The Socialists, led by Pedro Sánchez, the prime minister, included plans to limit participation in female sports to “people with a female biological sex” in a policy document decided on at the party’s congress over the weekend.
The decision to also remove Q+ from a plan to protect sexual and gender minorities from the impact of social inequality sparked fury from LGBTQ+ activists and politicians from Left-wing partners of Mr Sánchez’s minority government.
The passing of a transgender rights reform in 2023, allowing anyone to change their official sex simply by stating their wish to switch, caused a bitter rift within Spain’s ruling Left-wing forces.
Carmen Calvo, the former Socialist deputy prime minister, said at the time the reform would “destroy the powerful battery of equality legislation in our country”.
Pathetic display from so-called socialists
High T is not the same as growing up as male, just like HRT won’t reverse completely, discussed in said study.
I can, I just did, bone density, body build and muscle strength cannot be fully reversed. I’m not saying every trans athlete will better or ‘unbeatable’ as you put it. I’m saying they’ll have an unfair advantage.
To be clear, I believe everyone in the Olympics has some kind of biological advantage (be it Phelps having the wingspan of a 737 or Bolt having the legs of an antelope), but there shouldn’t be a judge on who decides who has or hasn’t had enough HRT and can compete, that’s just gatekeeping being trans.
Bone density is actually one of the things that absolutely goes down with HRT, they even mention that in the study you cited.
This is all from the study you just linked, if you really are interested in learning maybe you could try reading the sources you’re bringing to the table.
Just to close out, again citing the study you provided:
It’s almost like this is a non-issue that is being brought up by assholes to discriminate against an out-group.
A reminder that this comm is not for debating trans rights, (rule 4) I’ve let it slide thus far, but I’m really starting to question my judgement.
Note I said not fully reversed.
I did, it’s clear that there could an adventage, not that there definitely will be.
Don’t put me in the opposition just because I’m trying to understand and educate myself, I’m tired of people on both sides of this argument making clearly blanket statements, one side says “there is no physiological difference” and the other goes “hey it’s completely unfair”. Reality lies somewhere in the middle, but seems like you’re not willing to talk about the gray zone.
For the record, I support trans rights, and not taking away any power from you to educate me.
Are you interested in defending your statements or learning?
Bone density in trans women actually can end up being lower than in cis women, citation
It’s a tiny fraction of the population, even less of whom are going to be athletes. Cis women are perfectly capable of having higher testosterone levels and muscle mass than trans women.
Frankly a far bigger advantage when it comes to competing in sports is being wealthy enough to even have time/money to train for and attend these types of events on a regular basis rather than working to survive.
Don’t get defensive then.
The reality is that the ‘sanctity’ of sports competition is and has been a farce, excluding trans people entirely is a shit way to address whatever supposed problem there is, and the people who are interested in excluding trans people don’t give a shit about evidence anyways.
No need to be condescending, and my words have no need to be misread.
I have never claimed otherwise to anything you just said, I’m pointing out that there are blurry lines, grey areas where it is unclear how much bone density or muscle mass loss is considered as fair. We have very little ways of verifying what dosage of hormones people recieve, and people have no right to demand that information, making this whole thing into a mess. And the last thing we want is excluding people for ‘not being trans enough’.
I hate how discrimination is even a factor, it shouldn’t be, and I am aware this is fighting a greater issue, maybe its better to be defacto all inclusive until proven to be a problem.
Not sure any cis or trans person can match your density
Wow for a so-called ignorant passerby you sure have a lot of talking points ready. That’s amazing.
I’ve been trying to understand this issue for years, I’m leaning to one side because I allow science to look for answers, and I come here in this community, fully knowing people will shit on me. You could choose to leave constructive comments, or choose to leave whatever sarcastic mess this is supposed to be.
Wait, so, your solution to “gatekeeping being trans” is to gatekeep trans people?
What? I am deconstructing the issue here, not proposing a solution.
I have to ask, are you trans yourself?
Nono I am not, that’s why I think it’s so important for me to engage in conversation about it. And obviously I was expecting to be downvoted, but I did expect a more nuanced discussion, I apologise if I’ve overstayed my welcome.
More than anything, I don’t think you really get to have an opinion on what is, or is not, gatekeeping trans people. That’s the sort of thing you need to “shut up and listen” to trans folks about. But that’s just my take.
Lmao, yeah sure.
You’re welcome to an opinion on trans folks in sport, that’s not what I’m speaking to. You don’t get to come into a space for trans people, and dictate to us what is, or is not, gatekeeping being trans.
But yeah, pop off with a misleading quote I guess.
[edit: y’know what, this was a stupid post. Ignore this.]
deleted by creator