also interested in hearing what you think the exception is
It would be a statistical miracle if every single trans woman was stronger than every biological woman.
but I’d never claim that there’s no exceptions
Ok, that's fair.
I’m confident in claiming that most are
Right, but that's what the other commenters were waiting for supporting research on, I believe.
I get that these are retention bonuses and such.
I.e. the folks keeping their jobs get more money, while the folks losing their jobs get nothing.
Wth? How is it even legal to let someone go without paying severance? When I was let go, I had to be paid my severance (which was considerable) because that's the law in Ontario.
They called my claim that men have a significant advantage over women when it comes to strenght a made-up fact so I backed it up with evidence as requested.
Hmm, on re-reading I can see that as being part of what was asked. However, you wrote this,
This isn’t about not wanting trans people in the sports and you know it. It’s about the unfair advantage they have over biological women.
Men have a significant advantage over women when it comes to strenght and speed and in most (but not all) cases this applies to trans women as well.
So I think the real ask is for evidence that post-transition trans women are stronger than cis women. To reiterate, I think the points now requiring evidence are these statements (edited by me for clarity):
It’s about the unfair advantage .. trans people in the sports .. have over biological women.
.. trans women .. have a significant advantage over .. cis .. women when it comes to strength and speed and in most (but not all) cases
I do note that you state that this is not true in all cases btw, so also interested in hearing what you think the exception is (that is, what are those cases where trans women, particularly trans women in sports, do not have an unfair or significant advantage over cis women when it comes to strength and speed).
Actually, now I'm curious how they will handle cases of people with more than 2 chromosomes.
Me too. Actually, this is explicitly called out in the article,
World Athletics’s testing requirements would also affect small numbers of competitors who were born with atypical sex chromosomes.
But they don't say what would happen. The easy ones: presumably, XYY is treated the same as XY and XO is treated like XX. But how would XXY be handled? Or cases where we have genetic chimerism - e.g. some cells are XY and some are XO or XX. (One way this happens is if fraternal twins of different sex are in the womb, and then one absorbs the other.)
Intersexed folks at best seem to be an afterthought in this proposal.
If the tests are sensitive enough, someone with XY gonadal dysgenesis might be counted as XX as well, though I'm skeptical on this point. Actually, this is exactly why such tests are bad - someone who presents as female in virtually every public way, and would be seen as female in terms of sex under even many forms of medical examinations, could be treated as male under these rules and forced to compete against men.
It's the exact opposite of what the anti-trans folks say that they want to accomplish - protecting women from male athletes.
As the research doesn't cover trans athletes, it's of limited relevance. The onus has not yet been met.
It’s exactly what these idiots want so they should just move.
It's not like I disagree with you on this, but... who says they can? How would they do it? It sounds to me like you're suggesting they just pack a trailer, drive south, overstay and live as undocumented migrants.
There'd be a certain poetic justice in that, to be sure, but anyone with two brain cells would be able to understand why living in Canada with full citizenship is better.
I thought by “harder to move” you meant ... like they’re denying people to immigrate there.
Yes! That's exactly what I meant. These folks can't just waltz down into the US of A and expect to stay forever. They have to comply with the existing immigration programs, which rather ironically are harder to comply with under the current administration in the US. Heck, even visiting or working in the US is getting harder.
Granted my above references were more towards the latter, rather than with immigrating per se. We're only a few months in to this term, so we haven't had time to accumulate the data to see trends yet. But in his first term, the number of green cards that got issued by the US was cut down sharply, https://www.cato.org/blog/president-trump-reduced-legal-immigration-he-did-not-reduce-illegal-immigration or see https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/trump-restrictions-legal-immigration-second-term-rcna151994 if you want a less biased and more neutral source.
You think they’ll treat us better once we become the 51st state?
Oh, heck no. I can't find it now but I recall one of the administration officials saying that Canada wouldn't even be a state, it'd be treated like Puerto Rico (a territory with no voting rights).
Basically, we've got to be prepared to defend this country to the death.
They don’t even treat their current 50 states well.
Yes, I know - I only recently escaped myself from that.
there was an administrative issue
Depends on how one defines "administrative" I suppose, but the term is not inaccurate. You could also categorize it as a political issue, as well as a legal issue.
That’s not being fair at all.
Edit: Enjoy your upvote!
Now, there's a huge irony here. These folks like the guy currently running the show down south, even as he makes it harder for them to (legally) join him and his country.
I imagine a "you can apply to be unbanned after April 28" could suffice. Almost certainly these folks (or bots?) will just disappear after the date and not bother to apply.
Not saying that we should do this - just that after April 28 matters less because most of the bad actors will almost certainly abandon their accounts after the election.
Archive link is available at https://archive.is/fCfth
But I've noticed that it's not resolving universally - e.g. if using cloudflare's DNS then you can't get to archive right now. But you can use something like https://www.croxyproxy.com/ to access the archive link...
To be fair, recent events like https://lemmy.ca/post/41181182 and https://lemmy.ca/post/41102961 or https://lemmy.ca/post/41065802 or https://lemmy.ca/post/41091031 suggest it'd be harder for them to move over to the US now than it used to be. At least as Canadians.
Most likely, the only realistic option they have for moving to the US would be to attract someone and marryH^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HH
The only realistic option for them is for Canada join the US as a single country. Which is still wildly unrealistic. But it's all they have, sad as it is.
That being said, if a future option opens up - say from a new treaty provides an option where they irreversibly renounce being Canadian in return for getting US citizenship - I wouldn't necessarily say no to that.
Same! I went the other way to escape this craziness - now I risk ending up right back where I started.
Exactly.
None that I can see.
This would kinda imply that maybe it makes sense to start talking about new categories. Kinda like how we already have different weight classes in wrestling. But I doubt it would happen, if you look at the studies from the NPR article by the OC,
9% isn't that much of an advantage, and it could go down further as time goes on (as the raw data sorta hints at), just maybe the study wasn't running for long enough.
And this doesn't apply to all trans folks. Do remember,
So a trans woman who transitioned before puberty has no competitive advantage worth talking about, and a trans woman who transitions after puberty just needs time to lose the extra muscle before the competitive advantage disappears.
Finally, keep in mind that even for those that are recent post-puberty transitions, they still don't perform as well as cis men, so it definitely does not make sense to include them in there.
Meanwhile, transmen on average outperform cis men,
Everything suggests to me that there's no problem and we've split up the categories in the right ways, at worst it's perhaps just a matter of tweaking this statement, "1 year period of testosterone suppression that is recommended by World Athletics for inclusion in women’s events" to a slightly longer time period.