it's literally just a pro-blockers opinion piece to counter the anti- ones which, strangely, don't look like "bait" to you in spite of being equally biased

Let’s see someone defend this: Seattle high schooler places 72nd in boys cross country, breaks records on girls team the following year.

https://www.sportskeeda.com/amp/pop-cul ... -72nd-boys

“Biological males have the advantage of having greater muscle mass and lung capacity alongside higher bone density.”

“In 2007, the Washington Interscholastic Athletic Association announced that trans athletes can take part in sports in their reassigned gender only when they have undergone a minimum of two years of hormone treatment and surgery. The policy was updated in 2018 which stated that male to female students must have one calendar year of documented testosterone suppression treatments to take part in girls' competitions. The aforementioned regulations went on to be scrapped in 2021.”

Interesting sidebar to that is the curious 2018 rule that didn’t put the same stipulation in place for female to male students. Hmmm, wonder why?

Yeah, I’m sure the reason someone transitions is to physically dominate women’s sports. All of women’s sports should feel threatened by this. :eyeroll:

How often do you go to WNBA games, bammer? Or regularly attend UW women’s sporting events. You are a man that primarily watches men’s sports. And as you pointed out above, men’s sports aren’t “threatened” by someone transitioning to male. Why does this suddenly bother you?

Bammer can't seem to understand this issue and keeps coming back to it over and over again no matter how many times it's addressed. Hmmm, wonder why?

bammer seems to be struggling with the idea women are more athletic than him. in fact, i'd bet half the women on earth could take him in a fist fight

At least he managed to not misgender anyone in that post. Baby steps.

Fair. But I don't feel like points should be handed out for baseline shit.

Nobody defending this one so far. Baby steps.

Because it doesn't need defending. Because it's already been hashed out.

What is it you think needs defending exactly?

people like Bammer invariably think everyone is coming to this information for the first time just because they are, kinda like Christopher Columbus "discovering" America

More follow-up on the NYT Puberty Blockers article:

I really thought it was general common sense/consensus/uncontroversial that people should at least be of adult age before making such (potentially harmful) drastic changes to their bodies. That's my opinion anyway, surely coming as great shock to you. Highly valued as usual 2 cents, I'm sure.

minors aren't making "drastic changes to their bodies", Tree

In general I agree, but there are thousands of kids out there that would benefit from medical transition. My point in posting this stuff is that we need to know what the consequences are so they and their parents/guardians/doctors/etc can make informed choices about when to proceed vs. 'watchful waiting'.

Kids are really stupid. They should hardly be making any decisions at all about their lives. That's all I mean. I fully support adults' freedom to do absolutely anything with their lives, so long as it's not causing harm. I'm actually quite liberal despite what some of you might think.

it's extremely drastic.

Yeah, I thought so too. Thanks Burt.