This thread is about girls, not women.
The suicide rates are about 50% higher for trans girls than for cis girls. A solution to this nonexistent problem that consists of excluding trans girls from access to a suicide-prevention avenue like sports is a killer solution.
That’s 2 nice correlations. But your 2nd cite doesn’t differentiate between cis- vs trans- girls, so one would assume their arguments about suicide holds for trans girls who play high school sports as well. They were, after all, quite clear that they were talking about gender not biology.
Right? Round and round we go!
Physical maturation of both males and females happens within the window of high school.
Certainly the discrepancy between the sexes ramps up enormously once puberty starts and that is where the issues of fairness and safety start to matter.
The UK report itself distinguishes between the very top level international competition (which is governed by international treaties and rules and which are not covered by this report) and its own remit of domestic, social and grass-roots sport which I would suggest makes it relevant to the high-school age discussed in this thread.
It is not intrinsic to this thread but might be useful to read through the report and supporting documents. It certainly reads as thorough, thoughtful and fair.
If the subject was about sport in schools when puberty has not started then it’d be a very different thread, with the overwhelming consensus being that the kids at that age should play together and that indeed, safety, fairness and inclusion can be reconciled in those circumstances.
Boys continue to “fill out” and get more muscular for a few years after high school. But that wasn’t my point. I was replying to Summerday.
What? Wanting to participate in a sport does not constitute medical necessity. If an adult wants to mess with their chemical balances power to them. I’m not comfortable giving that power to teenagers (or encouraging their parents).
I think the words “modest proposal” indicate it’s not a serious suggestion, and is instead being presented to make a point. In this case, the point is, “gender identity matters”.
Suicide prevention avenue? I think you’re mixing causation and correlation; it may well be that the kind of adolescent who tends to be suicidal is less likely to try out for sports, rather than sports participation having any effect on suicidal tendencies. Furthermore, you are generalizing the inverse correlation between cis girls playing sports / cis girl suicide rates and trans girls playing sports / trans girl suicide rates. We don’t know if that would hold for trans girls, there are so few of them playing sports.
I am completely aware of that. You may be intending to address this to Summerday, who first brought up the idea that sports were a suicide-prevention technique. My point is that even if this is true, the proposed solution is monstrous.
I didn’t see anything in Summerday’s cite mentioning that it was solely about cis girls. Given the obvious correlation/causation problems, though, I’m not sure how much further I want to pick nits at it.
Was that not what you did when you implied that transgirls playing on the female team would make them feel that society is less transphobic and therefore lower their risk of suicide? If not, why don’t you explain why you introduced the topic of suicide into a thread about transgirls in sports?
No, I don’t think it’s helpful…the oppression olympics are not helpful. Is it your point that lowering the suicide rate for transgirls should occur at the expense of lowering suicide rates of cis-girls? If not, explain how comparing those two rates of suicide is pertinent to this thread.
Maybe you can provide a cite that shows that playing on the girl’s team instead of an open or co-ed team helps to lower the rate of suicide in trans girls. Because what you’re advocating for is pushing some cis-girls off the girl’s team to open up spots for trans-girls. Since cis-girls also experience a lower suicide risk when playing high-school sports, it seems like it’s less, or not, important to you if cis-girls experience a higher risk of suicide when they don’t play high-school sports.
If trans-girls can play on the open team or a co-ed team and experience lower rates of suicide than if they didn’t play at all, then the ideal place for them to play would be those teams since it would allow the greatest number of cis-girls and transgirls to play high-school sports.
I have no idea what you’re saying here.
The second cite states that girls who play high-school sports are less likely to engage in sexual activity and/or pregnancy than girls who don’t…it doesn’t even mention suicide. It uses the word “female” and refers to pregnancy. Since trans-girls can’t get pregnant, I have no idea why you say, " But your 2nd cite doesn’t differentiate between cis- vs trans- girls[…]" My statement was that cis-girls who play high-school sports have lower rates of pregnancy than those who don’t play.
The first cite also refers to males and females. I don’t, and never did, deny that suicide rates are lower in males who play high-school sports compared to those who don’t, my point was that females also experience lower suicide risk when playing high-school sports.
Sorry, that was my mistake, I meant the first cite, the one about suicide.
And my point was that we must assume that benefit also applies to transgirls, since they were using “female” for the gender, not biology.
They also were treating gender as a strict binary, but baby steps…
I don’t agree that they were using female for gender not sex, but since they said that males and females experience lower risk of suicide, transgirls were included in that lower risk when they referred to males.
Males and females experience a lower risk, I never disputed that.
I didn’t say “sex”, I specifically said “biology”, since that cite seems to use the word “sex” as interchangeable with “gender” in places.
They specifically and repeatedly use the word “gender”. You can “not agree” till the cows come home, but that’s what your own cite says. Stuff like "Separate statistical analyses were conducted for each gender. " abounds in the paper
Now, if you’re arguing that they’re using “gender” in an idiosyncratic way, that’s different. But then what use is a cite in a debate on trans issues that misuses the word “gender”?
Transgirls aren’t males when it comes to gender. If they divided their study cohort by gender, as they said they did, then transgirls would be counted in the female cohort.
For those who are unaware, “female” and “male” are adjectives that are used to describe both biological phenotypes and gender. You need to read the context of a sentence to know which is being referenced.
Since when and according to who?
For several years, at least. Probably always. And according to how people actually use the words.
Is there evidence that trans boys who switch to boy’s sports are still competitive? If it makes little difference, you would expect to find just as many trans boys doing well as trans girls when it cones to sports.