News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Newsom has consistently and repeatedly fought for trans rights. I dunno why trans advocates are getting hung up on sports. I swear you guys were manipulated into digging your heels in with the dumbest position possible solely to divide and discredit the movement for equality for trans people.
It's like how the news media will ignore dozens and dozens of innocent Black men getting shot by police until there's a story of a gang member with a rap sheet a mile long who was actively trying to rape someone when police shot him, and then they'll run the story hoping that the anti-racists will rush to defend him.
Insisting on having untransitioned or partially transitioned trans women in women's sports is such an obviously stupid hill to die on. You're all playing right into their hands.
I don't know if you're falling for it or this is just how you feel, but Newsom was talking to Charlie Kirk who popularized the "groomers" line, calls June "groomer month" all the time and constantly talks about executing "groomers". Newsom softballed it to make it seem like Kirk just cares about sports, and repeatedly dog whistled a lot about how much he agrees with Kirk keeping it ambiguous about what exactly he agrees with.
Maybe you believe Newsom is deep down a good guy and he's just doing this to shill for right wing votes, and once you give him power he'll be normal. But right now all he's doing is telling his audience of out of touch liberals that the "I don't want to see a black pilot on my plane" guy is the kind of sensible conservative Democrats should be bipartisan with.
IMO based on how he talks and the trans bills he's vetoed as governor, Newsom is the type of liberal that likes the idea of being the big guy protecting "these poor people" from dirty rednecks, but is also extremely suspicious that all this gender shit is some kind of Tiktok trend that might get out of hand if he lets trans people have it too easy.
I've never seen people care this much about Micheal Phelps biological atheletic advantage. That alone tells me that this argument is disingenuous and a way to be transphobic in a public way.
There are actual verified cases of olympic tier athletes winning because of their biological make-up. And yet the only time biological advantage is brought up is to shill tranphobic talking points. You don't even have to be trans to be accused of being trans. These same people claiming to be advocates of women's sport are the same people who will falsely accuse biological women of being biological men
Have you ever seen Michael Phelps compete against a league of teenagers?
Or a regional swim meet in Idaho?
All trans women/trans athletes should be banned from sports competition because 2 happened to out-perform their cis peers? What a pathetically reactionary argument. This comment right here perfectly exemplifies the transphobic mindset.
Here's an idea: why don't you post actual peer-reviewed studies and evidence of trans athletes outperforming their peers on average due to being trans? Oh wait, you can't. Because there's literally zero empirical evidence of that being the case.
And the fact that you pivoted so quickly away from Phelps for some reactionary anecdote says it all.
The fuck bullshit is this?
The fuck bullshit is this?
Did you respond to the wrong comment? Literally my previous comment, the one you responded to, is about Phelps.
Edit: also
Sealion.
Scientist already have proven there's no advantage and were testing athletes in sports for hormone levels, muscle atrophy and bone mass loss that happen when on HRT (which is why even the most famous trans women never dominated year after year, because the tests showed they were at normal female levels)... Peer reviewed scientists > you and your biased sources
Bigots don't care.
Many sports are divided in a women’s and an open competition. In the open competition any genetic advantage goes (hence the name open), whereas the women’s competition is restricted to people with a specific trait. In such a context I think it’s totally valid to restrict the women’s competition to “born with vagina”. Transgender (both M->F and F->M) can continue to compete in the open section.
Sports that are instead divided in a men’s and women’s section are more problematic, because they may completely block transgender people from competing at all levels, which is very exclusionary. I don’t see a particularly good solution for these sports, apart from changing sections to “open” vs “women’s “.
Finally, I do not see a role for genetic testing (born with vagina, but XY for instance). People make life decisions based on the gender they believe they are. Takebacks based on genetic tests that could occur in far advanced stage of an athlete’s career is completely unfair.
But what advantage do women without a vagina have versus one that does? What if they didn't go through cis puberty? How do we knows trans woman have an innate advantage instead of being effectively handicapped by their hormone treatment? This is my entire point. People want to ban Trans women specifically because of a reactionary feeling of "its not fair" while having zero evidence. There are like 2 cases where a trans athlete outperformed their cis peers. Yet the way some people (not you specifically) act you'd think trans women are sweeping every sports competition.
In my opinion, it comes down more to being exclusionary towards trans woman. More-so then it ever was about "protecting women's sports". I don't think that everyone that wants to bar trans women thinks this way. But people like Charlie Kirk 100% do and will abuse that at every turn. This is the same man that calls June "Groomer month".
I think it's completely nuts that after the last 20 years and especially the last 12 years, Democrats still seem to think that compromising with the right will flip republicans voters. Gavin, my guy, they think you're literally the reincarnation of Stalin. You could gargle Trump's nuts and they'd still hate you
No they don't. They know it won't and don't care. They just love moving to the right for its own sake.
Because once you lose one right, the rest fall like domino's.
Ok then in that case you are SO fucking late to the party
Correct. Ask any of these people “defending” women’s sports to name a dozen non-male athletes. Ridicule them upon failure to do so.
The Left in the US would so much rather die on the hill of perceived moral superiority than achieve any of their goals. And, thus, here we are.
That’s part of why trump got elected lol. Rather than trying to fix the issues while retaining some level of government, some people were like “let’s have a brutal authoritarian dictatorship and change things for the worse. That will show democrats!” Meanwhile nobody votes in the primaries or their local elections
It's asinine, and that's why we need a new Left in the US: a Left of people who actually want to build a society in which the highest possible health and well being is achieved for the largest possible number of people, and who are willing and able to learn and adapt, to find the most effective methods for achieving said society, even if it means compromising and being pragmatic. A Left that is measured by results, rather than performative social justice advocacy.
I find it so hard to have good messaging on this topic because we first have to convince half this country that helping others is a virtue not a weakness. How do we convince a deeply selfish population that helping neighbors and keeping our nation healthy and educated are not “communist plots to make everyone poor” but just basics of a successful society. I can argue politics all day but once someone thinks empathy is a weakness or a sin, I just don’t know what to say anymore. We need a fundamental societal shift and that has to start locally I think.
We should worry about the Right after we get the Left into some semblance of coherence and rationality. Liberals and Leftists should be natural allies against the fascists. Instead we got the Leftists knifing the Liberals in the back this election.
That might be fixable. Compromise between Left and Liberals is plausible. The Right, on the other hand, is not at all tethered to reality. There is no reasoning or compromise with them. They are in full-on batshit wackadoodle land. Addressing them will require something a lot more radical than "convincing".
So you're going to punch left until they agree with your bigotry and never get around to punching right.
Currently? As though it's not the only thing you do.
Well lemmy is a hornets nest of particularly stupid leftists, so yeah, that's a big part of what I do on this site specifically
You think anyone to your left is stupid and admire everyone to your right.
Abuse is the centrist substitute for defensible ideas.
Not anyone to my left. Just anyone dumb enough to enable fascism by rejecting an alliance (even of convenience!) with liberals.
So anyone who doesn't mindlessly fall in line and support everything you do.
You don't want an alliance. You want servility. I get why you're so frustrated. You don't see why servility isn't as easy for everyone else as it is for you.
And now we're at the part where you start making up shit and claiming I say it. Cool cool cool. I think it's nice we usually get 2 or 3 honest exchanges in before you remember your propaganda mission. I've missed that.
You've been lobbing abuse this entire conversation.
You have nothing good to say about anyone to your left, and nothing but defense of anti-trans hate.
And centrists will accept any policy as long as it's to their right.
You don't know what you're talking about.
You say that to anyone to your left who doesn't jump with joy at the latest betrayal of marginalized groups.
I say that to anyone who doesn't know what they're talking about.
You arrogantly say it to anyone to your left.
That's not true. You don't know what you're talking about. Stop. Just stop.
Don't you have a republican to capitulate to?
No, dingus, I don't.
Oh, that's why you're so cranky. Here you are gaslighting and abusing someone to your left and there's not even a chance that you'll get headpats from republicans for doing it.
How do you know that you're to my left? You don't know me. What makes you so far left, anyway? Are you a Marxist, anarchist? What? You wanna gate keep the left, let's do it. Give me your specific socioeconomic, sociopolitical ideal, and details about how you think it can be achieved. I'm dying to hear about your grand plan to change the world and usher in utopia. Come on, we're all waiting for you. The future of humanity is in your hands, your plan had better be good.
I don't side with charlie kirk regarding trans people, for one. Discussion's about trans people.
If I dare to disagree with you and charlie kirk, I need to have a solution for every last one of the world's ills? Seems like a pretty high bar to clear just to be to your left regarding trans people.
When did I even once mention trans people?
When did I even once mention Charlie Kirk?
Is that all you think the Left is? Trans issues? There's nothing more to the Left than matters pertaining to trans people? You do realize that there are many billions of people on the planet who are not trans, and that their concerns matter as well?
I think you may be in the wrong thread, then.
I think that's what this thread is about.
The thread is about trans people. You're just trying to deflect.
Such as your lord and savior charlie kirk.
I'm not the one deflecting. You never answered my question: should the concerns of non-trans people also matter to the Left?
Yes, this thread is about trans issues, specifically the question of whether or not trans women should be allowed to participate in women's sports. Do you realize how privileged you have to be for that to be a major concern? Poverty, destitution, illness, these are problems that millions of people face everyday, yet you won't even acknowledge them because "that's not what this thread is about." You're no Leftist.
I'm sure they matter to you. Particularly the concerns of charlie kirk and his bestie gavin newsom.
I know enough trans people so it's personal, but it also speaks to a pattern of behavior within the centrist wing of the democratic party. Trans athletes are just the most recent group that democrats have thrown under the bus for the unmitigated delight of hearing the thumping sounds.
And your wing of the party has made it crystal clear that they are uninterested in helping anyone poorer than the "good billionaires" they toady up to.
They do. The question is: do they matter to you?
I don't know why you keep bringing up Charlie Kirk. I know next to nothing about him, I don't listen to him. I don't know, or care what he thinks about, well, much of anything, really.
It's not my wing of the party. I don't have a party, which is why I said I wanted to build a new Leftist movement: one that is interested in the concerns of the working class people. But, what folks like you don't understand, is that most working class people are not concerned about whether or not trans women are allowed to participate in women's sports. They are concerned about paying their rent, feeding their families, affording medical care, and other day-to-day, material issues. I choose to focus on those issues. You can focus on whatever you want, I don't care. My new Leftist movement won't include people like you, because you're not helping anyone, and I don't think you care to. You would accept widespread harm, so long as you could go on performing as a social justice advocate.
I have nothing more to say to you. I'm really not interested in reading another one of your vapid, banal responses about Charlie Kirk, or whatever other nonsense you might come up with. I'm going to go actually try to make the world a better place.
I agree with you
As someone with trans family, and that works around parents (but has no kids myself), and is very liberal personally --
From what I can tell, Gavin is speaking to how the average parent feels. They are accepting of trans people, but have some hesitations and those are coming out through this example, for one. And I mean the more liberal parents
You either need to get out there and speak to these people and work to help them get over these feelings, or you need to accept how they feel and the... yes I'm spinning this phrase... boundary they are requesting and then work within that to change their minds
Raging at them and damning candidates over it without working to actually change it is just like the Palestine voters and Kamala all over again (at least at a superficial level)