Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this.

I understand not wanting people who went through male puberty to compete as female. But to make an exception for people who underwent medical transition before puberty encourages early medical transition. If they feel, as they seem to, that early medical transition is harmful, why would they reward it in this way?

I think because the rationale for the rule is that biological males who went through puberty have an inherent advantage over women that even testosterone suppression cannot address. Therefore, they left it open for those trans women who never went through puberty. I don’t think this is going to lead to a bunch of 11 year old boys transitioning.

I don't think the number is going to be concerning.

The trans kid in my life is a transboy, so this doesn't impact him at all. But puberty has been hard, because of this sense that he needs to medically transition so that his body is male, and his parents' sense that he needs more time. If he knew that not transitioning at 10 or 11 meant no chance of competing? It would be way harder for his parents to get him to hold off.

I just don't see this exception as a good thing.

Parents and medical professionals should be able to hold off a 11-12 year old. It’s their job.

But why would the swim federation make it an exception?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this.

I understand not wanting people who went through male puberty to compete as female. But to make an exception for people who underwent medical transition before puberty encourages early medical transition. If they feel, as they seem to, that early medical transition is harmful, why would they reward it in this way?

I think because the rationale for the rule is that biological males who went through puberty have an inherent advantage over women that even testosterone suppression cannot address. Therefore, they left it open for those trans women who never went through puberty. I don’t think this is going to lead to a bunch of 11 year old boys transitioning.

I don't think the number is going to be concerning.

The trans kid in my life is a transboy, so this doesn't impact him at all. But puberty has been hard, because of this sense that he needs to medically transition so that his body is male, and his parents' sense that he needs more time. If he knew that not transitioning at 10 or 11 meant no chance of competing? It would be way harder for his parents to get him to hold off.

I just don't see this exception as a good thing.

Parents and medical professionals should be able to hold off a 11-12 year old. It’s their job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this.

I understand not wanting people who went through male puberty to compete as female. But to make an exception for people who underwent medical transition before puberty encourages early medical transition. If they feel, as they seem to, that early medical transition is harmful, why would they reward it in this way?

I think because the rationale for the rule is that biological males who went through puberty have an inherent advantage over women that even testosterone suppression cannot address. Therefore, they left it open for those trans women who never went through puberty. I don’t think this is going to lead to a bunch of 11 year old boys transitioning.

I don't think the number is going to be concerning.

The trans kid in my life is a transboy, so this doesn't impact him at all. But puberty has been hard, because of this sense that he needs to medically transition so that his body is male, and his parents' sense that he needs more time. If he knew that not transitioning at 10 or 11 meant no chance of competing? It would be way harder for his parents to get him to hold off.

I just don't see this exception as a good thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this.

I understand not wanting people who went through male puberty to compete as female. But to make an exception for people who underwent medical transition before puberty encourages early medical transition. If they feel, as they seem to, that early medical transition is harmful, why would they reward it in this way?

I think because the rationale for the rule is that biological males who went through puberty have an inherent advantage over women that even testosterone suppression cannot address. Therefore, they left it open for those trans women who never went through puberty. I don’t think this is going to lead to a bunch of 11 year old boys transitioning.

I don't think the number is going to be concerning.

The trans kid in my life is a transboy, so this doesn't impact him at all. But puberty has been hard, because of this sense that he needs to medically transition so that his body is male, and his parents' sense that he needs more time. If he knew that not transitioning at 10 or 11 meant no chance of competing? It would be way harder for his parents to get him to hold off.

I just don't see this exception as a good thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this.

I understand not wanting people who went through male puberty to compete as female. But to make an exception for people who underwent medical transition before puberty encourages early medical transition. If they feel, as they seem to, that early medical transition is harmful, why would they reward it in this way?

I think because the rationale for the rule is that biological males who went through puberty have an inherent advantage over women that even testosterone suppression cannot address. Therefore, they left it open for those trans women who never went through puberty. I don’t think this is going to lead to a bunch of 11 year old boys transitioning.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this.

I understand not wanting people who went through male puberty to compete as female. But to make an exception for people who underwent medical transition before puberty encourages early medical transition. If they feel, as they seem to, that early medical transition is harmful, why would they reward it in this way?

Anonymous wrote:This passed by a large margin too, 71% in favor of the new rule. This goes to show that people felt like they couldn’t voice their opinion on the issue for fear they would be labeled a bigot, because at the time it was portrayed as an issue where only bigots opposed biological males competing in women’s sports and the voices against were in the minority.