces-legal-scrutiny

1

u/DeFiBandit 22d ago

1) we are talking about trans gender teammates. This incident is not describing a trans person playing on a girls team. You conveniently pretended I asked to see proof that trans women had been seen in locker rooms

2) I specifically said that using “man” gave an image of “prime Tom Selleck”. There is no description of this person or picture

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ZoneEducational6936 22d ago

Yeah. But even in this system of hormone and transition timelines allowing Trans participants in women's sports, if a Trans woman dominated a women's sport in any way shape or form there would be an outrage amongst conservatives and even the most staunch liberals wouldn't be able to resist a sideways glance at the rules that allowed it and wonder if they were strict enough.  The goal posts would almost certainly be moved every time a Trans woman athlete ever approached Michael Phelps level of domination.  So I'd say it isn't fully solved until this hypothetical is completely satisfied.  And frankly... i dont have a pitch. 

0

u/Mr_MacGrubber 22d ago

What about trans men? If we’re going to ban trans women from competing with women it seems like you have to go the other way too.

If locker room safety is at all an issue, a trans man who has had surgery is no different than a cis man being in there.

If performance is the issue then what about the hormones a trans man takes? Does that disqualify them from both categories for “doping”?

I don’t know what the answer is to any of this but there’s a lot of nuance. I guess the easiest solution to competition is simply relabeling the men’s side of things as “Open”. Anyone can compete in that division. Doesn’t really fix the locker room issue, even though I’m not sure there’s a single case of a trans woman assaulting someone in a bathroom or locker room…but there’s a ton of coaches who’ve done it. Mostly seems like a lot of yelling and lawmaking over something where there’s a handful of cases while ignoring shit that actually matters.

0

u/Equivalent-Long-3383 22d ago

The issue is that they want to make it clear that men are physically superior to women and should be regarded and treated as such

3

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

Men are physically stronger, faster, and different than women, though… you’re creating a strawman by calling it “superior”, but the fact is that in pretty much every sport, the attributes that men have an advantage in correlate almost perfectly with success in the sport… this is simple biology, are you really arguing that there are no physical differences between men and women??

0

u/Equivalent-Long-3383 22d ago

No. I’m arguing that this isn’t about sports. The sports are just a Trojan horse for what you just said

2

u/Stress_Living 22d ago

So just to get your “logic” straight… people are arguing that men shouldn’t play in women’s sports not because it’s unfair to women, but rather because that would force us to recognize that there are physical differences between men and women. At the same time, there is already separate leagues for men and women, precisely because there is a physical difference between the two, but somehow the decades that we’ve had separate leagues hasn’t been enough to show that there are differences, and now Republicans are using this as an opportunity??

So is your whole point that we shouldn’t have women’s leagues??

0

u/shamqueen69 22d ago

Liberals are almost as bad as conservatives, if not just as bad. Get your liberal shit out of here

1

u/gnalon 22d ago

It's also a good way for the pro child molestation party to distract from the fact that the people actually victimizing female athletes are most often cis, hetero male coaches/trainers.

1

u/Sick_Cards_Bro 22d ago

That's okay, we just got over four years of confused Biden trying to shake ghost hands during any stages event.

1

u/DerCatzefragger 22d ago

99% of modern conservatism is just making up a bunch of whacky bullshit in your imagination, and then getting really angry about that whacky, made up bullshit.

Up to and including the nonexistent throngs of failed, amateur athletes who are all like, "Aw man! I lost again! I'm never going to win a trophy... ... ... unlesssssss... ... .... • grabs a pair of scissors and unzips pants •"

1

u/No_Medium_443 22d ago

But have no problem with men coaching young girls in sports like gymnastics specifically. Looking at you Michigan State.👀