Yeah, mass shootings are a real problem and should be higher on the list of priorities.
But I still consider the issue of people transitioning (mostly men to women) after puberty to have an advantage over their female competitors. You don't need a large population with that advantage to put them all on the podium. Effectively, that destroys a women category in a sport because for most sports the distinction is meant to protect and promote women.
It's not advisable to allow trans people in those categories because removing them later from that would be inhumane. They should have their own category, similar to how people with disabilities have (and no, I don't claim that this is a disability). Changing categories to terms other than "women" and "men" based on weight is also an option, but by definition, that's essentially the same as removing/destroying women's sports, not an alternative to it. At least the word "woman" is not used to describe a trans woman who has practiced with a male physique for 20 years and won with women who didn't transitioned.
People who claim that trans women don't have an advantage are delusional. I doubt that Republicans think that deeply, and it's mostly driven by hatred, but that doesn't mean the issue doesn't exist.
What you're saying doesn't constitute a strong argument. My position is that we should notinclude trans people in those categories because, later on, we cannot remove them (which would be much worse). You, on the other hand, seem to opt for ignoring that and, through ignorance, place people with views similar to mine in the position of oppressors trying to remove those people from that category. That's malevolent.
Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports.
As I mentioned, you don't need to have 10% of people with an unfair advantage in sports; you just need a few on the podium. You completely ignored that because it's easier for you to fight with an imagined bot than an actual argument.
If those athletes' performance would align with others, that wouldn't be an issue. What I'm raising as an issue is that they could build muscle differently, and even bone density can be different for men and women. It's impossible to eradicate all those characteristics. That's what trans people are trying to do and they have made progress, but some things stay, especially for those who began transitioning late after puberty.
I’d argue they’re on the same level as the cis female population.
I would oppose that statement. You can balance hormones, but there are differences in how men grow taller, gain muscles while using different hormones, and fat distribution is different for different genders, with fat located in different places. These things don't disappear after transitioning completely. The trans community would love that because it would improve their lives and they wouldn't be misgendered as often, but it's not how it works for people after puberty.
This argument has existed before Trans. I rememberan Olympic sprinter opened this debate. She had more masc hormones than average. She didn’t take masc hormones, she didn’t drake performance enhancing drugs, she wasn’t Trans. She was just born with more than the average male hormones than the average woman and there was a debate on if that gave her an unfair advantage.
Yes, it's a valid counterargument to what I've written. Defining a woman is hard.
Every time you people shift the goalposts, you shift them even more when it’s finally met. If a naturally born woman gets the same argument, when will this argument end? When women can’t compete in sports at all? Back in the kitchen taking care of house and family?
But I see that being reasonable didn't work for you in the long run.
People without legs participate in runs in the Paralympics, and some of their prosthetics are quite bouncy. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point they beat runners with legs using those prosthetics.
I would prefer for them not to compete with "regular" runners because the balance between having legs and bounciness of the prosthetics shouldn't be the deciding factor when determining the winner.
Letting people with prosthetics compete with each other and not with people with legs is fair for both groups.
Removing categories in sports would result in podiums filled with men, which is a root of that problem.
It is fine if you don't mind it.
I prefer categorization for men, women, trans men, trans women, paralympics, and I would even leave that amusing category of not-tall-man basketball because they in fact cannot compete with tall players but they still can compete among themselves.
How to stop mass shootings in a nutshell by one political party (lemmy.world)
Population of Antarctica
An unauthorized photo of Stalin: the moment he was informed that the Germans were about to take Kiev, 1941
Share of citizens living abroad in 2017
⛪ㅤㅤ
Approaching half of Britons (47%) would need a piece of evidence to be at least 99% accurate before they consider it to be beyond a reasonable doubt.
Training AI to play Pokemon with reinforcement learning (www.youtube.com)
Did medieval peasants travel? (www.youtube.com)
Different approaches to recycling plastic. (youtu.be)
2¹⁸ = 262144