this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
463 points (96.8% liked)

politics

18870 readers
3836 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place 33 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Sometimes, there are valid arguments regarding transgender matters. For example, someone that has medically-induced higher levels of testosterone might have a resulting advantage in aggressive sports. I don't know if that's true or not, but it's at least worth discussing it openly and honestly. What I find odd though is that the people that make transgender matters in sports their main issue say they do it for fairness, especially in support of women. However, these same people tend to have misogynistic views everywhere else in politics, so I'm supposed to accept that this one particular thing is where they finally started caring about equality?? It just seems so inauthentic.

My sister is one of these people. She's suddenly all about equality in sports. What?! When has she ever cared about anything or anyone besides herself and her kids as an extension?? When has she cared about fairness?? It's so uncharacteristic of her to think that way, that I have trouble believing anything she has to say on the matter.

[–] morphballganon@lemmynsfw.com 12 points 1 month ago

It makes sense if you don't believe them when they say it's about fairness.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

For example, someone that has medically-induced higher levels of testosterone might have a resulting advantage in aggressive sports. I don't know if that's true or not, but it's at least worth discussing it openly and honestly

Why is this worth discussing? You want to talk about how Michael Phelps has unusually long arms for his frame, which gave him a huge advantage while swimming? You want to talk about how some Ultramarthon runners have slightly different lactic acid buildup genes so their muscles don't burn as much? You want to talk about how all the players in the NBA and the WNBA are in the top 99.9 percentile for human height, giving them a huge advantage? Should all of these people be banned from sport because of their genetic advantages?

Many athletes have flat out, built in genetic advantages to other people. There is literally no way to make this "fair" without excluding people that are outside of what will be a 100% arbitrary baseline or forced gene editing, which we are barely able to do and would be wildly unethical.

It's not worth discussion, because the discussion will be asinine.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

The "medically-induced" part renders everything you just said pointless

[–] thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Theres a very simple answer to that: The things you are mentioning (height, weight, arm-span, testosterone levels) are not normally distributed in the human population, but follow a binormal distribution. It makes sense to let people from one of the two parts of the distribution compete within their own bell curve. It makes far less sense to set a cutoff at the tail of the curve and disallow people from the tail from competing.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Its simple? Okay. Tell me the exact "allowed" physical parameters for any sport.

Since it's simple, these should be well defined and easy to source.