159

26 comments

This really hits on one of my main issues around the trans sports debate, which is the hypocrisy in trans men vs trans women in sports. I’ve always found the argument ridiculous because all of our major decisions have implications and require sacrifices, and you would think that it would be a no brainer that if you medically transition that will be the end of your sports career.

There are all sorts of medical treatments that impact sports, but for some reason this one is “unfair”. But the sports debate shows how it’s perfectly acceptable for transmen to sacrifice athletic careers but not transwomen. Think about it, if you’re a female athlete and decide to medically transition, you can no longer compete with women due to hormones. So the only option is to compete with men, and transmen won’t make the cut - they are no longer competitive in their sport. But for transwomen, they get to move to the women’s field because they are no longer competitive with men. So in this way, it is perfectly acceptable for a transman to sacrifice athletics but not acceptable for a transwomen. Absolute fucking misogyny that nobody seems to notice.

Mack Beggs was the TIF who made a big stink about wrestling with the boys in high school. And she lasted a few weeks in college athletics before she tapped out. Its so obvious that this self ID sports bullshit only hurts females

I believe Beggs made the male wrestling roster at Life University, but has never competed - or even practiced with the guys. The summer between HS & uni, Beggs had a double mastectomy that apparently led to a lot of complications & damage to the pecs & some nerves that made it impossible for Beggs to do sports the first year at uni. The next year COVID hit.

There's no record on the Life University sports website of Beggs participating in any college meet, not even an exhibition event, ever. Just headshots of Beggs for the first two years. This year, Beggs' junior year, there's not even a headshot.

https://liferunningeagles.com/sports/wrestling/roster/mack-beggs/3452

Agreed. Basically everything transactivism focuses on is purely for the benefit of TIMs, not TIFs. Sports are a great example, prisons are another one-- when California legalized people going to the opposite sex prison this year (SB 132) there were literally hundreds of applications from men who wanted to go to womens' prisons and like, 3 from women that wanted to go to men's prisons.

If transwomen(TIMs) were actual women and transmen(TIFs) were actual men, then we would expect to see the same prioritization of "men's" desires in their activism, but we don't. It's all about the entitled TIMs and what they want.

The only time TIFs get prioritized in trans activism is when they are used as stalking horses in cases involving toilets & locker rooms. The trans lobby knows it would look bad to push for teenage boys to get into spaces where girls are changing, showering & attending to intimate bodily needs - so instead they file lawsuits on behalf of teenage TIFs who want into the boys' bathrooms & locker rooms.

TIFs also get put in the spotlight when they can be used to create the idea that men can have babies, need abortions & get pap smears...all of which is done to advance the TIM/TRA agenda of separating female biological functions from girls & women, whilst simultaneously reducing girls & women to those same biological functions - menstruators, gestators, birthers, birthing bodies, milk makers - and dehumanizing us by referring to us by specific sex-related body parts - uterus bearer, vagina owner, front hole haver.

[–] Livin 6 points Edited

TIFs also benefit from language policing.(TIFs are the ones that usually push for chest feeing, uterus-havers, birthing person, pregnant person, etc. to take the place of woman. TIMs benefit as well, because once the word woman is distorted and even erased, they can redefine woman and make it the same as transwomanhood.

Think about it, if you’re a female athlete and decide to medically transition, you can no longer compete with women due to hormones

That's been the case for the most part until now, but it won't necessarily remain that way. My understanding is that the trans lobby & individual athletes are arguing that TIFs should be given TUEs (therapeutic use exemptions) that allow them to take exogenous T whilst continuing to compete in female sports.

Both TIFs & TIMs have set their sights on female sports. The TIFs want to stay in women's sports - but with TUEs that allow them to dope on T - coz even when on high-dose T, they can't compete with males. And TIMs are pushing to be able to compete in female sports without suppressing T, arguing that rules & regs that require TIMs to reduce T by use of drugs or getting their balls removed goes against "my body, my choice" & amounts either to "pharmaceutical genital mutilation" or "forced surgical mutilation & sterlization." Of course, the contradictions & holes in these arguments are mind-boggling.

The rule-bending & loophole widening that trans ideologues are seeking are similar to the rule changes they've succeeded in getting state & national regulators to make to the rules for what gets covered/paid for by private & government health insurance programs. Double mastectomies for TIFs & non-binaries are increasingly being covered coz breasts are being deemed "unnatural growths" & "deformities" in girls & women with opposite sex & no sex "gender identities." Similarly, all sorts of cosmetic surgeries for people with various "gender identities" are being covered based on the idea that these are "life saving" and "reconstructive."

Ugh. And none of these people see a problem with rebranding women as some sort of "physically defective" catchall category?

[–] Livin 8 points Edited

What!?!? This is such bs. These sports leagues have to put their foot down. Then are woman sports going to called nonmen sports (to include TIMs, TIFs, and non-binaries)? They should just create a Trans division of sports and get out of female sports. If TIFs want out of womanhood so much and claim they are not female, then don't play in female sports. Why doesn't playing in female sports make them dysphoric? But somehow everything else makes them feel dysphoric, It's dysphoric if menstruation product is labelled for women or someone says pregnant woman but not playing in womens's sports. Got it.

I mean, doesn't this just prove at the end of the day that there is a physical difference between male and female?

Excellent point, well made. I hadn't thought about it in this way. thank you.

Yes, I never got the “my right to play sports”

Um

Which amendment was that again???

[–] [Deleted] 12 points Edited

The secret amendment: Men must have their cake and eat it too.

I guess the only way to make that possible is to steal cake from women and girls.

Because transgender males get anything and everything that their hearts desire.

And they don't have to deal with the trade-offs and sacrifices that come with major life decisions.

This is what makes me so angry. TIMs want to be constantly coddled and protected in a way normal people never are. Like, sorry dude, if you want to live full-time as a Stunning&Brave Laydee, you have to accept that professional athletics just isn't for you anymore. Just call your handmaiden friends and play soccer in the fucking park if you cannot live without beating women in sports

[–] Livin 22 points Edited

They're delicate flowers. They need to be affirmed in everything, by everyone, everywhere, all the time

This is an aspect of womanhood males can NEVER understand. Women who want kids and a career have to make a LOT of hard choices. Do you have them young when you're early in your education/job, or do you have them when you're older and established? How long should you take for maternity leave? And how hard will it be to catch up once you return to work? How many kids can you manage before your career takes damage? Should you pump breast milk or use formula? Etc. And no matter what you choose, people will ALWAYS judge your choices and try to make you feel like a shitty mother!

And this is amplified for professional athletes because pregnancy changes your body and breast fed babies are very dependent on having mom around. Not allowing the woman in OP to travel with her spouse and newborn is a clear act of sex discrimination! They're literally punishing her for being a new mother and asking her to choose between her Olympic career and her baby's health. Its outrageous that this is allowed to happen while the Olympic Committee sheds crocodile tears over men like Heather Swanson getting to play on the women's teams

Honestly I think traveling internationally during a pandemic with an infant is much more dangerous to the baby's health than utilising a milk bank and pumping to keep supply up. Yeah it fucking sucks, especially being away from your baby but I don't think it's sexist to say "hey actually it's probably more dangerous to take your child with you than to leave her safely at home for 28 days". She is going to be exposed to people from all over the world and it's not safe for a baby. She's not truly being forced to choose between her child's health and her career here because taking her child with her is probably the worst option in my opinion.

GOOD question! Probably because nobody cares about women's desires lol. We're "supposed" to be mothers first so being forced to abandon our athletic careers and aspirations for our children is "the natural state of things."

This is totally bonkers. How is it not clear as day the one exception should be “infants”? That baby is young enough she could be put in a chair and set on the side of practices, games, etc. and if the mom is willing to take the risk of bringing her that’s her right. I understand wanting to ban family and friends so you reduce the mass of people, but she’s right that it’s absurd to have a SPECTATOR sport with TEAMS and a nation-wide live audience but she can’t bring a baby so young she’s still breastfeeding? This is something people don’t have much sympathy for because they’re used to the male side of these issues which is just...oh, wait, never worried about it anyway because the wife will automatically be left alone with the baby.

It's her right to endanger an infant with almost no immune system? 😕 This child is not even old enough to wear a mask. Being exposed to lots of people during practices or flights is a health risk even for adults.

I absolutely have sympathy for her. My son was in the NICU for two weeks and I had to pump breast milk without seeing him. It was agonising. It's not as though pumping for 28 days will end her breastfeeding journey and bonding with her child. A dead child from COVID will end it. It's not worth the risk and I agree with the rule. Her infant would be recklessly endangered if they make an exception for her.

Tbh as a breastfeeding mother, I think taking an infant on an international flight right now is undeniably risky for the child in question. She can utilise milk banks and pump while away from her child to keep her supply, even though it sucks. Under different circumstances I would be up in arms for her but a baby can't wear a mask. Traveling to a different country with a baby in the middle of a pandemic is not advisable. It's not because she's a working mother. The current rules are there for the safety of the participants because of the pandemic and it's probably wisest for her baby to stay home.

But yeah I'm sure if she were a man on hormones trying to "breastfeed" everyone would be pulling out all the stops for him to live out his sick fantasy, because that matters more than child welfare 🤢🤮.