Are there any who want to? Why do you care?

Yes there is and they are playing

"They"? Plural?

There are vanishingly small numbers of trans athletes, so I'm skeptical. But if they are indeed playing then that would suggest they're allowed to play.

Thought there may be one but wasn't sure. So I guess if 'they’ are playing there is not yet a rule around it

I don't think they was meant in a plural sense then

I guess if 'they' are playing there is not yet a rule around it

Let people play basketball. Full stop.

Check how defensive Kobe gets about it literally immedistely. I think someone touched on one of his pet causes. I think let women decide what constitutes women in their league and in their own private spaces. I shouldnt be able to pop on a dress and expect to infiltrate what was made for them

Love this crazy left wing debate. Hypothetically what happens if Nate Jawai choses to make the transition, took the medications to meet the requirements, and suited up in the WNBL in 2025, how would that look, fair to all women?

Fraught with danger this one. We've separated sport down gender lines for a reason.

"Love this crazy left wing debate"
There are nicer ways to flag yourself as a conservative.

Someone can just say
“Love the crazy right wing response”

Let's all fight and not get along aye. We gotta hate each other. Gotta.

Why is it hateful to suggest that biological males shouldn't be competing in women’s sport Manu?

I'm proud to be a conservative, not hiding that, and happy for everyone to have their own opinions and be their best selves.

Sport should end the trans debate by making Male/Female biological at birth. It'll be a Trans athlete in the WNBL, next it will be a Boy identifying as a girl in u18s VJBL, how's that going to work out.

The only sport that has tackled this issue well is Rugby. The issue of safety basically forced their hand, given the nature of the sport. Other sports would do well to have a look a the process they went through which looked at the issue from all sides of the debate and the available scientific literature. They concluded that the goals of safety and fairness are at odds with inclusiveness in this debate. They then made the decision to prioritise safety and fairness, consequently their guidelines recommend that only biological females should compete in women's rugby.

And healthy debate is not hate, it actually promotes acceptance of others with differing opinions, and a key to ending social divide.

What causes "hate" and division of society is the silencing and cancelling of one particular side of the ledger, which unfortunately is the norm these days.

Pro sports

Biological men
Biological women
Trans men
Trans women
Disabled men
Disabled women

None of these can be grouped together unless the sport is mixed or non contact.

"silencing and cancelling of one particular side of the ledger, which unfortunately is the norm these days."

Like calling a side crazy, per chance?

I agree that it's unhelpful to cancel or silence sides, but you definitely lose the credibility to your point if you’re doing exactly that.

Unfortunately, hypocrisy is the norm these days.

Haha this is my point exactly.
18 comments and nothing has actually been said.
People aren't good at properly communicating differences of opinion or belief, so for that reason I personally don't even bother. There's really no fruit in these discussions, especially on the internet.

Game 3 can't come quick enough.

Yes there is and they are playing

"They"? Plural?

Spot on Perthworld.

Gotta say the wind has really been taken out of the Finals series. What a dead period right now. Game 3 should've been last night with the final two games for Fri/Sun. I personally haven't watched a minute so far with the opening round of the NRL and I won't be watching G3 either (but this predicament mainly affects QLD residents and NSW I guess).

Gotta say the wind has really been taken out of the Finals series. What a dead period right now.

"hypothetically if nate Jawai........"

wow he would be a 38/39 slow as baller that wouldn't even make the wnbl or never would even want to play.

those kind of comments shows what is wrong with society these days.

next you think the 5g monster going to get you???

EMelb
Yesterday

Let people play basketball. Full stop.


Let them play basketball, in their own league BOT against biological women, women have fought and are still fighting in this sport fit recognition and a more equatable playing field and now a male who "identifies@ as a female wants to muscle in (literally) on a females sport
It's disgraceful
All for supporting transgender if that’s how they want to live and identify but they have no place in a debates sporting arena
They are biological makes, Taki g hormones to change their natural chemistry , that’s strike one as no athlete at this level can take performance altering hormones or supplements.
They are born biological makes with the skeletal frame and bone strength of a man which is completely different to that of a woman regardless of hormones taken which gives them an unfair advantage when rebounding , setting screens etc
And regardless of what they identify as , especially when they have yet to d ergo gender reassignment surgery , they have a male anatomy which has NO place in a females change room , let alone having to address the contact that comes playing a team sport , he grabs a girls ass and he can be up fir sexual assault
It’s an absolute mine field of NO GO areas

If the league allows this they are failing the women in this sport yet again
This league has many 15 to 18 yr old girls playing in it , it’s irresponsible to place a transgender make n this environment

If this is the life choice they make then it comes with some sacrifices , one being playing elite team sport
They do not permit it in AFLW so why in NBL1

I shouldnt be able to pop on a dress and expect to infiltrate what was made for them

Hypothetically what happens if Nate Jawai choses to make the transition

Why is it hateful to suggest that biological males shouldn't be competing in women's sport Manu?

It'll be a Trans athlete in the WNBL, next it will be a Boy identifying as a girl in u18s VJBL, how's that going to work out.

I agree that it's unhelpful to cancel or silence sides,

I tell ya ... these trannies ... nothing but trouble.

women have fought and are still fighting in this sport fit recognition and a more equatable playing field and now a male who "identifies@ as a female wants to muscle in (literally) on a females sport

They are biological makes, Taki g hormones to change their natural chemistry , that’s strike one as no athlete at this level can take performance altering hormones or supplements.

They are born biological makes with the skeletal frame and bone strength of a man which is completely different to that of a woman regardless of hormones taken

he grabs a girls ass and he can be up fir sexual assault

They do not permit it in AFLW so why in NBL1

If you were to dig up the remains of a transgender person, the biological body they were born in would still be found, their genetic dna would identify their remains as the gender they were born that's a fact

If you cannot understand how a trans female is completely different in every way to a biological one, then you have a problem
FYI Koberulze, a "biological female “ is not made by altering hormonal status , no amount of homones will ever give a biological man a period, nor allow them to give birth , that’s what a biological female is born with, the anatomy to grow life
And because of that they have a completely different skeletal formation , their pelvis has a completely different function, different centre of balance , weight distribution.
Biological males especially ones that have gone through puberty have much denser bone mass, more structural power in all areas, and no amount of female hormone changes that
These facts play a huge roll in competing team sports and individual sports, swimming now has different times for transgenders to qualify because of this

Sure they have every right to play sport, but it should not be at the expense of women , you put a biological male against a biological female in a running race and you know whose most likely to win, same as it will be in basketball.
Using Liz Cambage as an example of an equal playing field is a terrible attempt to justify it, of course it would be equal, plenty of Opals play in NBL1 they are biological females so there is no disadvantage other than skill base.
Putting a male into that scenario changes things, imagine a burly male who identifies as a female tackling an opal and causing a season/ career ending injury , yes it can happen at anytime but the odds are it’s more likely with a male against a female , now change that to a 15 yr old girl against a 6ft plus male , that’s a law suit in the making for lack of duty of care
Males identifying as females have NO place in women’s sports it’s actually that simple , they can go play in
Mix gender teams if they want to play basketball

" They didn't permit Jews in 1940s Germany, what's your point?"

Godwins law much. Why was that a helpful comment to make?

“Why? Why must we pretend that all debates have two opposing and equally-valid positions?

Nobody actually believes that. The only debate is over where to draw the line. Most people are okay with silencing/canceling those who advocate for genocide, for example. There's very little "no, no, hear them out" on that one.”

Given you decided to do a sentence by sentence breakdown response to what was a largely indecipherable mess of English, I'm guessing you’re pretty content at shouting at brick walls if it means you get to vent your point.

Avoiding silencing people isn’t pretending or admitting to two opposing yet equally valid opinions.

Your interpretation on that doesn’t have a logical basis and the English in it doesn’t reflect it either.

I don’t know how you even gleaned that to be honest.

For what it’s worth, I think bad faith arguing and finding ways to misread what people say isn’t overly helpful either.

If you were to dig up the remains of a transgender person, the biological body they were born in would still be found, their genetic dna would identify their remains as the gender they were born that's a fact

If you cannot understand how a trans female is completely different in every way to a biological one, then you have a problem

no amount of homones will ever give a biological man a period, nor allow them to give birth

Biological males especially ones that have gone through puberty have much denser bone mass, more structural power in all areas, and no amount of female hormone changes that

These facts play a huge roll in competing team sports and individual sports, swimming now has different times for transgenders to qualify because of this

Sure they have every right to play sport, but it should not be at the expense of women

Using Liz Cambage as an example of an equal playing field is a terrible attempt to justify it, of course it would be equal, plenty of Opals play in NBL1 they are biological females so there is no disadvantage other than skill base.

imagine a burly male who identifies as a female

Cue the circus music

Koberulze, seriously your trying to compare a woman whose had a hysterectomy with a man whose never had a uterus lol

Fact is you cannot change your dna , taking female hormones may make your facial hair stop growing and your breast tissue increase slightly, but it will never give you ovaries, a uterus, a vagina, periods or the ability to give birth or have hysterectomy, that's a biological female not one made by taking hormones wearing female attire or choosing to identify as a woman

The choice to have a males who. Identify as females play in team sport needs to made by the women this decision affects, the biological females already in the sport

I have 3 friends who have all transgender children and they agree that a transgender females ( born a male ) should not be playing against women in any sport, for all the reasons mentioned ,but also because it shows no respect for women knowing and understanding how hard it’s been for women to be respected as athletes at elite levels in all sports and THATS what they are trying to be, straight from the horses mouth so to speak

If there is real interest in this, then I would suggest looking at either the AFL or the Cricket Australia policies- Both have different policies for elite/ elite development and community level competitions. Both look at each athlete on a case-by-case basis with ongoing assessment by a medical panel (and this is a massive simplification of a thoughtful process). Having studied and written on this topic, both these organizations are world-leading in their policies, and way in front of World Rugby.

Have a listen to KR

99.982% of people can be accurately identified as male or female based on the underlying nature of their biology and whether their body's system was intended to produce either sperm or eggs, ie male or female. There's your definition of biological male and female

The fact that some, for various reasons, cannot actually produce sperm or eggs is beside the point.

Males have inherent physiological advantages on average, one being that they're substantially taller and wider which is helpful in many sports. Hormones don't change those things.

Could put a new slant on Mixed Basketball

Can we all agree to not present opinion as facts?

Just say "I think" if you're going to interpret science.

Instead of “X is X because science”, because that’s kind of BS, let’s be honest.

LV - I think you’re confusing sex and gender.

If you want to talk chromosomes, you’re talking sex, I think.

If you’re talking the nature of DNA signals and hormones, you’re talking a process that isn’t binary, as far as I am aware.

Which leads to this:
“Males have inherent physiological advantages on average”

I believe science is a pretty clear and consensus these days that you can’t make that blanket assertion for those having undergone an altered hormonal process, for lack of a better term.

Realistically it’s a complicated situation of a case by case basis, whether people would like to admit it or not.

It’s extremely complicated. A lot of the purported advantages aren’t even the relevant ones, it’s usually levels of chemicals none of us have ever heard of which are pertinent to the question of if there is an inherent advantage.

There really isn’t a scenario where there’s a blanket advantage for transgender athletes, but there’s also not a situation where transgender athletes can be said to all not have an advantage.

So, if inherent advantage is what dictates whether a transgender athlete should or should not be allowed to compete, it would seem it’s a literal a case by case basis on what is very complicated science, that probably shouldn’t be oversimplified as to how LV has done, especially if the aim is to represent a semblance of accuracy.

Men and women are separated in sport for a reason. There's a reason why a man hitting a woman is seen as so abhorrent. Men and women are biologically not built the same. I am happy to sit and laugh and watch some guy dominate women's sports - it doesnt affect me personally. But I will happily tell one and all that it is a ridiculous spectacle that shouldn't really be happening.

My personal experience with the mixing of genders on a basketball court happened in the first game of mixed basketball I ever played. I almost broke some girl's hand just trying to intercept a pass to her. I wasn't playing overly aggressively. I definitely wasn't out to hurt anyone. But that's the reality of the situation - when you put men in women's sports, women get hurt. Even when the rules are heavily put in the favour of women, as is the case in mixed basketball, women run the risk of injury and most certainly run the risk of being dominated.

But for me, do what you want. Have trans women in basketball leagues - go for it. The best disinfectant for BS is sunlight. It wont take long for the obvious truth to reveal itself in ways that only an idiot could ignore.

"The best disinfectant for BS is sunlight"

I've noticed that’s a term used increasingly by conspiracy theorists lately. What’s the latest one? 20 minute cities?

What happens if you’re proven wrong, I assume you’d just make up reasons as to why you’re not wrong?

It’s a totally pointless term that appears to be used by people who can only contemplate just how right they are and how wrong everyone else is.

There’s absolutely zero room for a feedback loop or capacity to absorb people saying “hey, what you’re saying is actually not true, and here’s why...”

"I almost broke some girl's hand just trying to intercept a pass to her."

Yeah look, played mix for a solid decade, generally speaking if you try to intercept a pass, you don't foul them in the process, let alone nearly break a hand.

I think your coordination/timing might not be great, perhaps basketball isn’t the sport for you?

Men and women are separated in sport for a reason.

That would be called evidence-based reasoning, Luuuc.

Get that weak woke shit out of here!

But for me, do what you want. Have trans women in basketball leagues - go for it. The best disinfectant for BS is sunlight. It wont take long for the obvious truth to reveal itself in ways that only an idiot could ignore.


If it's as simple as trans people in basketball, and it’s not an issue having them in team sports, why are we bothering with men and women’s sports in the first place, why can’t they play in the men’s league.... Bet the men wouldn’t be happy about that , and the trans would be screaming g the men are too physically tough…. Yet they seem to think it’s on for them to now come into women’s sports

I hope the rest of the teams in the league actually take a stance and say no to this madness, women’s basketball is not the place for men who identify as female to interject themselves into

It’s wrong on so many levels

Sporting administrators can't even make consistent tribunal decisions and you're trusting them with something like this? Nah. Case-by-case is too arbitrary and inconsistent.

And as the evidence base changes, the decisions will change, so you might have a bizarre situation where a transgender athlete has been competing for a number of years and then the standards change and they become ineligible. Are their team's championships then forfeited?

Here's evidence that will never change.

Males that go through puberty will be, on average, 12-14cm taller than females. Plus wider at the shoulders and longer arms than a female.

That's a significant advantage in many sports.

That doesn't mean every male is taller than every female. Although it does mean the vast majority of males are taller than the average female. What it also means is that every male is, other things being equal, taller, wider and longer limbed than a female version of themselves.

So the most consistent, fair and logical thing to do is apply this across the board and not allow males that have been through puberty to compete against females.

And no one's saying they can't play sport. They're welcome to compete against men. If this means they compete in 2nd or 3rd division instead of top division, so be it. That's something that needs to happen to protect the competitive integrity and fairness of sport for females.

Can these games have bets placed?

Semi serious

"Here's evidence that will never change.

Males that go through puberty will be, on average, 12-14cm taller than females."

Why would you say “here's evidence that will never change” and proceed to give an example always changes?

You had to use specificity in the figures which has literally always varied in history and will always vary in the future. And it also varies through different races.

I’m not saying height and broadness isn’t necessarily as “advantage” or that overall men aren’t going to be taller/broader than women.

Your actual statement was just simply completely wrong and straight up bizarre. Such an unnecessary commitment to make.

By the by, you didn’t so much mount an argument about transgender (given you’ve ignored endocrinology, but whatever), you’ve really just mounted an argument as to why we should exclude based on race.

Because isn’t race where we see significant discrepancy in height and broadness?

Euro females are similar or taller than SE Asian males on average.

Do you want to touch that argument and tell us why it needs to apply to gender but not race or....?

Koberulze, seriously your trying to compare a woman whose had a hysterectomy with a man whose never had a uterus lol

taking female hormones may make your facial hair stop growing and your breast tissue increase slightly, but it will never give you ovaries, a uterus, a vagina, periods or the ability to give birth or have hysterectomy

The choice to have a males who. Identify as females play in team sport needs to made by the women this decision affects, the biological females already in the sport

it shows no respect for women knowing and understanding how hard it's been for women to be respected as athletes at elite levels in all sports and THATS what they are trying to be, straight from the horses mouth so to speak

99.982% of people can be accurately identified as male or female based on the underlying nature of their biology and whether their body's system was intended to produce either sperm or eggs

Males have inherent physiological advantages on average, one being that they're substantially taller and wider which is helpful in many sports. Hormones don't change those things.

LV - I think you’re confusing sex and gender.

If you want to talk chromosomes, you’re talking sex, I think.

Men and women are separated in sport for a reason.

women’s basketball is not the place for men who identify as female to interject themselves into

Males that go through puberty will be, on average, 12-14cm taller than females. Plus wider at the shoulders and longer arms than a female.

That's a significant advantage in many sports.

What it also means is that every male is, other things being equal, taller, wider and longer limbed than a female version of themselves.

[Your actual statement was just simply completely wrong and straight up bizarre.]

No it wasn't.

It might not have been sufficiently precise for your liking, but the underlying point was 100% fact. Being that males who proceed through puberty are significantly taller than females, on average.

That has been true throughout all of history and it won't change. (Unless humanity starts altering embryos so we're all the same height like some dystopian sci-fi horror film).

Race isn't as clearly definable, firstly. But no one's suggesting we let Asian men compete against Euro females, are they?

This debate takes place within the specific context that certain physical advantages that males possess have been withered down by the use of hormones. I'm simply pointing to physical advantages that lie outside the realm of hormones ability to change. It's a specific point within a specific context. Race is a broader issue and therefore not relevant or analogous.

Being that males who proceed through puberty are significantly taller than females, on average

*And wider, and longer armed

But no one's suggesting we let Asian men compete against Euro females, are they?

"No it wasn't.

It might not have been sufficiently precise for your liking, but the underlying point was 100% fact. Being that males who proceed through puberty are significantly taller than females, on average.“

Sometimes I get the feeling your ability to read is a little subpar, I told you off for being unnecessarily specific because it made your statement clearly wrong.

You preferred to be inaccurate through hyperbole than just say “men are taller than women" on average. Because, as I said...

“You had to use specificity in the figures”

Clearly you felt it was worth mentioning to have an effect to your argument.

Don't go brushing it aside - especially given if the height difference was negligible, it’d ruin the effect of your argument.

So, in summary, yes LV, it certainly was wrong.

“Race isn't as clearly definable, firstly”
Silly, silly, silly. Race is fundamental to medical science, it’s most definitely definable and measurable.

“But no one's suggesting we let Asian men compete against Euro females, are they?”

That’s the way you went? Not “why let Asian men compete with European men” given that has a similar discrepancy in stature?

Or are you going to waste everyone’s time and say “but muscles” and be completely wrong about endocrinology?

What’s the poison you wish to pick?

A question for all commenting about size and strength etc Any of you actually know the attributes of this person? They may be 5'3" as an example. All of you are making generalisations based on absolute no knowledge of the individual. It's kind of funny

Oh dear, KET with the condescending comments.

Given that humans are growing taller with each generation and the proportionate difference isn't changing, would you have preferred I said "Males that go through puberty will be, on average, *at least* 12-14cm taller than females."

I assume that is both sufficiently specific and unchanging for you.

Race may be measurable genetically. However there's more variation where individuals are concerned.

As I said earlier the male/female distinction can be made in 99.98% of humans. 99.98% of humans are either male/female. Not indistinguishable (intersex) or somewhere in between. The same is not true of race.

[All of you are making generalisations based on absolute no knowledge of the individual]

Every male is, all other things being equal, taller, wider and longer limbed than a female version of themselves.

Even if that male is 5'3.

Oh child please

As I said earlier the male/female distinction can be made in 99.98% of humans.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/

There you go

The 1.7% figure is regularly bandied around but if you look at the details, it's beyond ridiculous.

To say that, for example, a boy with a very mild abnormality in their urethra is therefore "intersex" just massively fails the pub test. Not to mention fails the medical test. No medical professional would be in any doubt whatsoever about the sex of a boy with that condition.

The same is true of the majority of the other conditions used to reach the 1.7% figure.

I mean, the first of those exclusions I googled is definitely something I would class as "can't tell gender just based on XX or XY chromosomes".

The definition of "intersex" they're using isn't as meaningful in a discussion of how clear-cut and biological gender is, because those light shades of grey are just as much the point as anything less clear.

If you google a bit more you'll find the 1.7% figure is based on an "ideal male" and "ideal female" stereotype

So basically they define some arbitrary parameters around secondary sex characteristics (which are distinct from underlying sex) such that for example, a boy possessing a normal length penis but a mild urethra abnormality (hypospadias) is therefore not a boy but intersex. Among other examples

This 1.7% figure is actually taught in Australian schools if you can believe that. Not sure how teachers can teach that with a straight face, but they're expected to

" Oh dear, KET with the condescending comments."

What was condescending? Telling you to read properly before replying? At no point have you said “oh sorry, I misread” - you read what you wanted to read, not what was said.

That's a bad faith method of replying to someone, so that’s a you issue, not a me issue.

“I assume that is both sufficiently specific and unchanging for you.”

If that’s the argument you want to roll with, complete the argument then: What do we do with the issue of similar stature discrepancy by race?

If discrepancy of stature is the safety issue, it doesn’t suddenly not exist for race, does it?

Basketball Australia has a policy- https://australia.basketball/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Transgender-Inclusion-Guidelines-December-2021.pdf
Basketball NZ probably has (in my opinion) a better policy with greater information.

Sections 5 and 6 of the BA policy covers respectively community and elite level competitions. NBL1 is considered an elite level competition, and judgements will be made on a case by case basis by (it appears) a panel including medical personnel.

Mitigation requirements for inclusion in elite competitions will follow FIBA rules as outlined in NZ policy-
1) appers to be a requirement to live as a member of the gender identity group for a period of four years after their declaration (hence, male athletes won't just up and choose to change to win a game or enter a women's changeroom)
2) maintain testosterone levels below 10nmolper litre for at least twelve months, with the possibility that this could be for longer if case by case resolution demands. (There are other requirements)

Both policies have the cutoff for automatic inclusion as Under 15s in juniors- this fits in with the early VCAT ruling on inclusion of adolescent female players in junior boys football competitions. So, junior trans girls and boys before the age of 15 are able to play in the competition that corresponds to their gender identity.

koberulz
Yesterday

But no one's suggesting we let Asian men compete against Euro females, are they?
Nobody's banning Euro women from competing against Asian women, either.


No they aren't because they are women you numpty lol

Transgender are NOT women nor female they are men and males who identify as women and females and need to take hormones to justify that thought process because their bodies clearly and unconditionally want to be male

They have no place in women’s sport , doesn’t mean they can’t play sport, they can enter mixed teams? Individual sports or play against men, but keep away from women in sport , women work too hard to get their own recognised now these men who want to identify as women/female ( and that’s their right if that’s what makes them happy) want to infiltrate into women’s sport

Take a make who has gone through puberty and sits at 6 weighs in at say 95kg and has a hand span and wing span to match ( let’s not forget shoe size) , they have always run as PG / SG , they come into the women’s league, just because they have taken hormones and identify as a female doesn’t change their height, weight, arm length hand / foot size, and they get signed as a OG, imagine that coming up against the likes of Reid, Heal, Pannousis, Rocci, Cubbilloetc, they are all u see 5’6, even your talker PGs like Whitcomb, Wallace, Melbourne Madgen, Antonuadou, who all sit around the 5,9, 5,10 mark , they would literally be wiped out constantly and likely injured, or put that into a 66 post player coming in at over the 110kg , goi g fir a rebound against the likes of Pizzey, the Froling twins, Megan Makay even Kayla George and Sherf, on what plant is that an even or fair playing field

If they want to play at elite level let them play against men , if your happy to have transgenders in sport then let them play against their birth gender

To return to the race comparison for a second.

Thought experiment.

Imagine 99.982% of the human male population could be clearly categorised as either an Asian male or a European male (to take KET's example). And European males had, on average, a range of significant physical advantages on average. Perhaps it would make sense to have two different competitions.

But clearly that is not remotely analogous to actual reality with regards to race.

People often cannot be clearly categorised. And there are a multitude of races. Not so with sex- there are two sexes only, and people are clearly identifiable.

The number of people who are truly "intersex", ie not male or female is roughly the same number of coin tosses which land on their side, instead of Head or Tails. 1 in 6000.

Society is more than adept at exclusion via race.

The reason we don't do it anymore is because racism is a shit move, not because it’s too logistically hard with mix-races.

So is your view that we ought to do it via race for safety as well *if* it was logistically easy to do so?

You know, to be consistent in protecting people from stature differences?

Oh KET get off the race crap, it's got absolutely nothing to do with race, males and females are in every race , men identifying as women isn’t justification to accept them into a female sporting team, Christ I could identify as a whale doesn’t mean I can swim the world ocean’s holding my breath now does it if you want to try ridiculously outrageous analogy

Transgender are NOT women

their bodies clearly and unconditionally want to be male

men identifying as women isn't justification to accept them into a female sporting team, Christ I could identify as a whale doesn’t mean I can swim the world ocean’s holding my breath now does it if you want to try ridiculously outrageous analogy

Koberulz with the facts and I'm here for it.

"Biological processes do not have intent."

Evolution says otherwise.

Mammalian reproduction says it has a very specific biological intent.

Protip, transwomen ARE NOT women.

Stop repeating this lie, and you won't be tired of it.

Evolution says otherwise.

Protip, transwomen ARE NOT women.

"Evolution says otherwise.

No it doesn't."

Yes it does.

There is not a single shred of evidence in the field of biology which says otherwise.

"Protip, transwomen ARE NOT women.

Incorrect."

You've already demonstrated your anti-science credentials.

It is wise for you to be silent and take instruction from your betters.

Evolution doesn't say anything. It's a process. How on earth can it have intent?

"Evolution doesn't say anything. It's a process. How on earth can it have intent?"

It doesn't need to express anything.

Evolution isn't a process, it's a function. That function is to perpetuate the species. There is no such thing as a successful species which doesn't reproduce.

That is why science dictates there are only two genders, despite the tiny incurrence of chromosomal abnormalities.

It should be every woman's right to show their penis to whomever they like.

Evolution isn't a process, it's a function. That function is to perpetuate the species.

science dictates

"Nope. Perpetuation of the species is simply the result of the process."

So a specific ... or 'intended' outcome so to speak...

"There's no "thought" or "intent" behind it. That's not how it works."

It is precisely how it works.

Evolution is a function which is secular to conscious thought, to sentient input. It is **NATURE**

Nature derived from the Greek root 'phusis', or 'producing'. it's Indo=-European root deriving from 'bheu', a verb for '(to) be'. - To be producing.

The mammalian adaption of a delivery of two different type of gametes, with women delivering the ovum, men delivering the sperm.

Humans can do this unconsciously, as do many other mammals. The evolutionary programming is they do this, and this is what made them a successful species.

Programming has men for the most part attracted to women, and women attracted to men.

If men were only ever attracted to men, and women only attracted to women, the mammalian gametes would never reach each other. The species would die out.

Again, this doesn't not have to be a process of tick boxes, or conscious intent.

"Things that are capable of surviving survive, things that aren't capable of surviving don't. That's it."

That’s right, that is why there is no gender outside of male and female. All mutations which lead to a variant of XX and XY are infertile, and cannot reproduce. If a mutation of a third gender did become viable, then that would be different.

But at the moment, they either deliver an ovum or a sperm.

Science buddy, you should try it one day, instead of clinging to already debunked dogma.


“science dictates
No it doesn't."

It is tested and indisputable.
It most certainly does.

So a specific ... or 'intended' outcome so to speak...

Evolution is a function which is secular to conscious thought,

Again, this doesn't not have to be a process of tick boxes, or conscious intent.

That's right, that is why there is no gender outside of male and female. All mutations which lead to a variant of XX and XY are infertile, and cannot reproduce.

"science dictates
No it doesn't."

It is tested and indisputable.
It most certainly does.

Frisbee!

While I agree with what you are saying you've referred to a woman and a they/their in the same sentence so thats a couple of cancellation demerits for misgendering. Please, be better ;)

"I have no idea what you think "secular" means."

There's a lot of thing which elude you in this topic.

'Even granting that gender is biological (it isn't),"

It is, it can only be biological.

I know there is a current fad paraded by debunked ideologues attempting to assert it as something different, but at it's core it still reverts back to biological.

See Rajini Varma's work, where a lot of this come from.

You can't have a 'female brain in a male body' unless there is a nature to females, which is then by default, biological.

"homosexual, asexual and infertile people exist."

Yes, and they are of XX or XY chromosones, thus can be assigned male or female.

"Because evolution does not have intent, it's simply random mutations. Some survive. Some don't. That's all."

And the successful ones survive. And the successful, prevailing trait is heteroexual reproduction between a man and a woman.

Men exist, and they are men. But transwomen are men.

Women exist, and the are women, but transmen are women.

This is beyond dispute, it has a 100% success rate under the lens of biology.

"science dictates
No it doesn't."

It is tested and indisputable.
It most certainly does.

Science has never dictated anything, because that's not what science is. "

Science by it very core dictates truth.

It measures something and establishes a natural law. It can't be circumvented to sooth someone's feelings.

"Science is a method of investigating the world/universe and attempting to describe it."

Yes, and when successfully described... it dictates what we know... ?!?

So for example, what we know is...

We justifiably segregate sporting competition.

Some is based on age...

Some is based on gender....

Science DICTATES that someone with a Y chromosome is going to be overwhelmingly stronger, faster and bigger than someone without it.

Again, we segregate sporting competition on someone who is a man (XY chromosomes) and someone who is a woman (XX chromosomes)

Now we could go call it the "XX Chromosome National Basketball League" (XXCNBL), but we have a legacy word for this... it's called "Women". Biology tells us what a woman is.

We segregate sporting competition on chromosomes, this segregation is not circumvented to allow a bloke in because he wears a dress.

"I have no idea what you think "secular" means."

There's a lot of thing which elude you in this topic.

"homosexual, asexual and infertile people exist."

Yes, and they are of XX or XY chromosones, thus can be assigned male or female.

And the successful ones survive. And the successful, prevailing trait is heteroexual reproduction between a man and a woman.

Science by it very core dictates truth.

It measures something and establishes a natural law.

Science DICTATES that someone with a Y chromosome is going to be overwhelmingly stronger, faster and bigger than someone without it.

Again, we segregate sporting competition on someone who is a man (XY chromosomes) and someone who is a woman (XX chromosomes)

"I know what "secular" actually means, I don't know what you think it means because, as with a lot of the words you've used in this discussion, you used it incorrectly."

No, you're the one flailing with an inadequate knowledge of language, your baulking at 'dictate’ showed that.

‘Secular’ is used to express in lay fashion as ‘neutral or unrelated to religion’, but it is not its origin, and is never constricted to this. You're not a smart person, you need to educate yourself.

"The concept of the secular does not have to mean not-religion or non-religion. The assumption that the ‘secular’ is only conceivable through some idea of ‘religion’ or the ‘religious’ - whether in static or dynamic tension – is demonstrably incorrect" - https://secularismandnonreligion.org/articles/10.5334/snr.124

From the same website and an expression;
"“The results of this secular trend study suggest that hair loss in the population is significantly correlated with seasonality."
If you want to attempt to demonstrate you have insights others don't, you're going to find yourself in trouble.

“https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter_syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome”
The exception proves the rule....

“And the successful ones survive. And the successful, prevailing trait is heteroexual reproduction between a man and a woman.
So fucking what?”

Evolution is the outcome of reproductive success. That is why there are ONLY 2 genders, because any other combination or mutation is unsuccessful, we know what those genders are and we can identify those genders by their chromosomes.

Two genders in our species are the only possible outcomes for further reproduction.

This relates to my first post….

“"Biological processes do not have intent."
Evolution says otherwise.”

Being born male or female has an intended outcome, no mammal can be something other than male or female and be part of successful reproduction.

“That is literally the exact opposite of how science works.”
No it’s not, it is exactly how it works. If I say “If you step off a cliff, gravity *dictates* you will fall to the bottom”. Now a real Einstein like you might call yourself trans-avian and argue this via being a pedant, but reality is going to DICTATE to you an outcome.

“So without science, there would be no natural laws? What in the ever loving fuck are you talking about?”
No, it means even if we are unable to measure or observe it exists anyway. But a natural law will dictate its outcomes upon you anyway. Two genders in mammalian reproduction is a natural law, even if your kind are confused and no longer able to measure there are 2 genders, or what those two genders are.
Natural law will trump your delusion.

A further example would be radioactive material harming humans If we didn’t have the science to understand radioactivity. Radiation exposure will dictate your health effects, not feelings. This explanation backs by stance, not yours. Again, you’re not a smart person.

“Not only does science not dictate this, reality does not dictate this either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome”
That doesn’t counter what I am asserting, they’re still a man if XY, and still a woman if XX. They have moderate to severe defects, but are still male or female, and when we did up their skeleton centuries from now we will easily be able to make that identification.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achondroplasia
Dwarfism is not another gender. Now it is a severe defect, but does not counter anything I have asserted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone_deficiency
Not being able to produce growth hormone is a defect, but it does not alter gender.



“Name one person who has had to submit to chromosomal testing to play in the NBL or WNBL.”
Red herring, bordering on gas lighting. We have youth competitions, but we don’t subject them to bone age radiology tests. We can still understand the principle of segregating them based on age however.

Same principle applies, we segregate Men (XY) chromosomes from Women (XX chromosomes) for reasons of competition. The deciding factor is their chromosomes, not the clothes they wear.

Except the deciding criterion is not, and never has been, chromosomes. You dumb fuck.

Chromosomes have always been the deciding factor, because this is what determines what is a Man, and what is a Woman.

Referring back to your poorly thought bubble-

"So without science, there would be no natural laws? What in the ever loving fuck are you talking about?"

We know what a Woman is, being of XX Chromosomes. We rarely require a Chromosome test to determine it however. But we have understanding of it, and we should segregate competition on this principle.

A bloke wearing a dress is not a Woman, and rightfully should be excluded from competing in Women's competition, for the reason of the Y chromosome.

Our test for exclusion needn't be a Chromosome test.

We know what a Woman is, being of XX Chromosomes

Your science denying stance doesn't change anything.

We are all conceived with the same phenotypically female characteristics. That is why men have nipples

It is the presence of a Y chromosome which differentiates between the two genders, gonads becomes testicles for males.

Testicles then produce a major release of testosterone in the middle trimester of gestation of already impact the physiology of men which for the most part women can never overcome this advantage.

Things such as the narrowness of hips (wider to give child birth) and necks (why women are more susceptible to concussion).

men then get a further, permanent release of testosterone at puberty, at which point, virtually all women are more forever more more feeble than active 15 year old boys.

So no...once again you are wrong, and you continue to be someone who is not a smart person.

A Y chromosome dictates what is a man, the absence of which dictates what is a woman.

This Y chromosome which codes gonads to turn into testicles, which barring anomalies, produce testosterone. This makes a man so physically advantaged in terms of size, strength and speed that barring genetic defects or major trauma events, women can never close the gap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome

Pointing out a birth defect doesn't change this.

This is the 2nd time you've posted that link, and it refutes nothing.

If you were a smart person you'd understand. It's called critical thinking, it's preferable to blindly adhering to an orthodoxy.

But you're not a smart person, you're rehashing links and talking points with zero understanding of what they mean.

So pointing out things that contradict what you say doesn't prove you're full of shit? Righto.

"This Y chromosome which codes gonads to turn into testicles, which barring anomalies, produce testosterone. This makes a man so physically advantaged in terms of size, strength and speed that barring

--> *** genetic defects or major trauma events *** <--

, women can never close the gap."


It doesn't contradict anything I said.

Again, you're not a smart person.

Are XY CAIS individuals men, or women?

Men, they have a Y chromsome, like science says

How could you ever possibly know?

That's not the litmus test.

Try again.

So you concede there's no way of knowing.

In which case there's nothing stopping them from competing in women's sports.

Which means chromosomes are not the determining factor in the split of sports leagues.

You. Dumb. Fuck.

"So you concede there's no way of knowing."

There's a way of knowing, whether there is suspicion to apply the test is different, but science exist regardless of whetehr it is actively observed or tested.

I understand you have failed to understand this concept once before, so it comes as no surprise once again.

But in this event, this may be a man who falls into female competition, but he is a man none the less.

"In which case there's nothing stopping them from competing in women's sports."

If their tested and found to be XY, then yes, they would be exempt, because a woman's competition is for women.

It's not a hard concept.

Well it is hard for some..

"Which means chromosomes are not the determining factor in the split of sports leagues."

It doesn't mean that at all.

Again, you are not a smart person.

"You. Dumb. Fuck."

Lulz, yeah you really mopped the floor with that one...

Please make it stop!

If chromosomes were the criterion, they would be tested for. They aren't.

You're stupid.

As I said sparky, you don't U derstand science.

If I am unable to detect if so.ething is radioactive, that's doesn't mean it's not harmful to my health.

But you think it's a flex to say "if you don't do a chromosome test to detect a Y chromosome, then they're not male.. checkmate!!!"

That's the viewpoint of a moron.

You are that moron.

A Y chromosome dictates if so eone is a male

Geezus can't believe the crap coming out of koberulz, seriously
"Nope. Perpetuation of the species is simply the result of the process.""
Mate get off the cool aid the entire human race would not exist if there were not TWO sexes one being make one being female
And a transgender female is NOT a woman in anyway shape or form other than how they perceive themselves and how the hormones they have taken or the surgeries they have had makes them
To say otherwise is not only insulting to biological women but also completely untrue

Same as a transgender male is NOT a man, that doesn’t mean that they cannot live their lives as their chosen sex, that they are free to do but not at the expense of biological females and males , this BS cis and wanting pronouns to be used is simply trying to disregard a real females /males rights in this world .

Support transgenders by all means but women have a right to play their sport on their own terms with their own peers and equals