Not in California, as cited above. I’m not sure if you don’t understand that, or if you’re trying to gaslight me.
You clearly didn’t read the cite. Per AB1266, in effect since 2013, this is not the case for any athletics at schools receiving federal funding, in accordance with California’s interpretation of Title IX.
The reason Harris wasn’t successful at her campaign’s obvious goal around “limiting the conversation” to avoid this issue was because when she was running for office in California and trying to win the nomination in 2020 she had to go on video endorsing extreme positions on the issue. Until that stops becoming a litmus test for Democrats’ internal politics, it will continue to haunt them when trying to appeal to normal voters.
In general, people are not as stupid as you’d like to think they are. Democrats love doing “this isn’t happening and it’s good that it is.” There are no trans athletes in sports, and trans athletes in sports are the defining issue of our time. You’re making up this “distraction” about a thing no one cares about, and also if you don’t agree with me about this thing you are worse than a Klan member. This is a manufactured fake controversy from Fox News, and backing down one inch from the maximalist position on it is “throwing civil rights under the bus.” Etc etc etc. Do you think that just because some voters are dumb enough to not vaccinate their kids or do other stupid shit, they can’t detect the most basic contradictions, on an issue they obviously are paying a lot of attention to?
Me: this is not the issue we should be devoting time to.
Everyone: devotes lots of time telling me why yes it is.
Okay, y’all. If that’s what the thread needs to be about, have fun. Like I said, tough hill to climb.
AB1266 does NOT say self-ID, and nothing else, shall be used to determine gender identity (and thus eligibility for women’s sports).
I think you’ve swallowed some of the Republican propaganda on this issue.
I don’t know how to respond to Republican propaganda like this, other than to say “that are lies being spread to distract from their theft and destruction of your rights and services”.
So apparently the “messaging” to “win again” is: Continue doing everything that led to losing last time, accuse anyone who wants to change it of being a “Republican propagandist” and a “liar,” then collect your six-figure consultancy check for advising yet another “perfect candidate who ran a perfect campaign” on how to lose.
…sure. Excellent summary, and well played!
Read the OP and try again.
Haven’t we been through this before with the “we’ll just decide what The Message is” and yell at people for breaking rules we made up on what they are allowed to notice?
It also doesn’t lay out any other criteria, so self ID absolutely is the law of the land. What the fuck is with this gaslighting?
What criteria are used in California other than self ID? I think you’ve swallowed some far left propaganda on this issue.
No you’re gaslighting! 
Where does it say anything about self ID at all? Perhaps further clarification would be helpful, but I see nothing that suggests the law requires California to let me (a cis-man) play women’s basketball if I say I’m a woman.
No, I recommend you read the OP and try again.
Come on, man. This is getting ridiculous. Why are you doing this? The rules in California are pretty black and white.
Here’s the relevant text of AB1266:
And here are the CIF Guidelines for Gender Identity Participation (PDF):
Please show me where anything other than the student’s say so is required for the CIF to mandate inclusion in women’s sports.
Well, you’re not enrolled at a Title IX school, but if you were…
You’d contact the school and say “I identify as a woman despite what my records say”. The school would then have two options.
First, they could grant your request, and you could join the women’s team (assuming that you, a presumably middle aged man, could actually qualify).
Second, they could deny your request, in which case you could appeal. At your request, the school admin would contact the CIF who would assign an agent to handle your appeal. At the appeal, you’d need to provide documentation; the acceptable documentation includes “affirmed written statements from the student”, so as long as you’re willing to sign such a statement, I don’t see any grounds on why they could deny your appeal, according to the CIF’s own documentation.
They don’t have to let you on the basketball team if you suck at basketball; but they can’t use your gender as the basis for denying your right to join the women’s team.
Now, in real life, are people like you trying to join women’s sports teams? No, I highly doubt it. But just because someone is genuinely trans and absolutely identifies as a woman does not mean it is fair for them to compete with cis women.
This remains a distraction, in this thread and in the national discussion. How many athletes in California are affected by California’s policy on trans athletes? How many trans folks? How many athletes in North Carolina are affected by California’s policy? How many trans folks? Meanwhile, how many athletes and trans folks in California and North Carolina are affected by a tax policy that favors billionaires while increasing burdens on the regular folks?
Let experts in the field deal with these issues that affect almost nobody, and let’s focus on the issues that affect hundreds of millions of people.
The only reasons I can think of to focus on trans athletes instead of on tax policy are:
- You’re one of the tiny, tiny, tiny minority of people impacted by policies about trans athletes in sports; or
- You think these policies cause or prevent more suffering than tax policies; or
- You’re a billionaire, or a billionaire stan; or
- You’ve been successfully distracted by the billionaires and their stans.
You just cited the process, which includes multiple steps, including the possibility of a hearing.
That’s not “self-ID”. In a hearing, self-ID can be challenged. Fraudulent self-ID could be shown to be fraudulent.
Thank you for citing the facts which demonstrate that California does not just allow self-ID alone determine athletic eligibility.
I think you’re right that this is a hijack, but it still needs to be overcome somehow. The Republican propaganda has been very successful.
A hearing that confirms that you wrote an affirmation saying you identify as a woman, yes. That IS self ID.
If I require your self ID documentation to be notarized, it’s still self ID, despite the requirements of a notary.
The point is that there is absolutely no requirement for a medical diagnosis of dysphoria, proof that medical transitioning has been undertaken, or literally anything else other than the student’s self identification as being trans.
That’s self ID, and no amount of gaslighting is going to change that.
Ok, so what’s the medical requirement involved? What requirement other than you identifying yourself as trans is required?