this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
232 points (92.3% liked)

World News

38987 readers
1901 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The International Cricket Council has become the latest sports body to ban transgender players from the elite women’s game if they have gone through male puberty.

The ICC said it had taken the decision, following an extensive scientific review and nine-month consultation, to “protect the integrity of the international women’s game and the safety of players”.

It joins rugby union, swimming, cycling, athletics and rugby league, who have all gone down a similar path in recent years after citing concerns over fairness or safety.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cyberjin@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (4 children)

No, chromosomes are not a social construct. They are physical structures in cells that carry genetic information and play a fundamental role in biological processes, including determining an individual's sex. The concept of chromosomes is grounded in biology and genetics, not social constructs.

You can spin it all you want, but women are getting destroyed in sports by transwomen because they have physique of a man like bone structure and muscle mass.

[–] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

chromosomes are not a social construct

True, they exist in the physical world! But what chromosomes mean to us is indeed a social construct. Who cares what some little dingle in your nucleus says? People who follow socially constructed divisions in society based on this arbitrary physical thing, that's who. 💝

but women are getting destroyed in sports by transwomen

Can you PLEASE share a source for this? No one will source this claim but it keeps getting upvoted

[–] Cyberjin@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Last time my comment got deleted.. I don't know if it were the link or something else.

Just search for it on YouTube "Five Times Trans Athletes Beat Thousands Of Women In Their Sports"

[–] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

.... your source is a YouTube video listicle??

EDIT lol it's 3 minutes of text on still images and some of the most transphobic shit

[–] Cyberjin@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Easy to consume, but why don't you just use search for the names mentioned in the video? 😂

[–] wafflez@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Our conceptualization of chromosomes and how we relate them to being "man" or "woman" is a social construct. This is what I was referring to.

Transwomen are heavily taken out of context by the media in sports and I have yet to see any actual evidence that transwomen shouldnt be allowed in sports for women. Hormones play the most significant factor

[–] Cyberjin@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] wafflez@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Laurel Hubbert is 45 years old, far from her "prime." Regardless, even if someone wins a tournament just because they're trans doesn't conclude they had an advantage.

I cannot find any direct sources from Avi Silverberg. Many of the sources that exist present Avi as a male who just pretended to be a woman to protest against trans inclusion in sports.

Megan Cortez-Fields is literally in highscool sports getting death threats. The two races she won she didn't even win by big margins: https://ramapoathletics.com/documents/2023/11/18/2023_Cougar_Splash_Results_-_Final.pdf

In your terry miller / andrya yearwood link a doctor, Joanna Harper, directly agrees with me about hormones being the biggest factor. Chromosomes are not really important. I don't believe trans individuals should compete with others of their gender without also having the same hormones.

Almost every athletic success any trans woman has is like this: not particularly outstanding compared to other women in the same sport, and not even close to the stats of men. The media just intentionally skews it to reinforce the confirmation bias of bigots. There are hundreds of sporting events everyday.

[–] Cyberjin@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Okay we done here, I'm feeling like talking to flat earthers that can't see pass their bypass.

It's literally broken records

[–] wafflez@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

If that's your opinion after I took the time to read your sources and responded adequately in a thorough to why they don't conclude trans women shouldn't compete in womens sports, then I don't think anything can change your mind. Those are highschool records, if they're broken records then provide reasons as to why you think that.

[–] PotatoKat@lemmy.world -5 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] pete_the_cat@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

That's a "rare" (or should I say "exclusive" since multiple family members have it?) mutation, being like "only XX females can give birth right? Shows link Checkmate transphobes!" isn't really proving anything. It's a genetic mutation.

It's as close to saying "people that can't feel pain are superhumans" when they're usually the opposite and have to live life in fear of constantly hurting themselves, sometimes severely, and being unaware of it.

[–] PotatoKat@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The point is that chromosomes are clearly not what deterimes sex if a female was born with XY chromosomes. Genetic mutations are a part of life and we literally can't know the percentage of females born with XY without testing literally everyone. Your mom could be XY and you'd never know unless she got tested. So if chromosomes don't determine sex what do? Saying it's a genetic mutation is a thought terminating cliche and allows you to continue living life without thinking deeply on the subject. Which, imo, is pretty anti-science.

Genetic anomalies don't at all make something invalid. Did you know red hair is/was a genetic mutation? Does that make red hair not a hair color?

"There's only black brown and blonde everything else is a genetic mutation"

[–] pete_the_cat@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Of course genetic mutations are a pretty common thing, but some are minor (like your red hair example), some are "WTF? How did that happen?" mutations, and some are straight up deadly like the various forms of cancer.

Women being XX is a classification (?) we've all agreed on because like 99.8% of people with XX chromosomes are women. Mutations are literally something out of the ordinary that shouldn't happen.* A woman shouldn't have XY chromosomes because almost every woman in history that we know of has XX chromosomes*.