Transgender athletes wins CT state champs for school

You are the one without reading comprehension. And you're not able to define what a woman is.

that is frankly a stupid person’s perspective and bad for sports in general

Go ahead and echo back the sermons of your Church of SRY Saints along with fellow patron saint Let it Rupp and supreme overlord Transphobia Verbosia. The federal government, DMV, and World Athletics, and Everyman doesn’t care to verify anyone’s karyotype for anything of substance in the real world.

How you do figure? I mean, it's a pretty common thing around these boards for people to champion "American-born" records. Those that do seem to think that people born outside of the US, particularly in East Africa, have an unfair advantage. Does that mean they should have their own classification for racing? Does that mean the non-African born athletes should get a head start in the race?

No, we just acknowledge that some athletes have an unfair advantage and go on with the show. You can't create a situation where every athlete on the start line has the same prospects of winning. Don't even bother.

Somebody who lives in the world as a woman regardless of their sex assigned at birth is a woman, and someone who lives in the world as a man regardless of their sex assigned at birth is a man. For example, I know a man who transitioned in the 1960s and has lived in the world as a man ever since. He married a woman and he and his wife adopted two children. He is a man and is accepted as such in society, despite having been assigned female at birth. The same applies to anyone assigned male at birth who identifies as a woman, transitions and lives their life as a woman.

well you can certainly create a situation where everyone on the start line has the same basic biological components in equal measure and no one has an undeniable upper hand on decades of reaping the benefits of testosterone and musculoskeletal development

Seriously? You previously said that you're a physician, which suggests that you have some understanding of the scientific method and the notion that truth claims are only provisionally accepted and are always subject to critique and revision. "Because Yale said so," is not good enough for me, and it shouldn't be good enough for anybody who cares about getting to the truth.

I don't like calling myself an expert of anything because I'm always learning and always open to changing my mind, but I'm literally an expert in this topic, and I'm not content to have Yale tell me how I should use particular terms, especially when they provide two separate definitions, one of which is incoherent. What does it mean to self-represent as male or female? They also leave out a definition of gender that was the dominant one in feminism until about 7 years ago; this definition says that gender refers to the social roles and expectations placed on a person by virtue of their of their biological sex. In this definition, gender is constraining; it is not a facet of inborn personality or liberated self-expression.

More broadly, where "gender" is concerned, scientists and researchers used to study the social and biological world to figure out what parts of sex/gender are biological and which are social (nature vs. nurture). Now many beg the question, putting assertions about the definition of gender in place of evidence and arguments.

Your sexuality relates to your behavior, not what you are physically.

Somebody asked me for the definition of female (biological sex) versus the definition of a woman (gender identity) that I (and my colleagues) use when treating patients or doing science. The Yale description captures the definitions pretty well and is quick to read. I can’t help that you don’t like them, but btw, these are the accepted definitions now across all academic medical institutions in the USA at least. As in all things human, there is an interplay between biological and social determinants. Again, I’m not understanding why any of this makes you so upset.

Another poster referenced parenting as a good analogy. There is the biological notion of parenting, as in a person who has genetic offspring, and there is the social construct of parenting, as in raising a child regardless of a biological connection. Both are valid, somewhat interrelated concepts that are broadly accepted by society and subject to scientific investigation. Can you be a mother and have only delivered a child, but never raised a child? Yes you can. That child is connected to you irrevocably as your biological offspring. Can you be a mother who has never been pregnant, but raised a child? Yes, you can. That child is irrevocably connected to you too, but not in the biological way of the first child. Can you be female, but not a woman, yes you can. Can you be male and a woman, yes you can.

Yes. Only an expert like yourself knows females have SRY genes.

Females are not castrated males with a dose of estrogen. They're females--people with an SRY gene, ovaries that produce eggs, a uterus in which an embryo can implant and grow into a baby, breasts that produce milk to feed that baby.

You like to say one thing and do another, don’t you?

I'm not upset in an emotional sense. I reject attempts to foreclose research and questioning by people who act as if assertsions are settled knowledge, which is precisely what Yale is doing. Can you tell me what it means to self-represent as a male or female?

What precisely renders a male a woman and a female a man?

Your claim will come as news to "Everyman" - and every woman - who contributed to the new FINA or World Aquatics' regulations that came into force last year - rules that "Everyman," every woman, and every boy and girl subject to FINA/World Aquatics' governance now has to follow. Those rules say:

All athletes must certify their chromosomal sex with their Member Federation in order to be eligible for FINA competitions. Failure to do so, or provision of a false certification, will render the athlete ineligible.

Member Federations must confirm their athletes’ certifications of chromosomal sex when registering their athletes to compete in FINA competitions

FINA reserves the right to include a chromosomal sex screen in its anti- doping protocol to confirm such certification.

Males have an SRY gene. SRY stands for sex-determining region Y gene. This gene initiates the physiological sequence that causes an embryo to develop along the male pathway.

Other than this, I agree with you. Females are not castrated males. Females produce large sessile gametes (eggs), and males produce small motile gametes (sperm).

Sounds like you are not disagreeing with anything I actually said above (which didn’t include FINA).

Look up what “everyman” means instead of being a deliberate literal dunderhead.

Those are your words that JAHJ posted italicized verbatim from another thread. I remember calling you on it as well, but it looked like you slithered away in shame without a response.

If I really wrote that, and I'm not going to check, it's obvious to anybody who regularly reads what I write that I meant to write "without." Who knows, maybe I was "PMessy" at the time or was suffering from hysteria. I do run a lot, so maybe my uterus detached from its usual position and began roaming around my abdomen. Maybe found itself all the way to my head and bumped into my brain!

Actually no! I and others in multiple earlier threads got tired of asking you to provide a refutable definition of a woman, but all you spouted was transphobic social sciencey nonscience, so it was curious to see you mention the SRY gene in defining a woman and the very first post you mentioned it fairly recently, you got it wrong, so I assumed you were still learning basic biology.

It's not about fairness, it's about cheating. Transwomen are men who identify as women, so if they enter women's sporting competitions then they are cheating.