An effort to ban transgender girls from girls school sports in Washington was leading in election results released Tuesday night.

According to the Secretary of State’s office, 54% of voters said yes on Initiative 638, one of three ballot measures backed by conservative political committee Let’s Go Washington. More votes will be counted in the coming days.

Archived at https://archive.ph/2dosL

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 59 points 6 days ago (20 children)

I-638 only applies to transgender girls and not transgender boys, and requires all students on K-12 girls sports teams to provide medical documentation that confirms their “biological sex,” according to the initiative’s language.

If the initiative passes, it could throw the blue state’s status as a haven for transgender people into question. If the final vote count indicates the initiative has passed, it will also likely face a legal challenge if approved by voters, several legal experts told The Times.

It should be challenged and I hope it is. Targeting only girls with this initiative shouldn't pass muster.

I'm deeply disappointed in my fellow Washingtonians.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 6 days ago (18 children)

    They only ever focus on the girls 😞 it's such a tell, honestly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    "What if the female child I'm trying to rape has a penis?"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 6 days ago

    Trans kids are also more likely to have the vocabulary to articulate what they are seeing in locker rooms / practice. Can't creep as hard if someone who has been advocating for their own rights is witnessing another's get violated. That whistle gonna blow.

    Just in case anyone wants to twist what I'm saying. Cis-girls can absolutely advocate and do advocate for themselves but trans men / women come into this age already mid battle; one day we should make it so that's not the case. Just kids being kids not wondering if they are being clocked 24/7.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (15 children)

    I guess it's not the case in grade school, but in many professional sports and college, there are technically no "mens" teams. Those teams are open to any and all athletes.

    It's the women's and girl's sports where the restrictions lie, and hence the focus for transgender athletes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 6 days ago (13 children)

    I guess it’s not the case in grade school,

    This initiative is specifically about grade school.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (12 children)

    Right, but I think that gives some insights. Boys sports in grade schools could technically be open. For very young kids, there's probably even little difference in athletic ability.

    Girls' sports are what need some kind of sex identification and distinction. I'm not saying it should be based on genitalia or chromosomes, but that's why the focus is there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 days ago (11 children)

    Girls’ sports are what need some kind of sex identification and distinction.

    Not in grade school. We have never needed this before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (10 children)

    We have never needed a transgender ban. As long as we've had activities specifically restricted to girls, we've needed some sort of distinction. That distinction could be "Any athlete identifying as a girl," but one is needed. Otherwise, what does it mean for a team to be restricted?

    Remember that the question I was responding to is why does it work one way - restrictions on who joins a girls' team - and not the other. That's the question I'm answering.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 days ago (8 children)

    No that comment said they only focus on girls. You assumed too much about their statement. They never even asked a question.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 days ago (7 children)

    They're trying way too hard to pretend it isn't just sexual insecurity and misogynistic bigotry 🙄

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 days ago (6 children)

    I've had sex with a minor, and it was definitely a thing. It wasn't rape, either.

    This in their history, no wonder they're in here arguing about genital exams for little girls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    You're pulling a comment from another post completely out of context. Someone said there is no such thing as sex with a minor. It is always rape.

    That's not true, and I used my own experience as an example. That you're not creative enough to think why my having sex with a minor would not be illegal nor immoral is not my problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    Being cheeky about raping minors says a lot about you already.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    Again, not rape.

    Nor did I argue for genital exams for little girls.

    You're trying to paint me as a pedophile and won't let facts get in the way. That's pretty disgusting. Maybe stick to the communities where that behavior is acceptable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

    Nor did I argue for genital exams for little girls.

    I said you're arguing about genital exams.

    We don't need anybody playing devil's advocate about this initiative.

    Again, not rape.

    The conversation was about raping minors and you thought you'd be cheeky and clever with that comment. A mod removed it for a reason.

  • source
  • parent