But how many trans people in competitive sports are we talking about here? Enough so that there needs to be LAWS that target trans children? Or does it make more sense to handle it case by case, with these few trans women having to submit to blood tests to check their testosterone levels (which is currently what happens).
But how many trans people in competitive sports are we talking about here? Enough so that there needs to be LAWS that target trans children? Or does it make more sense to handle it case by case, with these few trans women having to submit to blood tests to check their testosterone levels (which is currently what happens).
I am sympathetic to the argument that the issue isn't numerically big enough to require sweeping laws. And I don't like the consequence of keeping some people out of competition altogether -- though people are also kept out for other reasons (i.e. disabilities). But "case by case" might mean arbitrary.
The main point is: It should not reflexively be called "bigotry" to say that there are real differences between a "trans woman" and an actual biological woman.
It is not bigoted to say that girls have a good reason to feel cheated when someone who recently competed as a boy is now competing against them and winning all the races.
If Dems go along with the free and easy charge of "bigotry" against anyone who raises these legitimate concerns, it alienates a lot of people who are not hateful bigots at all.
Carol does not have to hold any science credential or completed any studies herself. She only has to cite studies when asked. Which specific assertion do you think requires citation? Probably the one about real differences between a trans woman and an actual biological woman," correct? It is common knowledge that a trans person must constantly take hormones and other drugs to maintain the transition or the body will start to revert back.
But how many trans people in competitive sports are we talking about here? Enough so that there needs to be LAWS that target trans children? Or does it make more sense to handle it case by case, with these few trans women having to submit to blood tests to check their testosterone levels (which is currently what happens).
I am sympathetic to the argument that the issue isn't numerically big enough to require sweeping laws. And I don't like the consequence of keeping some people out of competition altogether -- though people are also kept out for other reasons (i.e. disabilities). But "case by case" might mean arbitrary.
The main point is: It should not reflexively be called "bigotry" to say that there are real differences between a "trans woman" and an actual biological woman.
It is not bigoted to say that girls have a good reason to feel cheated when someone who recently competed as a boy is now competing against them and winning all the races.
If Dems go along with the free and easy charge of "bigotry" against anyone who raises these legitimate concerns, it alienates a lot of people who are not hateful bigots at all.
Carol does not have to hold any science credential or completed any studies herself. She only has to cite studies when asked. Which specific assertion do you think requires citation? Probably the one about real differences between a trans woman and an actual biological woman," correct? It is common knowledge that a trans person must constantly take hormones and other drugs to maintain the transition or the body will start to revert back.