this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
381 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2772 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
[–] RedSeries@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Regarding the sports bans, trans individuals do not generally get a significant advantage against their cis peers. In the case of trans women, they are often are at a detriment in sports due to the lack of testosterone in their body that's naturally there even in cis women. We haven't seen clear cases of trans individuals standing out against their cis peers consistently and the argument that excluding such a small group works both ways. Unless trans folks are somehow world-class by default, excluding them from their gendered sport is moot and if anything cruel.

One place I see compromise (at least with trans women, I have no idea how men's sports handles trans men since they need to take Testosterone) is requiring a certain number of years of HRT. Those who just started HRT might have an advantage, but after a few years they are around the same level as or further behind their peers.

EDIT: I'm a tiny bit more conflicted now reading some other comments I've seen you make. I feel like you're coming from a genuinely good place though. I hope you continue to expose yourself to different ideas and keep learning and growing. ^_^

EDIT 2: :barks like a sealion: iykyk

EDIT 3: My only regret is that I only have one downvote to give.

[–] kitnaht@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm supportive of trans people's rights to be left the fuck alone, and to be treated equally. But I also get that there need to be safe spaces for women to exist without some shadow-of-a-doubt in the back of their mind. Yes, that's exclusionary, but remember the "Man vs Bear" debate a few months back? There are lots of women who are legitimately less trusting of men than they are a wild animal who will maul your face off.

Yeah, I'm harsh with the way that I put things. I understand that; it's a result of the harsh environment I grew up in as a kid. People who were raised more tenderly probably don't like the way I speak about things. But I DO support LGBTQ individuals and their right to not be discriminated against; as best as I can reconcile that with my belief that women need places they can escape men entirely if needed.

[–] RedSeries@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There are lots of women who are legitimately less trusting of men than they are a wild animal who will maul your face off.

I'm not a man, and your original comment seems to agree with that, but this says otherwise. You would never use this excuse if you actually saw trans women as women.

as best as I can reconcile that with my belief that women need places they can escape men entirely if needed.

Then you should understand why I, a trans woman, would like to be included in the space matching my gender.

I grew up being taught to give guidance and tolerance to those who are ignorant or bigoted, but this is the end of my rope. Do better.