• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

US Politics

Teddy Eagle said:
If currently mixed competition isn't included how is anyone being disadvantaged?
Click to expand...

This literally happens anyway, chess for example, darts.....No one expressly stops woman entering non physical hobbies or competition events where men don't have a physical advantage......The only reason men still tend to win in these is only because say, the number of women playing chess compared to men is far smaller and hence the pool of high level players is smaller.....On average men and women tend to prefer different hobbies, not always but on average...In sensible times no one considered it an issue. No one considered tomboys an issue for example until the left started waffling nonsense about it meaning something else.

It makes sense for women to also have women only competitions to increase their chances of recognition as a champion within that gender. I don't think anyone has a problem with that. No one is forced either way.

But apparently if men want a single sex competition for whatever reason we have to listen to a legion of feminists and soy boys having a fit over it.

It's silly.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Challenge a company rated very highly for their lack of bias and for the accuracy of their reporting?

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Reuters - Bias and Credibility

LEAST BIASED These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or
mediabiasfactcheck.com mediabiasfactcheck.com
Click to expand...
I suspect their determination to ensure a lack of bias may well result in them including articles from both a left, and right, perspective. Their coverage of the original “research” was actually more objectively described than it was elsewhere, even if they use the term “mastectomy” to describe what the scientific report from the “NLM” describes as “breast reduction procedures” and says concerns may be unwarranted. A report that you referenced in support of your claim. Most of the Reuters article is about hormone treatments, doubtless because they are by far the most common.

The basis of your original claim is an article published by “The Manhattan Institute”. An organisation at least partly funded by the Koch brothers. I found this analysis of their reputation:-

Fact Sheet: Manhattan Institute

CJ&D is a tax-exempt nonprofit group that works to protect the civil justice system and fight tort reform.
centerjd.org centerjd.org

Enough there to justify considerable suspicion about the quality of anything they produce and the motivation for its production.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I suspect their determination to ensure a lack of bias may well result in them including articles from both a left, and right, perspective. Their coverage of the original “research” was actually more objectively described than it was elsewhere, even if they use the term “mastectomy” to describe what the scientific report from the “NLM” describes as “breast reduction procedures” and says concerns may be unwarranted. A report that you referenced in support of your claim. Most of the Reuters article is about hormone treatments, doubtless because they are by far the most common.

The basis of your original claim is an article published by “The Manhattan Institute”. An organisation at least partly funded by the Koch brothers. I found this analysis of their reputation:-

Fact Sheet: Manhattan Institute

CJ&D is a tax-exempt nonprofit group that works to protect the civil justice system and fight tort reform.
centerjd.org centerjd.org

Enough there to justify considerable suspicion about the quality of anything they produce and the motivation for its production.
Click to expand...

Another right wing organisation.


Gender-Affirming Mastectomy Trends and Surgical Outcomes in Adolescents - PMC

There are over 150,000 transgender adolescents in the United States, yet research on outcomes following gender-affirming mastectomy in this age group is limited. We evaluated gender-affirming mastectomy incidence, as well as postoperative ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
Stirlingsays said:
This literally happens anyway, chess for example, darts.....No one expressly stops woman entering non physical hobbies or competition events where men don't have a physical advantage......The only reason men still tend to win in these is only because say, the number of women playing chess compared to men is far smaller and hence the pool of high level players is smaller.....On average men and women tend to prefer different hobbies, not always but on average...In sensible times no one considered it an issue. No one considered tomboys an issue for example until the left started waffling nonsense about it meaning something else.

It makes sense for women to also have women only competitions to increase their chances of recognition as a champion within that gender. I don't think anyone has a problem with that. No one is forced either way.

But apparently if men want a single sex competition for whatever reason we have to listen to a legion of feminists and soy boys having a fit over it.

It's silly.
Click to expand...
It’s a blanket order.

So if someone whose gender was considered male at birth, but now identifies as female, wants to compete in any sporting competition for females, whether or not physicality is an issue, they will be refused. They will be expected to play in the men’s equivalent.

That will obviously be very difficult for those who now look, dress and behave exclusively female. In sports where physicality is a major contributor to success there is a strong argument for it but where it is not the downsides heavily outweigh the up.

In addition there are some people who possess elements of both genders at birth, are allocated one but may choose the other later or remain as “intersex”. How will they now be regarded? It’s a complex issue that cannot be solved by a populist signing a piece of paper.
 
Good thing there is only two Genders. Male (XY chromosome) and female (XX chromosome)

I believe most of us learned this science in our school years. Perhaps some lefties missed out a year or two?

Hopefully the UK follows the US now and makes women's sports a safe space from men.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
It’s a blanket order.

So if someone whose gender was considered male at birth, but now identifies as female, wants to compete in any sporting competition for females, whether or not physicality is an issue, they will be refused. They will be expected to play in the men’s equivalent.

That will obviously be very difficult for those who now look, dress and behave exclusively female. In sports where physicality is a major contributor to success there is a strong argument for it but where it is not the downsides heavily outweigh the up.

In addition there are some people who possess elements of both genders at birth, are allocated one but may choose the other later or remain as “intersex”. How will they now be regarded? It’s a complex issue that cannot be solved by a populist signing a piece of paper.
Click to expand...

Different sports have already found a way.

Swimming Announces ‘Open’ Category For Transgender Athletes—Here Are The Other Major Sports With Restrictions Or Bans
 
It is a sad reflection that such things as stopping men competing in women's sports, where the men would have an obvious unfair advantage, and the stopping of child mutilation are deemed controversial.
Still the good thing is that these abominations are being eradicated - hopefully the woke tide is turning at last.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Another right wing organisation.


Gender-Affirming Mastectomy Trends and Surgical Outcomes in Adolescents - PMC

There are over 150,000 transgender adolescents in the United States, yet research on outcomes following gender-affirming mastectomy in this age group is limited. We evaluated gender-affirming mastectomy incidence, as well as postoperative ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Click to expand...
No, it’s the same source you referenced and I described as being more scientific. Compare the original report you referenced with the one you do above. Here it is again:-

Prevalence of Gender-Affirming Surgical Procedures Among Minors and Adults in the US - PMC

This cross-sectional study uses a national dataset to examine the prevalence of gender-affirming surgical procedures among minors and adults in the US.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

It deals with almost the same subject. The difference being the original covers “Minors & Adults” whilst your latest attempt covers “Adolescents”!

Look at the dates of publication, the original was last year. The one just referenced was written in 2022 and a final version published in 2023.

Look at the language. The one in 2023 refers to mastectomies. The one in 2024 refers to breast reductions.

It seems to me that they are learning, improving, trying to be more accurate and less emotional not only in what they say but in how they say it.

This is a complex subject, prone to emotion and prejudice, so improvements in report writing is only to be welcomed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top