Can someone explain to me how my state got everything else right for the most part but went stupid for this one?

Literally, let's inspect little girls privates, but not boys, because 10 trans students exist and MIGHT want to play sports with their friends? Jesus.

It was also kind of disgusting that literally all our state initiatives were funded by a 1%-er, Brian Heywood and his Let's Go Washingtion PAC.

Edit: couple transphobes showing their colors here. Not only do they have a bad understanding of how hormones affect the body, degrading muscle mass and bone density in trans women for example, it also is just a dog whistle and avoids the real issue.

Segregating trans folk from sports is just another way to demoralize and dehumanize a small subset of the population. "If you're not trans, you can play sports with your friends. You're not really a girl/boy anyway." It's disgusting. Do we need trans drinking fountains too? It's attempting to instill these thoughts into children. In children's sports. Which are just kids playing together and enjoying their lives. It SHOULD NOT MATTER if a boy plays soccer with a girl or a girl plays football with a boy. Let kids be fucking kids. Ask kids after they play with each other if one of them should be excluded. The kids understand it better than the adults pushing narratives who often don't even have children. The kids just want to play together and do a better job of being accepting in group play than these conservative, lonely incels.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 1 day ago (9 children)

No. I'm really not. I'm just saying that a sex with clear and sharp advantages over another one should probably not be allowed to compete against the other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (8 children)

    I'm just saying that a sex with clear and sharp advantages over another one should probably not be allowed to compete against the other.

    It's literally what you're saying just with sex as the arbitrary boundary.

    if there's advantages that should not be allowed

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (7 children)

    I'm sorry if you disagree here, but I do not believe sex is an arbitrary boundary. If it were we wouldn't have any women's leagues because there would be no need for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9331831/

    ^ the source you cited is the one saying that. I'm simply pointing out if we remove all advantages like you want it means alot needs to change. None of which is related to trans athletes having an advantage

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    Point out where in the source I supplied it says that, please.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (4 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    2nd time i'm asking. should be easy since you say there are many. I don't care which one. Just point it out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    You haven't asked for anything yet.

    Please what do you want proved I'm curious how much you actually read

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments