“No one, whether you’re trans or not, wants the federal government digging through your identifiable patient information and figuring out what they like and don’t like,” Hack said. “It’s an absolute overreach, and people are really scared.”
Asked whether Hack’s priorities were measures he could support, Platner agreed. “Yes, indeed. They most certainly do,” he said.
Yeah, and a plurality of the people in that study said they don’t want the federal government making the rules for trans athletes:
Next time, find an actual analysis of the study instead of letting a right-wing rag like the post tell you the parts you want to hear.
But in a debate, the Republican candidate will certainly ask, “Do you believe men who are transgender should participate in women’s sports?”
Then they can say, “If there is data that proves trans athletes have a competitive advantage, then having them play in the same league as cis athletes would be unfair, but I trust athletic leagues and school districts to make that determination, and not politicians with ideological agendas.”
Like, seriously, this is your argument? The Democrats need to support trans athlete bans, even though a plurality of Americans don’t want them to do that, because a Republican might ask a difficult question? Are tou serious?
It’s up to science to determine whether trans athletes have a competitive advantage.
Yeah, where did you think the, “data that proves trans athletes have a competitive advantage,” was going to come feom? Or it’s just up to science? Like, the abstract concept of science is going to set the rules for sports leagues? Or is there gonna need to be some authority on sports and athletics to enforce those rules? Some sort of athletic association? Anyway, if ypu think you parse words until I get frustrated and drop this, you are deeply underestimating how petty I am.
(Also, as I pointed out earlier in this thread, what little science there is on trans athletes has determined that transs athletes don’t have a competitive advantage,.so I guess you support including them!)
If males are superior to females in sports, then trans male athletes are superior to female athletes. From https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2026/03/26/what-makes-an-olympic-athlete-female-the-rules-just-changed-again/
The IOC says that biological males have an advantage in sport, and so the new rule was needed to protect competition in the female division. They claim there is a 10-12% male performance advantage in most running and swimming events, and a more than 20% performance advantage in most throwing and jumping events. And they claim the male advantage can be greater than 100% in events that involve explosive power, like in collision, lifting and punching sports.
The IOC attributes this advantage to men’s greater testosterone. They explain that men experience three significant testosterone peaks: in utero, in infancy and beginning in puberty through adulthood. This gives biological males “larger and stronger skeletal muscle and bone, larger and stronger hearts, larger lung size, more red blood cells, and lower body fat than females,” the IOC explains in their report. This gives men a large advantage in sports, especially those that rely on strength, power or endurance.
Well, this is an excellent example of an independent sports organization using scientific data to make their own determination on what the rules should be around trans athletes. Thank you for admitting I was right, I’m sure that wasn’t easy for you.
Note that the article gave reasons for male athletes having an advantage. This should motivate all sports organizations to ban trans men in women’s sports.
Note that other studies, including meta studies that analyze multiple studies, have concluded that there trans athletes don’t appear to be at an advantage, and that their results are, “low confidence,” meaning their isn’t enough scientific data to make a determination either way. I actually shared the most recent of those studies earlier in this thread, but you ignored it because it didn’t conform to your beliefs. Which isn’t very scientific.