News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Don’t order me around. Maybe face the fact that you are bedfellows with fascist garbage that are using this wedge issue as a foot in the door to completely eradicate what they call “trans ideology” (a fucked up term).
I do have to say that because the issue is overly nuanced and you appear to want to dumb it down to a single issue. Thus: muddier. Hrt for 1-2+ years significantly lowers muscle mass and upper and lower body strength. Hemoglobin is lowered and stamina is impacted. Many of the competitive advantages are neutralized, but not all. Depending on the sport essentially all are. Wingspan and hand size do not change (unless transition started very early, which is another issue that right wing assholes try to block, but that’s a whole separate thing). So what sport? Rowing? More debatable. Golf? Less debatable. Transition started very early, like 7-8 years old? Less debatable.
See? Muddy, nuanced. But again, this has been discussed to death but you morons dont listen and keep just focusing on its not fair because biology even though your understanding of biology apparently ended in 8th grade with a c- in the class
Yeah, you have no idea what you're talking about.
I'm not looking for you to "dumb it down." You need to take a stance and own it if you want to say anything of value.
It's a yes or no question, but you seem to be incapable of giving a yes or no answer. If it depends on the sport, then say "yes for this sport, but no for this one." You can't say "more or less debatable" and then say "it's been discussed to death" as though that means anything.
It's been discussed so much that you're unable to take a stand? Seems like more discussion is required, but like I said you don't seem capable of having one. If you can't stick your neck out and say "it's okay after this criteria is met for trans women to compete with women in this sport," then what are even trying to argue?
The real problem here is that you're afraid of your own argument, so you want other people to make it for you. That's just not good enough.
First I will say my position is fairly clear to anyone with a brain: attacking trans participation in sports is clearly a move to begin attacking more trans rights with the intent to “eradicate transgenderism”. This has been explicitly said by prominent figures in the maga movement. Ergo they should play on principal as this makes it a human rights issue. Debate didnt have to go to this avenue but the maga chuds pushed it here. And apparently you need everything explicitly stated so i hope this is crystal fucking clear enough for you.
On that note outside of that issue you are looking to make a complex topic reductive, yes. You want to take that entire nuanced take I just gave you and turn it into a Fox News bullshit wedge issue: “should trans people play in sports”. It should not be this way. It should probably have more nuanced and be discussed within communities with some kind of arbitrator for disputes if things feel unfair or if discrimination seems to be occurring. But we’ve seen how people respond when discrimination is corrected for: they take over the government and erase references to slavery.
You are the same as the people who reduce down gun rights to “guns or no guns” and abortion to “abortion or no abortion” to push people to extreme positions when 99% of the time it won’t ever impact them or anyone they know (except for the gun one)
Slippery slope, next.
You're the one who's trying to make it seem like a done deal that we can't question. Wanting to give females their own sports division is "eradicating transgenderism" in your eyes, which is complete nonsense.
Let's be more honest now. What's really happening is that you've been conditioned to fight demons even where there are none. There is a subset of people that literally cannot tolerate anything other than unwavering loyalty, and they take advantage of your kindness by placing unreasonable demand after unreasonable demand upon you.
As time goes on, the dust settles, and you get more life experience, you'll start to recognize how you're being manipulated and hopefully have the strength to rise above it.
Oh bugger off. You are incapable of staying on topic because you know your argument is weak.
It’s not a fallacy if the opponent straight up states it as a goal
Complete nonsense why?
As life goes on you’ll probably learn to be even more of a condescending prick who attacks other people’s arguments without giving any substance of your own. This makes sense because as bits and pieces start to eke out the more it becomes clear that you probably just a crybaby who is super mad that they had to use pronouns and start calling “steve” “luna”. The horror!
I don't have to answer for what other people say or do, we've been through this. You should be asking if I think that should be the goal, but instead you try to conflate other arguments with my own so you have something easier to argue against. Stay on topic. Again.
I'm sure this spiel sounded nice in your head, but all it does is prove that you don't actually have a leg to stand on.
If you don't end up learning from this over time, then that's on you. I've done my part to educate you and it's up to you what you do with that knowledge.
You've shown me that you're in "tantrum-mode" right now, so I'm going to ignore you and let you tire yourself out.
Good luck.
You don’t have to answer for them but you can acknowledge that their position is dangerous from a human rights perspective even if it is not personally your position. Crazy how that works
You’ve done nothing but be dishonest and pose no argument. You instead keep positing on what I should be doing instead of posing any actual position of your own.
To that end I gave you the benefit of the doubt and reread the thread, exactly this pattern. Nothing of substance from you. Just condescension and no actual content. Except for the removed post where you enter the thread of course.
Then I visit the mod log to remember what kicked all this off and see you have several transphobic posts: banned from 196 for a meme that implies queer people are groomers, straight up saying that trans women are men, “transgenderism”, etc. so you’re just a real piece of shit, huh? Like at least be genuine and say “I fuckin hate trans people”. Don’t do this coy bullshit like a scared little baby. Own your position you fucking coward. Don’t dance around it and drop little slurs and insults to test the waters. You won’t though because you know you’re a scumbag for it.
I finally did find the original post and now remember your point - women losing will have discomfort. So fair point. You don’t deserve this, but whatever. The philosophical debate is whose discomfort is more important? Thus bringing up the maga shit. If there are people, who are currently holding a great deal of political power and who also have already enacted anti transgender legislation starting literally on day 1, that poses an existential threat. This tips the scales then. Their discomfort is essentially equal assuming they have all put similar effort into their sport (we can’t do case by case for such a broad decision, obviously) so the moderating factor is the existential threat to their existence.
You can deny this by calling it a slippery slope fallacy but again: this is documented as a strategy. It is not a transgender persons anxiety saying “what if?!”. It is prominent maga influencers and strategists saying literally that attacking the sports issue is the first step towards attacking more.
In closing - go fuck yourself.