Where in your cited article does it say 6 yr olds are getting puberty blockers or 12 yr olds are groomed into transitioning?
Sorry I didn't think it was necessary to provide explicit evidence for all of my points but since I'm sure this is all you need to change your mind I'll add them in below.
James Damon Younger, whose mother and pediatrician wanted to put him on puberty blockers when he was 6
"The lawsuit against the Kettle Moraine school district was filed in Waukesha county circuit court last Wednesday. The plaintiffs argue that the district undermined and overrode parents’ decision-making role regarding a “major and controversial” issue. “Specifically,” it said, “the district has adopted a policy to allow, facilitate, and ‘affirm’ a minor student’s request to transition to a different gender identity at school – without parental consent and even over the parents’ objection.”
In the midst of the oldest track meet in the United States, the paper of record's coverage of running is about... a man who won $10,000 in a marathon with a time just barely faster than the winner of the women's race. Leaving aside the issue of whether non-binary is a legitimate category (it's not). How does it make any sense that gender identity factors into athletic performance. Can anyone explain to me why there should be a separate category for slower men who identify as they/thems to compete in? With transwomen I understand that it's a more complex issue because there are hormonal treatments (read: castration) that lend credence to the argument that they should compete with the women (they shouldn't). But in this case I don't see any science based argument for why this category is necessary other than for providing clout chasing men with an opportunity to leverage their newfound status as a protected class to win money that should otherwise be going to the actual winners of the men/women's races.
What is apparent is that you just posted this story so you could ride your transphobic hobby horse. Glad you're having fun.
Because the label "transphobic" is a meaningless phrase that conveys nothing about an individuals beliefs. Is it "transphobic" of me to not want 6 year olds put on puberty blockers, or see 12 year olds groomed into socially transitioning by school staff without their parents knowledge? Am I transphobic for thinking that a father shouldn't lose custody over his 15 year old son because he doesn't approve of him medically transitioning?
Yes, you can be called transphobic because you clearly have an agenda and it is anti-trans. I won't read your specific cases, because I know that there are legitimate arguments from different parties on both sides, and you are only presenting the argument from one side, the anti-trans side. You may actually be right to argue against transitioning in some of the cases, or even all of the ones you picked out, but in a forum where we are not involved in those specific cases, to only use that as your argument can be called anti-trans or transphobic.
Maybe we are just getting ready to be humanoids. perhaps the deep state is getting ready to introduce the alien species and we’d have a hard time gender identifying them. therefore, aliens won’t have to feel bad, and we’ll all be used to it.
look at r/TumblrInAction on reddit. Jackie Green and Jazz Jennings were gr00med by their parents, forced on puberty blockers, and then subjected to a pseudo "sex change" (creating a facsimile of a vagina) that didn't work because there wasn't enough material to work with because of the puberty blockers
When much younger, I remember attending many local races where there were no divisions. Everyone started at the same time and competed against everyone else. The first three finishers received recognition and awards.
Some race directors started adding a separate category for female runners. I have also seen categories for walkers, all sorts of age groups, those with physical disabilities, those with intellectual disabilities, those running with dogs, athenas and clydesdales (those that weighed a certain amount more than average), local resident categories, club member categories, those pushing babies in stroller devices, those running with their child, those running with a spouse, those running in a costume, etc.
Now some event directors may choose to expand their categories to include those that identify as nonbinary. There are numerouss other catefoties that could be added based upon how individuals choose to identify themselves.
I have no preference about what categories event directors choose to offer. I a Event directors have the ability to offer as many or as few divisions as they wish. (I have also attended races where there were no categories, and even the runner that finished first was not recognized) Runners can decide what they are and what they want to be, based on genetics and/or their choice, and enter any category that they wish. Participants can also choose not to select any category, and refuse to provide information regarding their gender and age that are on most entry forms.
If I do not like what categories and event offers, I do not have to participate.
Events directors do not even have to separate categories when they recognize participants. It would be intersting to see someone get awards for finishing third overall running as a nonbinary individual in a team with their spouse in the 20-29 age group as a local club member and heavier runner with a phycical disability in a costume.
I don't have a dog. Can I compete in the non-caninary division? I do have a cat, so is there a felinary division?
I have never been a race director, but I have a lot of respect for what they do. They have to decide what they want to reward, what they want to emphasize, what sort of experience they want to provide to their paying participants.
The nonbinary option maybe is a good selling point for a race in one part of the country, not just in terms of the number of nonbinary participants but also in terms of the race's overall "affect." It could appeal to a population that supports in principle the idea of nonbinary as a reasonable gender choice. It arguably wouldn't be a selling point in other parts of the country.
As far as races with other categories and nonstandard aspects, we already have them. I've competed (with dog) in a race that encourages dog participation, and which had a prizes both for the human/dog category and the human-only category. I've been in other races that prohibited dogs. Obviously, some races have a wheelchair division, most don't. You'll never have a baby-stroller division for liability reasons.
Regarding prize money, if I were a race director, I would worry about the appearance of welcoming people to register as nonbinary, and then having second-rate or lower-tier prizes for them. "Yes, you can register, but only at this inferior level." It would undermine the experience that you're trying to create.
I've run in a few races with stroller divisions including a father's day race that was only dad's with strollers.
You seem intimately familiar, buddy. Good for you that you see little barrier to transitioning, you got this!
There's a really weird kind of cognitive dissonance among people attempting to defend the trans side of this debate that I see pop up quite regularly. On one hand, you're obviously attempting to stand up for trans people (which is fair enough), but then you also attempt to make fun of people who know anything about the issue; as if seeking to gather knowledge about trans/non-binary is some kind of weird fetish, and thereby implying that trans/non-binary is weird and fetishistic.
I just thought I'd point this out, because if you continue to do this, it won't be long before the mob comes for you.
seriously, you must be smoking something special if you think (on average) parents are pushing their kids to be trans. trans kids are homeless at astonishingly high rates because (on average) their parents don't accept them. any example of that is in fact a counterexample to the norm.
You seem intimately familiar, buddy. Good for you that you see little barrier to transitioning, you got this!
There's a really weird kind of cognitive dissonance among people attempting to defend the trans side of this debate that I see pop up quite regularly. On one hand, you're obviously attempting to stand up for trans people (which is fair enough), but then you also attempt to make fun of people who know anything about the issue; as if seeking to gather knowledge about trans/non-binary is some kind of weird fetish, and thereby implying that trans/non-binary is weird and fetishistic.
I just thought I'd point this out, because if you continue to do this, it won't be long before the mob comes for you.
They see it as defending a bunch of unfortunate weirdos they feel bad for, and they see that as a virtuous thing to do. Nobody actually takes these people seriously.
Kipchoge should just run in this category during retirement until he’s like 60
He could, but he won’t.
Many posters on LR like to predict a wave of “fakes”, but there’s no evidence of it having happened. A guy with the discipline to train enough to run 2:30, is likely to be an educated, decent person. A fake’s family, friends and co-workers would know he’s not binary and he would lose their respect. He would also be fired from most professional jobs. I just don’t see someone selling their integrity for so cheap of a price.
Kipchoge should just run in this category during retirement until he’s like 60
He could, but he won’t.
Many posters on LR like to predict a wave of “fakes”, but there’s no evidence of it having happened. A guy with the discipline to train enough to run 2:30, is likely to be an educated, decent person. A fake’s family, friends and co-workers would know he’s not binary and he would lose their respect. He would also be fired from most professional jobs. I just don’t see someone selling their integrity for so cheap of a price.
literally every man claiming to be a woman is a fake, because women are female humans and not costumes for men to wear. And 'Non binary' is a nonsense concept signifying nothing, invented by navel gazing academia in the late 90s.
All it takes is one a**hat to ruin the party though. I would assume not everyone is in a situation where they'd get fired over lying, or maybe it's just not enough of a deterrent to them. Or what if a non binary runner changes their mind about their gender identity a few years later, do race directors think they were lying?
I definitely feel that giving out equal amounts of elite money to a small group of people whose identity may be impossible to truly verify is a weird situation. It's not like wheelchair racing where, yeah, there's a really limited amount of people that show up but they really have no choice but to compete with their chair.
I have no issue with having non binary divisions where prize money is negligible, but having 3-5 elite runners for a major metropolitan race show up for 3 non binary prize money spots (because that's where we're at rn) is just not a good look for the LGBT+ movement
seriously, you must be smoking something special if you think (on average) parents are pushing their kids to be trans. trans kids are homeless at astonishingly high rates because (on average) their parents don't accept them. any example of that is in fact a counterexample to the norm.
Just out of curiosity I looked up the writer of the article on Twitter. Turns out she's a they/them with a "trans 8 year old" and "queer 12 year old" who is extremely passionate about exposing children to kinks. Now you might say that this isn't representative of most cases but if you're an elite aspirant it's obviously a pretty good way to move up the social ladder. As more prize money becomes available and more articles are written about brave non binary runners I believe we'll start to see a lot more parents like this.
