Leaders and best, another Wolverine breaking barriers and overcoming challenges -- swimmer G Ryan.
As the article says, G Ryan identifies as "genderqueer" or "non-binary," I didn't make those terms up or apply them randomly.
Leaders and best, another Wolverine breaking barriers and overcoming challenges -- swimmer G Ryan.
As the article says, G Ryan identifies as "genderqueer" or "non-binary," I didn't make those terms up or apply them randomly.
Watch your male-cis-binary-nonqueer privilege you tool!
I think Ryan or G is female by genetics, so it's not really breaking any barriers really... just a fluff piece.
I think that's a pretty small minded way of looking at it. Even if G is purely female anotomically (and I don't know if that's the case) this is still significant from a societal perspective and raises good questions and discussion. There are many aspects of society, sports being one of them, that has a harsh segmentation between male and female and these issues (along with the very popular bathroom issue) challenge many of our norms. Whether or not you agree with it, it's interesting and pertinent to our lives.
WolvinLA, I agree with a lot of what you say and certainly believe you are a good willed person. I think there will always, and appropriately be a "harsh segmentaton" between the sexes in sports. I would even call it an "appropriate segmentation".
I don't think it is appropriate or sexist to say I don't want to see a woman fight Connor McGregor. I don't want to see a woman swim against Michael Phelps. I don't want to see a woman try to pitch against Miguel Cabrerra. The "harsh segmentation" is simply an acknowledgement of the simple fact that males and females are physically different. That doesn't take away from a man / woman's personhood or value...just acknowledges the simple fact of reality that men are genetically physically more gifted than women on the whole. Not in every circumstance of course...but elite male vs. elite female the male is going to win every time.
But the examples you provide are not really the equity issues that will arise. If a woman wants to compete for a spot on the men's baseball team she will either make the cut or not--and it's her decision if she wants to compete against other players who are likely faster and stronger. But what if an athlete who is born male identifies as a woman and wants to play on the women's basketball team? Then the athlete is no longer an underdog, but may have an unfair advantage.
That was my point below: we have to figure out how to balance the rights of the transgender athlete with the rights of the athletes against whom they will compete.
I'm not going to pretend I know the answer--I have thoughts about which way I would lean, but I'm conflicted.
And articulated comment. Thanks.
No matter what, if you have male DNA you will have an inherent physical advantage even If you don't work out so hard. This is why we have to account for gender in sports unless you want to just not have male or female sports at all. In which case every sport will be 99% male due to the inherent physical characteristics and biological traits and capability of males
I think the solution here is to stop segregating by "gender", and start segregating by "class of athlete". So you'd have the fastest swimmers on one team, whether male/female/other, and then another team with slightly slower swimmers, whether male/female/other, etc.
Don't ask me about specifics, because I haven't thought it through that much.
Just have one team for both genders and it will be the end of female collegiate athletics. They are just not on the same level as men.
Also I feel sorry for young people. They got mind fucked from a young age.
it would've been simply not fair to other women athelets.
And that was a big theme in the article. I think the article deserves credit for acknowledging that these are tough issues and we are entering into uncharted waters (pun kind of intended). How do we come up with policies for athletic competitions that are fair to individual athletes who may have complicated gender identities AND other athletes who are also participating? This is a new dilemma and I don't think we've figured out the answer.
The answer isn't difficult at all to your question of "How do we come up with policies for athletic competitions that are fair to individual athletes who may have complicated gender identites and the other athletes who are also participating?". It isn't popular, but it is an easy answer.
I would propose this. You have an "XY chromosome" and an "XX chromosome" division. An athlete can identify with any gender they want. They can be called any pronoun they want. The deciding 100% objective, and I believe the most in line with fair play / sportsmanship, is to have contestants competing against the "same sex chromosome". Again, you can identy with any gender, but you can only compete agains similar "sexual chromosomes".
That may be the best solution, but I'm not sure it is a perfect or easy one. What if a person is born with ambiguous genitalia (something that I understand is not all that uncommon), and the parents raise that child as a boy. Turns out that the child, is actually xx rather than xy. I imagine as the child grows he will, for all intents and pursposes, identify as and be treated as a boy. When the boy gets to some competitive level of athletics, he is told that he has to compete in the xx division.
Or maybe the opposite is more likely--a child with xx chromosomes but ambiguous genitalia being raised as a girl. I don't know enough about the topic to know which is more common, but in either case the chromosome-based athletic divisions may not be as simple as they seem.
901 P, definitely not gonna be a perfect or easy solution. For the 0.1% of that population, I would certainly leave room for them to go with the sex they were raised.
901 P, also wanted to say I have really enjoyed reading and hearing your thoughts. They differ from mine, but I respect the way you engage, put your thoughts together, and are happy to dialogue.
Thanks Lakeyale13. This is why I'm ambivalent about the blanket "no politics" rule. I get why we have it, and most of the time I agree that I don't want the blog to descend into political bickering. But occasionally we can have informative and enlightening discussions about the political issues that permeate sports. There are lots of really smart people on this blog--sometimes I want to hear how they address the most complicated (and often political) issues that we face.
Other times I just want people to make 3-9 jokes.
LOL. Jokes are good too!
Please excuse a third-party opinion, but I went back and re-read your exchange. I have to say that I found it to be intelligent, articulate, and respectful, and I applaud the two of you for having it.
But in a back-handed way, I think it’s an example of why there should be the “No Politics” rule. Your exchange was the exception, not the rule. Hey, if the mods and members of this blog could absolutely guarantee that all political discussions would be conducted like yours, then I’d be all for it.
But of course, they can’t, and it’s ridiculously naïve to think it ever could be. 901 P, you made the observation that “there are lots of really smart people on this blog,” and that’s true (many of them much smarter than me.) But it’s also unfortunately true that there are plenty who aren’t - and their default reaction to disagreement is hostility and insult. In my time here, I’ve seen arguments break out over every topic from Beilein’s recruiting ability to whether the football helmets should have a matte finish. And these are relatively unimportant topics. But if you introduce politics into what can be a combustible atmosphere … well, then this blog becomes like so many others: a shitstorm waiting to happen.
And that would be a damn shame. Speaking for myself, I really like this blog. I get to keep up on one of my favorite subjects – all things UM – and frankly, I learn a hell of a lot. (A perfect example was Ace’s recent dissection of Beilein’s offense in the Wisconsin game. I sat staring at my screen, fascinated at the ballet between Wagner’s clear-out and MAAR’s cut that led to an easy layup.)
I’ve seen other blogs and message boards that started with good intentions, but degenerated into the shitstorm I mentioned before. I’d really, really hate to see that happen here, because I enjoy this blog so much. I’d rather keep doing what that noted Wolverine fan Willie Shakespeare once wrote:
"I like this place and willingly could waste my time in it.”
What about an athlete that is XXY or XYY? What division do they get to participate in?
Yes but it's probably also not fair to have a female transitioning to male who is taking testosterone participate in a female sport....If the amount of testosterone they get is enough to increase muscle mass, I don't know if it is.
That's the case that worries me. If you come down on the side of "fairness" then the girls/women shouldn't be discounted by allowing the very drugs and PEDs that are banned from being acceptable just because someone is transitioning. The option to transition one's gender is a choice and with that may come some sacrifice. One such sacrifice is not being able to compete against your original gender. Maybe the solution is to expand the Special Olympics to include a trans category. People can still train and compete.
Oh wow. I can't believe I have never thought of this! From anecdotal evidence I would say this scenario is much more likely then chromosomal trisomies.
Although, if you're taking hormones to transition would you still self-categorize into your former gender for your sport? That seems philosophically inconsistent, but again as a society there is still a lot to be worked out here.
I was pointing out that just going by chromosomes isn't fair either as the transitioned birth females will have an advantage.
I also read an article recently on a high school wrestler born female transitioning to male that they would not allow to compete against boys and she's just been dominating the girls.
when speaking of a singular person in the English language. Strictly grammatically, I find it very hard to understand what is being stated. For example, there are times in this article when Bottom is quoted where I can't tell if he's speaking about G or the entire team.
Rather than use "they" or "their," I would prefer a new, singular gender neutral pronoun such a "Z" or just refer to the person when they are talking about an individual, such as "G Ryan."
Maybe non-binaries should compete agasinst men.
Non-binaries can be born physically male or female but do not identify with either the male or female gender.
So totally ignorant to "non-binary" term. Are these individuals clearly born a male or a female and just choose not to associate with a certain gender, or is it anatomically they are perhaps not fully belonging to a specific gender. Truly not being an asswipe...looking for clarification.
They're born XY or XX and have gender dysphoria according to the DSM.
Let's hope they get the mental help they need.
Really, putting all politics aside, this would be the most objective way to classify where an athlete plays / competes. Don't take away what pronoun someone wants to be called. Don't take away the gender they want to identify with. Just simply let Science, which makes no opinions just states facts, dictate. That gets rid of all political / religious agendas. If you are XY...you compete against males. If you are XX you compete against females. We can call still call you by the pronoun you want or even the gender you want to identify with, but your genetics (100% objective) dictate where you compete and who you compete against.
I tend to agree with this. Anything else involves complicated administration that exhausts resources for something that benefits a very small segment of the population aka it's easier to make exceptions to a rule 99% of people live by than it is to flip the whole system.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but there's a tricky situation here: hormone therapy.
Someone who has XX chromosomes competing in the XX league but taking testosterone supplements? Not fair to the rest of the XX league.
Likewise, someone competing in the XY league on estrogen wouldn't stand a chance. There's a lot of context in this issue.
Seriously, I'd be fine with them just calling it the "XY Division" and the "XX Division". Call yourself whatever you want, but genteics is the common denominator to your competing.
these are small segments of the population but what about those born with ambiguous genitalia raised as boy/girl regardless of their chromosomes, or those born xxy or with androgen insensitivity? there's a lot more than "scientifically" male or female at play here.
For the 0.1% of the population, I would suggest using Science to measure their testosterone level. If it correlated more with a male, then the individual would compete against males, if the T Level correlated more with a female then against they females they would compete. If in the middle, then take your pick. LOL
I mean, 0.1% is not very large, but against the world population that is a lot of people. This topic is getting more exposture now, but still...
Another question: This seems to be a primarily American thing. Are other countries facing the issue of gender transition at the same rate as the US?
Was wondering what you'd be fine with. Got it.
What kind of mental health do they need.
I'll hang up and listen.
Here we go
Generally people need the kind of mental health help that will help them.
Determine what they need..others don't
Most people who are mentally ill don't think they have a problem. Personally I think most people are mentally ill, so if the majority is mentally ill then they would be normal so maybe they don't have a problem /shrug.... who knows.
The rate of suicide attempts among the transgender population is 41%. The national average is 4.6%
I would say there are significant mental health problems in the transgender community.
Yeah but there's a difference between depression and Gender Dysphoria. You're diverting the argument.
Gender Dysphoria as of the latest evaluations in psychiatry is classified as a mental disorder, hence its position in the latest DSM.
Until it is removed like being gay was removed, it is considered a mental disorder.
The American Psychiatric Association, publisher of the DSM-5, states that "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."
Your statement seems to lump all of those experiencing gender noncomformity as being afflicted with gender dysphoria, and so in need of mental help for their mental disorder. That may not necessarily be the case. That may be why some appear to be reacting strongly to some of these comments. No one wants their friends or relatives to be called mentally ill, or mentally disordered when they are not.
As others have pointed out in this thread, there are situations where people have something other than XX or XY chromosomes*. The folks on here saying have XX and XY divisions and claiming scientific superiority come off looking like the believers in Newtonian Mechanics after the discovery of Quantum Mechanics. Things aren't always so simple as they appear.
I have a relative who transitioned last year. I was very surprised to find out how much I didn't know about the issue. The statistics regarding attempted suicides among this community are horrific. It's also sad that the significant distress associated with gender dysphoria is often a result of ignorance of the issue. In other words, the distress is caused by society's gender norms and inability to accept individual's choices that are different. I don't care if a young boy decides they prefer to wear pink, have long hair or play with Barbies. They shouldn't care either. But when society tells them they are wrong for doing these things, it shouldn't be a surprise that they feel significant distress.
Having a mental illness is not a negative.
The fact that people are so offput by the mere suggestion of it suggests a greater societal issue that engulfs more than just Gender Dysphoria.
A shit ton of people have mental issues in the world and they should be treated like people having high cholesterol rather than some deep dark secret.
If anyone thinks my comments are somehow degrading the humanity of someone with dysphoria, then they're sorely mistaken and guided by a jaded view on mental illnesses that they should read up on.
And again, wasn't trying to lump, hence my last sentence regarding "types of help" one could get.
I'm not sure how having a mental illness is NOT a negative. Everyone has challenges of some sort. Just by the nature of having to overcome these challenges is something of a negative. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding your argument (wouldn't be the first time I misunderstood something!) :)
This is where a typewritten conversation is disadvantageous because it's hard to get at nuances of meaning if you don't realize how something will be perceived in advance. To recap, not all trans people experience dysphoria. Those that do should have access to healthcare, which itself is not well sorted for mental illnesses in the public at large.
Very informative--thanks ST3.
There are a lot of depressed people out there but no groups attempt suicide as frequently as people who specifically identify as transgender.
Imagine you're inherently unhappy with something that takes massive effort to change...Like your body and what it's trying to be.
Imagine you find the courage to tell your parents...and they don't understand, or get mad, or reject you.
Imagine that you manage to take steps to correct the things you feel you need to correct...and everyone judges you for it.
And imagine that there are political debates and internet forums which center on how human you are, whether your happiness is something we should accommodate as a society, and whether you should have basic American human rights.
I don't think I'm strong enough to make it through all that.
some documentation to support that contention?
Correct. Your DNA does not changed based on feelings. It is a psychological disorder to feel you are something other than your DNA and anatomy. You he sjw class is trying to say that DNA isn't real but emotional misfires are. Crazy.
Wait, how are you posting with Mgoblog HD???
Using an old version maybe?
Wait our swim coach is named Bottom?
But he identifies as Top.
they referred to two or more people?
"It wasn't until they enrolled at Michigan and visited the Spectrum Center, the university's LGBTQ services office, that they found the language to describe the tension they had been feeling."
Not every thread needs my superfluous comments.
This would be one of those times.
All I know is she is one damn good swimmer. Racked up a bunch of individual titles at B1Gs the last two years. Just became All-American on relay tonight. Go Blue!
Have you gone to any swim meets, WD?
Are you NOT rocking a Michigan speedo right now? SMH.
They is a really good swimmer. Does anyone know how long they has been swimming or what brand swimsuit they wears?
Se. They found a 47th chromosome according to the anti science left.
Eh careful there buddy.
The right isn't any better (if anything worse) when it comes to believing scientific data. (Looks at the new EPA head's views on climate science and Sessions' statement regarding weed and shakes head)
What are your thoughts of the ongoing weather geoengineering in all NATO countries? Is that the climate change we're seeing?
It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.
I once thought I was a chicken and people called me weird.
No "Q" for you bro...your "Straight" Dave.
"You're" Sorry, I had to, because I thought it would be funny.
Never saw so many exposed as ignorant as in this thread.
Thinking there are a lot of people who think they know a lot of things, and don't. Maybe best to stfu if you don't know anything about the subject.
Was wondering what you'd be fine with. Got it.
I'm right and you're wrong.... Unless I'm wrong and you are right.
MGoBrewMom, Im sure you are a nice woman. Truly mean that. I would ask that you not tell people to STFU just because they have a different opinion or perspective from you. Enter into a respectful dialogue. I love nothing more than hearing and listening to people who have a completely different worldview than me. I have learned a lot. I have even switched positions because of it. But no one listens to anyones thoughts, no matter how true they might be, once you tell someone to STFU. All I hear after that is the voice of Charlie Brown's teacher.
Cultural marxists cannot accept opinions that differ from their own. They feel they must be purged from popular thought, like the stalinists and leninists who think the "reeducation" of the common people who dare to stand for traditional values are a threat politically correct orthodoxy. The tyranny of thought control and speech restrictions is the foundation of all that mgobrewmommers love. Hence watch what happens to this blog now. Locked in favor of regressive progressives in 3 ...2...1
You're a fucking conspiracy theorist moron
Maybe try to provide an argument of your own instead of just slinging ad hominem attacks.
Yeah! your opinion is different than mine so you should stfu cause my opinion is better than yours! you get them mgomom...
All the talk about BLTQ makes me hungry.
Do you. None of my business.
I don't know what that means, but I'm glad G likes swimming, and I really hope the comments stay classy.
Commenting to say no comment because I know everyone was wondering
Oh wow. You're so brave, lemme arrange a medal for you
sure I understood everything I read. BUT, I much appreciate Michigan for their acceptance towards individuals that might not currently fit into an easy mold.
MICHIGAN was the very 1ST IN THE NATION to have a gay student office.
Leaders and Best.
Who downvotes this comment?
You can tell.
What is the significance of having the first gay student office? Shouldn't we be more concerned about having the best qualified student office to do their duty regardless if they are gay or not?
The significance is that in a lot of situations, gay students face issues that other students don't face, and those issues often aren't addressed by a general student office.
Hopefully at some time in the future we'll get to the point where we don't need a specific gay student office, but we're not there yet.
Under the no politics rule. Which is one of the best things about this site.
Speaking of which, Trump just held a rally down here in Nashville. Packed house. ;)
Oh no, political comments start in 3....2....1....
I got this..
Not your best night MGoBrewMom. Normally you are an open minded person.
I'm frustrated--but not surprised--that this thread veered off into the overtly political. Obviously the topic has political implications, but so too do many issues surrounding sports--race, gender, class, etc. are and always have been tied into athletics. (In other words, athletics can never be "pure" entertainment.)
In this instance it was disheartening that someone would point out that Michigan was an early advocate for recognizing the rights and needs of gay students and would get downvoted for such a statement. I mean, that strikes me as so uncontroversial to be basically apolitical--saying that gay students deserve respect, compassion, and to be treated with dignity. The fact that someone would downvote such a statment is depressing.
I guess I'm feeling a little fired up like MGoBrewMom. Apologies if I am dragging us further into the political rabbithole.
Do you think an opposing viewpoint would be any different? If I posted something of the sort of "So Proud that Michigan was the first University to have a Baptist Student Union! Its great to be a Michigan Wolverine" in response to an outspoken Christian swimmer's achievments, you don't think it would get neg bombed into oblivion? Of course it would and it rightfully should due to the guidelines of this board. Once you make a statement of clear politics removing all gray areas and clearly stating a political viewpoint, you have broken the rules of the board.
Possibly! Though I'd be happy if we were the first school to create a Baptist student union to provide for our Baptist students. That's a good thIng, and it's part of respecting the different qualities and backgrounds that make up our student body. But I agree with your larger point--people will neg a pro-Trump comment because "no politics," but then post a pro-Obama comment themselves.
Correct. I would be just as outraged as you if the "negs" to that post were indeed to make a statement that they weren't for the fair treatment, rights, and protection of gay students on campus. I know I certainly support their rights as such. I am assuming the "negs" are pointed towards the political tone than the content itself. At least i am giving them the benefit of the doubt and hoping there isnt anyone who truly would want unequitable treatement of gay students on campus. That would truly be deplorable.
Obama was more of a "vanilla President" whereas Trump is "Hitler fudge chunk." Therefore false equivalency.
What I'm taking from this comment is that "fudge chunk" is a sick burn. Not on a Shakespeare level, but still.
Also Godwin's law! Never fails!
Christians have had such a hard go of it in this country, obvi. Gimme a break.
1, Comparing what-ifs is always somewhat odd, since you're just making assumptions
2, Being gay is not a choice like being Baptist, or a Democrat, or Republican is. Being proud that Michigan was one of the first schools to move beyond ignorant politics and accept that being gay is a reality is not political
It's as political as being glad we accept people of color into university now
Not true, we know 100% fact that being gay is not genetic, or at least not entirely genetic. If that were so, 100% of identicall twins (two people with the EXACT same DNA) where one brother was gay would mean the other brother would be gay too. This isn't the case (I believe the basketball Jason Collins is an example. If I remember he is an identical twin and his brother is straighta and he is gay).
What Im not saying is that being gay has no genetic component, there certainly may be, but it we know with Scientific certainty that it isn't 100% genetic. That is just an unarguable fact.
His small pussy grabbing hands? His bromance/break up with Putin?
The fact that all he does is market himself, but really knows nothing, or doesn't care about consequences of shutting every government office?
The fact that his VP doesn't believe in science so strongly that he voted against "Pi Day"?
There...maybe that's political enough to shut down the comments.
Damn--a flurry of righteous anger from MGoBrewMom!
Honestly, she's ruining the thread that actually has some decent debate about how to classify sports or whether they should be classified with adherence to non-binary people's needs.
Agreed. MgoBrewMom, your exemplifying so much that is wrong in America today. You leave no room for dialogue or disagreement. That really is a crappy way of dealing with people. It is not respectful at all.
I did fly off the handle..not gonna get into why-but I'm off base...
Sensitive issue, and I do see that the LakeYale comments didn't warrant my reaction. I do think there are a lot of ignorant comments as well--but I did not help my cause. Super sensitive, and I did not use a filter.
Carry on, and please accept my apologies.
You don't always see a lot of self-reflection in threads like this. It's a sensitive topic, for some people more than others. I personally get very angry when I think of the discrimination and abuse that is often hurled at people who are gay, transgender, etc. Clearly this is something that matters to you, and I appreciate that.
You may not be thrilled with your comments now, but don't sweat it--we all have bad days on the board. It's just rare for most of us to admit it!
Apology accepted MGoBrewMom! I am assuming by your inference that personally this issue has touched you / your family in some way, and that you have been on the recieving end of some mistreatment. If that is the case, I am truly sorry for that. That is a horribly painful thing to have to experience or watch someone else you love experience.
Even though we disagree, I hope you know that I respect and love you as a person. Odd thing to say on a message board LOL, but its important to say in this climate of today. To disagree is not to hate, and I hope we all (myself most included) can remembert that. I wish you nothing but the best!
Have been bugging the hell out of me all night. Would have loved to turtle all those responses. I read too quickly, made assumptions--mis-read and went bat shit. I am good at self reflection--but I should be better at pausing before responding.
Yeah, I have close friends, and other friends who actually have kids with gender identity issues. Kids I've known since they were very young. One was 7 when I met him (she was a her then), the other was 2. Real life shit. Real life families, and I hear so many insensitive things, and read a few things here, and very wrongly, jumped to conclusions without reading well and undertstanding more.
The kid that I've known since she was 2, was born a boy and now lives as a 14 year old girl-- goes to school, plays club soccer on a girls team--which is how she identifies. Nobody knows except those who are close to the family, and a few of us outsiders with kids the same age and knew her as "him" when he was 2, and wearing dresses, etc (more than that--not that simple).
The sports/competition part of it is a different subject, but I can tell you that kids can, and do, get hormones that stop puberty (pause it), so these kids can actually 'go back' should they choose (they never do choose to go back, from what I've heard). So, this (now 13 year old) trans girl does not have the testosterone that a boy has. Anyhow..I certainly do not have answers for fairness in competition. I just don't like this group of people being judged and marginalized by people who don't understand or try to understand. Regardless of their small percentage of the population, they are still human, and I am pretty defensive of them.
Thank you for accepting my apology. I still may change my MGoName--may need a new identity soon if I keep freaking out.
I try to be fair-minded, but I'll admit that I don't always succeed. So I am much more forgiving of a post that is impassioned if I happen to agree with the person. As a result I'm not too bothered by MGoBrewMom's tone, but I don't have a lot of patience for the guy below me complaining about the social justice warrior privilege on this blog.
Anyway, that's my full disclosure and admission of bias, one-sidedness, etc. I agree with you that this thread (which must be living on borrowed time, right?) does in fact have some thoughtful and informative posts. I'd be curious to know more about people who don't fit the xx/xy binary and how they complicate any policies about athletics.
In any event, I was primarily surprised at how many negative reactions the initial story generated.
901 P, GREAT post. If you lived in NC I would take you to luch on my dime and love to hear your thoughts. You are a genteman without a doubt! Unless your a woman, and then you are a lady of the highest caliber. LOL
Did you just assume 901P's gender?
That's one of the nicest things an anonymous stranger on the Internet has ever said to me. Thanks!
And I happen to subscribe to the belief that gender is culturally constructed, but I'll save that for another thread!
What are you rallying, the fact that you don't know what chromosomes are or how gender is a biological fact and not a choice or preference or psychological disorder that manifests itself into the reality of DNA? Your obsession with bathrooms and feelings over science? Your love of an invasion of privacy to satisfy people with a mental disorder? If your comment didn't do it, and it probably won't because it is prevailing emotional political ideology infecting the education system, then my comment, based on science, will surely lock down the thread due to the social justice warrior privilege that dominates our politically correct and Orwellian education system, popular culture, and blog. Holy shit.
Again for emphasis. You're a conspiracy theorist moron. Go fuck yourself
Is this a fucking joke? Are there no rules?
If the mods were paying attention, they'd delete most of MGoBrewMom's and BayWolves' comments.
Sorry...I'm a jerk today.
A lot of people are useful idiots that are brainwashed by the globalists to destroy a country. Once that is done they are killed. Don't be one of those people. Trump is the first non-globalist puppet since Kennedy. Still many people are mind controlled by the globalists through their educational and media indoctrination. Thankfully that number is shrinking everyday.
This article about the IOC's stance on transgender athletes really helped clear up a lot of questions I had:
The IOC of all entities somehow came up with a decent solution to this?
Well, I'm shocked lol.
That article was confusing to read.
You guys are unbelievable.
There's intelligent discussion to be had, but this isn't it; it's not fruitful to vouch for the T and the Q from LBGTQ as mental disorders. It could be compelling to discuss certain instances where genotypic sex becomes fuzzy, like in Caster Semenya's case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster_Semenya)...but as far as we should be concerned we have a young person who is genetically female, doesn't identify as male or female, and we shouldn't be making that a difficult issue for them and be welcoming of a student-athlete who is just being themselves.
"but as far as we should be concerned we have a young person who is genetically female, doesn't identify as male or female, and we shouldn't be making that a difficult issue for them and be welcoming of a student-athlete who is just being themselves."
Couldn't agree more, and you managed to express your point with clarity and efficiency (unlike my many wordy posts above). Thanks Lee!
I thought it was a pretty intelligent conversation and I think the mental health portion is a decent chunk of it, right or wrong.
Speaking to people with differing viewpoints and perspectives is pretty awesome as long as people aren't being douchebags about it.
I really couldn't care less what she is as long as she's happy with herself. Hopefully that feeling is recripricated.
I always find it interesting trying to understand something I'm relatively ignorant to though.
Pulling out our DSM-5's and diagnosing a Michigan player is something you think is above board? I doubt that'd go over well if we were to label a football player with Narcissistic Personality Disorder for going pro when we didn't think they were ready, or say that the next person who ends gets in legal trouble has a Conduct Disorder, or that the next player who gets in hot water over a girl is a sexual deviant somehow.
In the case that the swimmer DID have a different mental disorder, can you imagine how the article would be received? "Swimmer conquers BPD" would have resulted in much different commentary. If the school were supportive to a player that had extreme Anxiety or Depression or what have you, we'd be saying that ~it's great to be~.
Binary thinking in terms of "gender"/phenotypic sex/genotypic sex as it relates to competitive sports is the correct topic, NOT amateurs discussing whether a kid has a psychological disorder. It wouldn't be white knighting to shut that shit down otherwise.
Welp. This thread is pointless now thanks to MGoBrewMom and Baywolves. Might as well lock it up.
It veered off from an interesting debate on sport policy into anti-Trumpism with a hefty dose of right-wing tinfoilism.
Yup, this thread would be a great case study for any Sociology or even Poly Sci students. Goes to show great intolerance on both the way right and left.
Would like to remove my comments.. but alas..living with them. Sorry again.
but I've met so many girls in martial arts that can straightup beat the shit out of anyone.
Ugh. This could have been a good debate. All you have to do now is say "SJW" to discredit someone on the left or "sexist" to discredit someone on the right. You can still meet in the middle on this issue with science.
This thread is funny. Thanks for the laughs guys (and girl).
I miss the Cold War. Good times.
4,3,2,1....... Major Tom........
I can't believe this thread has survived multiple incursions into the forbidden zones, but I've gained some insight based on your various perspectives. The only thing I have to add is, I hope G,she,they is happy and successful with her/their performance in the pool. My interests beyond that (at least within the confines of this blog) are singularly Maize and Blue
We as a society have begun to understand more about Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual issues and discrimination. But there is a lot more on the spectrum that needs education and understanding p.
LGBTQIAPKD. It's a spectrum that needs more understanding.
People working so hard defending spiritual blindness and moral bankruptcy, so much for M being leaders and best.
Did you make an account just to say that?
Garbage thread nice job mods.
The team Ryan swims on is commonly referred to as "Team 42" rather than the women's team (it is the 42nd edition of the "women's" team), and emails are addressed using gender-inclusive language such as "Blue" or "All Michigan athletes."
Politics aside, I think it's really cool how the team was able to make very slight changes to make one of its members significantly more comfortable.
I am a "Live and let live" person. As long as issues don't impede my own freedom, I don't care what people do. As long as you don't force me to become you, I'm good.
We know a person who is genderqueer and I support their right to identify with whomever they choose. But I am uncomfortable with the pronoun "they." This isn't a judgment on their identity; it's a grammatical peeve. I wish there was a different pronoun that adequately represented their identity. "They/them" is plural. Does that mean they see themselves as more than one person because they're not one or the other? Was "they/them" a conscious choice, or was it a default choice because there was nothing else?
This thread, and my difficulty with the plural pronoun, made me think about being judgmental and labelling. We have to judge (nicer term: evaluate) to make sense of things. We label for the same reason. On top of that, our country is a binary place: liberals vs democrats; good vs. evil; right vs. wrong. It's so deeply ingrained in us to be "either/or" and with the current political climate, we're becoming more and more entrenched in that way of thinking.
It must be very difficult for a person to not be binary in our society. I hope G finds success in their endeavors.
...for the the same reason you aren't. But I wonder if I'm being a stick in the mud over something very small.
Possibly. But when I read articles about this issue, i have no real reaction until I read the word "they." Then, I bristle. I'm a writer, so I'm acutely aware of things like verb tenses and using the correct pronouns. I understand the dilemma they have, but I can't stop focusing on "they." What happens when there is more than one genderqueer person? How does one pluralize the genderqueer "they?" It's not an issue with being genderqueer; it's co-opting a word whose meaning is universally agreed upon and giving it a new meaning.
I'm not a fan of using "they" because that's too confusing. There are other attempts at inventing gender neutral pronouns. I'm probably too old to start using Ne, Ve, or Ze.
I have the opposite problem. My wife and her parents are Chinese. They don't have gender-specific pronouns in their native language, so they are constantly mixing up "he" and "she" when they speak English.
...helping Michigan win and not cheating? If yes, then glad to have you and go Blue!
I'm not trying to be rude or disrespectful. I have nothing against G. They are free to live their life as they wish. It will never impact me one way or another. If I ever meet them on the street, I will happily shake their hand and offer a hearty Go Blue.
But the article states G was born as a female. The end. You are biologically a female. You swim with the females. I don't understand the problem.
If G doesn't feel they are a woman, then I feel for them. That's different from my human experience. I don't understand it and I can't imagine feeling as though you do not fit within the established gender definitions. They have my sympathy.
But the fact is they do fit as it relates to sport. G is a female anatomically. G swims with females.
Trying to turn this into a complex issue of non-defined sporting gender is a futile exercise, one with no solution because the problem you are trying to solve has no definition.
Transgender or non-binary or however you want to label people experiencing this gender confusion are asking society to be more tolerant and accepting, and we should be. But they also need to realize the very simple truth that Mens and Womens sports are segregated to prevent the inherent competitive advantage that a male body has over a female body. It's very simple and straightforward and G should also be accepting of what that binary sporting separation is trying to accomplish.
G can call "men" Gender 1 and "women" Gender A if they want. I don't care what non-traditional labels you want to assign to make G feel comfortable that they aren't being shoehorned into rigid gender definitions. At the end of the day, Mens and Womens sports are perfectly fine as-is. There is no problem with this binary separation. I have no desire to abolish mens and womens sports because G has a mental dilemma. G is a female as it relates to sports. Compete as a female.
I agree with you, and I doubt much will come from any activism mentioned in the article. From a competitive standpoint, exploring intersex leagues is full of holes.
For example: If I'm XY but I do not identify as male nor female, I'll have an inherent advantage against the XX people that do not identify themselves binarily, because I'm genetically and phenotypically "male" and they are genetically and phenotypically "female". Then you'd have to create separate leagues for XY intersex people and XX intersex people.
It would theoretically stop there, as XY people wouldnt be taking estrogen to transition (there's nothing to transition to) and XX people wouldn't be taking testosterone in theirs, but it's just not feasible to create two extra leagues for people who mentally and emotionally differ from their counterparts but are similar physiologically.
Our student-athlete doesn't have a physiological competitive advantage by not identifying as a female. I'm sure the girls swimming with her and against her can just write it off as her being "butch" or "masculine" or "tomboy" and be done with it, not seeing any unfairness in her being grouped with women athletically.
I'm all for championing the acceptance of people as they are, whatever their sexual orientation or gender identity happens to be, but I don't think creating new athletic divisions is the way to go, here.