Maine governor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a transgender woman takes testosterone blockers that put her testosterone levels at that of any other woman, what biological advantage would she have? Height?

They don't. Unless, of course, pre-transition the man was a hulking behemoth of an individual. Bone structure will not change with blockers. Muscle mass will change, though. But the number of those types of individuals is pretty small, I bet, probably around the same number as cis women who are more masculine in body type (ex: Ilona Maher, a cis born woman who is a hulking beast of a rugby player).

I'm a trans male. I am 5'10" (I was a very tall female before I transitioned). I'm on the short side for males, but my muscle mass is on par with fit cis males. My surgeon that I used for my top surgery aligned my scars so that they blend in with my pec muscles. I change shirts daily in either my office gym or gym where I'm a member and no one can tell. The only time when it is slightly more noticeable is in the summer if I let my chest get too tan because scars don't tan. Bet even then, it's not a glaringly noticeable thing.

I have never been harassed as a trans male unless I was wearing something showing support for the trans community, like a hat/shirt/pin/etc. like when I was on the metro on the way to pride one year.

They can make all the changes they want, but the fact will remain most of us trans individuals are so passing that you'll never know you're peeing or changing next to us. Who your little bathroom "laws" hurt are the cis people who don't look like their stereotypical gender... the masculine looking females or the feminine looking males. Because they never think the 5'10" muscular dude is trans but they always seem to think the 6'0" skinny effeminate cis guy is trans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is the main govenor dancing at a drag show, so i guess she doesn't get it and will die on this hill and make the left look terrible, wake up people this is why trump won
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/watch-resurfaced-video-of-janet-mills-performing-at-halloween-drag-show-who-told-trump-see-you-in-court/ar-AA1zC9A8

WTF is wrong with that?

Trump won because idiots think this is an "issue".

Data from a January 2025 New York Times/Ipsos survey shows that 79% of Americans oppose allowing biological males who identify as women to compete in women’s sports. In a political climate where the overwhelming majority favors this restriction, overtly aligning yourself with transgender athletes—say, by dancing at drag shows or vocally pushing back against these restrictions—can be perceived as out of step with mainstream views. In other words, such public displays may hurt your image by associating you with a stance held by only a minority of voters, potentially undermining your broader appeal.

Ok. The governing bodies of these sports should take up the issue.

Exactly. This isn't a national issue.

It IS a national issue. Under Biden the head of the NATIONAL Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) defended Trans Folks in girls sports, under Trump the same guy head of the NCAA banned Trans Folks in girls sports. He specifically said that he just wants to comply with national law, government guidance, and court decisions. He wants to stay out of trouble, not "take up the issue" and accept responsibility for the reaction.

[Anonymous]

I am sorry but this southpark clip is exactly the ridiculous of this whole male/trans whatever competing against females. If you don't get it you are way out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Put of all the issues the Maine governor picked to push back on she fell right into the trap and picked the trans one. Lol she's an idiot. She should have picked one of the other eos that are seen as glaringly wrong.

JFC..Some of yàll really need to believe this. Back here on earth most people in Maine are not upset with the Governor. Find a new line this one is tiresome

That’s not what I hear from my Democratic relatives there. Are you in Augusta? It might be true in Augusta.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White upper middle class Dems who are political (dcurbanmoms types) are much more excited about trans rights than rank and file Dems are. Most minority groups are less interested, most struggling single gals are less interested, most state and local government workers are less interested.

We like trans rights, including the right for people born male to compete in women's sports. We like this for four reasons:
1) It marks us as special, as high class. Again, less affluent Dems aren't as into this stuff as we are.
2) It's a great way to punish right wingers, religious types, soccer moms from red states and red suburbs/exurbs
3) It's a great way to drive Republicans crazy and make them say homophobic and transphobic things. It helps us cement our ownership of LGBTQIA+ voters.
4) For the really senior insiders among us, the ones who are happy enough working with powerful Republicans toward shared goals, issues like this help keep the public's attention off bigger issues

"struggling single gals"?

Sit down, boomer.

LOL. I wrote this post, and I'm no boomer! I do look at actual voter breakdowns instead of just "feeling" that my political party consists of mostly impressive fancy people like dcurbanmoms.

And the facts are:
a) the group with the highest propensity, by far, to vote for our party is unmarried women
b) unmarried women have lower incomes on average than married people or unmarried men
Yes, around here we have plenty of affluent single girlbosses. But nationwide most unmarried women are not that affluent.

These "struggling single gals" are a key part of our base. Single gals vote 70% Dem. And the poorer they are the MORE they vote Dem. The only other demographic we do that well in is African-Americans.

One of the reasons the richest Democrats are supportive of men in women's sports is because we are clueless about how the rest of our party really feels. The average Democrat is WAY less supportive of "trans folks" on the girls swim team than people around here are.

"single girlbosses"?

You are a misogynist POS, boomer wannabe. Sit TF down.

Simmer down, tone police. We're trying to win elections here, not make you feel powerful shouting down message board posts! Sheesh! I am not a misogynist. I am calmly explaining that transwomen in girls' sports is not a popular issue for most Democrats. And I am further calmly explaining that single women are an important part of our base, and many of them are less affluent and less political than the dcurbanmoms crowd. If you disagree with any of that, have at it, but objecting to phrases like "struggling single gals" and "girlbosses" is ridiculous. Those are phrases we Democrats proudly coined, and they describe important parts of our voting coalition. Less-affluent abortion activists and more affluent kickass career women are both great and important groups for us. And if MAGA types don't like girlbosses, that's their problem, I'm not letting them own the term.

Your censoriousness is one of the reasons we're losing these days. Swing voters don't like seeing "tolerant progressives" raging out on each other. And we can't think clearly or plan well when we're yelling at each other for every turn of phrase. In very real statistical ways, Democrats are to some extent a party of women and Republicans are a party of men. We need to campaign accordingly if we want to win. When people on here are saying our best hope for the future lies in men like JB Pritzker, Pete Buttigieg, and Mark Kelly, we're obviously a very confused party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had lesbians on my high school sports team. They were lovely and afforded everyone privacy in the locker room and beyond. This is a person issue not a type issue.

Lesbians are women.

That doesn't make it OK for them to look at other women or expose themselves.

Well, they don’t, because they are women and therefore do not have the assault and harassment patterns of men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:White upper middle class Dems who are political (dcurbanmoms types) are much more excited about trans rights than rank and file Dems are. Most minority groups are less interested, most struggling single gals are less interested, most state and local government workers are less interested.

We like trans rights, including the right for people born male to compete in women's sports. We like this for four reasons:
1) It marks us as special, as high class. Again, less affluent Dems aren't as into this stuff as we are.
2) It's a great way to punish right wingers, religious types, soccer moms from red states and red suburbs/exurbs
3) It's a great way to drive Republicans crazy and make them say homophobic and transphobic things. It helps us cement our ownership of LGBTQIA+ voters.
4) For the really senior insiders among us, the ones who are happy enough working with powerful Republicans toward shared goals, issues like this help keep the public's attention off bigger issues

Spot on. DCUM posters have no idea just how out of sync they are on this issue. The rest of the country sees you all as the baddies, you know.

[Anonymous]

If you are trans and your official government ID shows your transitioned sex, is there a way to have your school transcripts reflect this as well?

Meaning, do you even have to tell the university you are a trans female or male? Will they even know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are some numbers:

Percentage of teens in Maine who identify as transgender: 1.3%
Percentage of teens Nationally who identify as transgender: 3%
Of the 3% who play sports: 40%
Percentage of transgender teens who play a sports: 1.2%
There are 42.9 million teenagers in the U.S.

Number of athletes in the NCAA: ~500,000
Number of transgender athletes in the NCAA: fewer than 10


This is not a problem that needs addressing. It affects very few women!

So the women and girls who lose to men just need to suck it up?

I don’t think so. Democrats will continue to lose until they change position on this issue. Hope you like a decade of Republican rule.

I am a Democrat and this is one issue I agree on. I do think it could be nuanced. For example, if you have gone through pubety as a male you can not compete against women or girls. The thing that bothers me is we all know why Dumpy is doing this. He doesn't care one whit about women athletes. It is a way to have a wedge issue. but, I believe it is something we all could find common ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is the main govenor dancing at a drag show, so i guess she doesn't get it and will die on this hill and make the left look terrible, wake up people this is why trump won
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/watch-resurfaced-video-of-janet-mills-performing-at-halloween-drag-show-who-told-trump-see-you-in-court/ar-AA1zC9A8

WTF is wrong with that?

Trump won because idiots think this is an "issue".

Data from a January 2025 New York Times/Ipsos survey shows that 79% of Americans oppose allowing biological males who identify as women to compete in women’s sports. In a political climate where the overwhelming majority favors this restriction, overtly aligning yourself with transgender athletes—say, by dancing at drag shows or vocally pushing back against these restrictions—can be perceived as out of step with mainstream views. In other words, such public displays may hurt your image by associating you with a stance held by only a minority of voters, potentially undermining your broader appeal.

Ok. The governing bodies of these sports should take up the issue.

That’s absolutely not workable in reality and if you had any common sense whatsoever you’d know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a transgender woman takes testosterone blockers that put her testosterone levels at that of any other woman, what biological advantage would she have? Height?

They don't. Unless, of course, pre-transition the man was a hulking behemoth of an individual. Bone structure will not change with blockers. Muscle mass will change, though. But the number of those types of individuals is pretty small, I bet, probably around the same number as cis women who are more masculine in body type (ex: Ilona Maher, a cis born woman who is a hulking beast of a rugby player).

I'm a trans male. I am 5'10" (I was a very tall female before I transitioned). I'm on the short side for males, but my muscle mass is on par with fit cis males. My surgeon that I used for my top surgery aligned my scars so that they blend in with my pec muscles. I change shirts daily in either my office gym or gym where I'm a member and no one can tell. The only time when it is slightly more noticeable is in the summer if I let my chest get too tan because scars don't tan. Bet even then, it's not a glaringly noticeable thing.

I have never been harassed as a trans male unless I was wearing something showing support for the trans community, like a hat/shirt/pin/etc. like when I was on the metro on the way to pride one year.

They can make all the changes they want, but the fact will remain most of us trans individuals are so passing that you'll never know you're peeing or changing next to us. Who your little bathroom "laws" hurt are the cis people who don't look like their stereotypical gender... the masculine looking females or the feminine looking males. Because they never think the 5'10" muscular dude is trans but they always seem to think the 6'0" skinny effeminate cis guy is trans.

A cheek swab to qualify for NCAA competition harms nobody. Stop the ridiculous drama.

[Anonymous]

"I get where it sounds scary for boys or men to play certain sports with women (not from the locker room standpoint because, seriously, who would live life differently from the sex they were assigned at birth just to get into a locker room?!?) but from a strength standpoint."

It doesn't sound like you have much knowledge or experience of alternative sexualities. There are plenty of people for whom "getting into a locker room" is a goal. And there are plenty of people who "get off" on making other people uncomfortable.

Have you ever been to a draq queen brunch? Do those guys look like their primary motivation in life is...making the divisional field hockey playoffs?

Yes, the main issue is the unfairness of the strength differential. But the other serious issue is a power issue. Transwomen often enjoy violating womens' spaces. They are getting attention, making a political statement, and fighting the fight.

Many Democrats enjoy this power issue too. By siccing progressive activists on the daughters of conservative suburbanites, we are showing them who's boss. If the girls feel uncomfortable, so much the better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a transgender woman takes testosterone blockers that put her testosterone levels at that of any other woman, what biological advantage would she have? Height?

They don't. Unless, of course, pre-transition the man was a hulking behemoth of an individual. Bone structure will not change with blockers. Muscle mass will change, though. But the number of those types of individuals is pretty small, I bet, probably around the same number as cis women who are more masculine in body type (ex: Ilona Maher, a cis born woman who is a hulking beast of a rugby player).

I'm a trans male. I am 5'10" (I was a very tall female before I transitioned). I'm on the short side for males, but my muscle mass is on par with fit cis males. My surgeon that I used for my top surgery aligned my scars so that they blend in with my pec muscles. I change shirts daily in either my office gym or gym where I'm a member and no one can tell. The only time when it is slightly more noticeable is in the summer if I let my chest get too tan because scars don't tan. Bet even then, it's not a glaringly noticeable thing.

I have never been harassed as a trans male unless I was wearing something showing support for the trans community, like a hat/shirt/pin/etc. like when I was on the metro on the way to pride one year.

They can make all the changes they want, but the fact will remain most of us trans individuals are so passing that you'll never know you're peeing or changing next to us. Who your little bathroom "laws" hurt are the cis people who don't look like their stereotypical gender... the masculine looking females or the feminine looking males. Because they never think the 5'10" muscular dude is trans but they always seem to think the 6'0" skinny effeminate cis guy is trans.

A cheek swab to qualify for NCAA competition harms nobody. Stop the ridiculous drama.

The issue isn't trans males. It is trans FEMALES. I've never seen anyone complain about a former woman beating biological men in ANY sport. Biological women do not want to share a locker room with a trans female or compete against them.

[Anonymous]

This gender blender stuff is the gift that keeps on giving

Trump knows how to drive a wedge between democrats and the voters. Man he drives that wedge with a sledgehammer until the left is isolated .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a transgender woman takes testosterone blockers that put her testosterone levels at that of any other woman, what biological advantage would she have? Height?

They don't. Unless, of course, pre-transition the man was a hulking behemoth of an individual. Bone structure will not change with blockers. Muscle mass will change, though. But the number of those types of individuals is pretty small, I bet, probably around the same number as cis women who are more masculine in body type (ex: Ilona Maher, a cis born woman who is a hulking beast of a rugby player).

I'm a trans male. I am 5'10" (I was a very tall female before I transitioned). I'm on the short side for males, but my muscle mass is on par with fit cis males. My surgeon that I used for my top surgery aligned my scars so that they blend in with my pec muscles. I change shirts daily in either my office gym or gym where I'm a member and no one can tell. The only time when it is slightly more noticeable is in the summer if I let my chest get too tan because scars don't tan. Bet even then, it's not a glaringly noticeable thing.

I have never been harassed as a trans male unless I was wearing something showing support for the trans community, like a hat/shirt/pin/etc. like when I was on the metro on the way to pride one year.

They can make all the changes they want, but the fact will remain most of us trans individuals are so passing that you'll never know you're peeing or changing next to us. Who your little bathroom "laws" hurt are the cis people who don't look like their stereotypical gender... the masculine looking females or the feminine looking males. Because they never think the 5'10" muscular dude is trans but they always seem to think the 6'0" skinny effeminate cis guy is trans.

A cheek swab to qualify for NCAA competition harms nobody. Stop the ridiculous drama.

The issue isn't trans males. It is trans FEMALES. I've never seen anyone complain about a former woman beating biological men in ANY sport. Biological women do not want to share a locker room with a trans female or compete against them.

Yes, of course.

This issue could be solved so easily. Cheek swabs that test for sex required for NCAA and HS state finals eligibility. Essentially, over a certain level of competition, require cheek swabs. Federal rule-making for intersex. Done.

But the problem is that all this requires progressives to realize that most of the country sees them as the serious bad guys on this issue, and that level of self-introspection is not something progressives have. And it also requires deviating from the religious belief that people have gender souls that are separate from and more important than their physical sex. I just don’t think the elites that control the Democrats now can do that.