Biden administration says schools may bar trans athletes from competitive teams

[WhiskeyGrinder]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/04/06/trans-athletes-school-sports-title-ix/

Free link: https://archive.ph/MPbDs

The Biden administration on Thursday proposed new regulations that would allow schools to bar transgender athletes from participating in competitive high school and college sports, but disallow blanket bans on the athletes that have been approved across the country.

The proposal was met with mixed reaction from transgender rights activists, with some saying that it provided a welcome set of protections for trans students and others saying the regulations could offer a roadmap for those who want to discriminate.

Specifically, the department’s proposal requires schools that wish to limit trans athletes’ participation to show that the decision relates to an important educational objective and minimizes harm to others.

“The proposed rule … recognizes that in some instances, particularly in competitive high school and college athletic environments, some schools may adopt policies that limit transgender students’ participation,” the Education Department said in a fact sheet. It said the proposal would give schools “the flexibility to develop their own participation policies.”

Deeply, deeply disappointing.

[dchill]

1. EVERYTHING is about WINNING!

[WhiskeyGrinder]

2. Kick. Important stuff here, people!

[angrychair]

3. This is disgusting

I do not support this at all.

We are creating a rule for something that is a non-issue. Kansas has 2 trans children participating in high school sports in all of Kansas. Out of thousands and thousands.

[Nevilledog]

4. It's being seen as a betrayal and adoption of RW lies

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[WhiskeyGrinder]

5. That's exactly what it is. Horrifying.

[Initech]

6. This is some bullshit.

The only reason this is even a talking point is because of right wing conspiracy theory hate sites like Infowars and that Libsoftiktok asshole. And honestly, fuck them.

[gratuitous]

7. So are these proposed regulations, or a done deal?

I will withhold judgment until the text of the proposed regulations is published (and not just take the Washington Post's characterization of what the regulations say - color me cynical).

If there's a period of public input and testimony allowed before the regulations are finalized, I'm far more optimistic of the outcome under a Biden administration. I would expect the administration to follow the science, the facts, and the lived experience of trans persons, and be less amenable to transphobic fear- and hate-mongering.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

9. It's a proposal, and you can read it on the DOE's website.

Here: https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-us-department-educations-proposed-change-its-title-ix-regulations-students-eligibility-athletic-teams

From the WaPo article:

The proposed rules, which will be subject to public comment, are the administration’s interpretation of the federal Title IX law, and would apply to all public K-12 schools, as well as colleges and universities that receive federal funding.

I would expect the administration to follow the science, the facts, and the lived experience of trans persons, and be less amenable to transphobic fear- and hate-mongering.

That's not what the administration's proposal does, though.

[Ms. Toad]

58. There is a 30-day comment period.

The site isn't being cooperative at the moment, so I can't give you a specific link. But once its search function starts working again you can comment here: https://www.regulations.gov/

[LostOne4Ever]

90. What do I need to search under?

I been trying title ix of the education amendments but haven’t found this particular proposed rule.

[Ms. Toad]

91. I haven't found it yet -

The search tool wasn't working at all last night. Today it is working, but isn't pulling up the proposed rules - so it may not be posted yet. I'll keep an eye out and post another comment here when I find it.

[LostOne4Ever]

92. Thank you very much

For letting me know and all the great posts you made in this thread!

[Solly Mack]

8. ...

...show that the decision relates to an important educational objective and minimizes harm to others.

Huh?

I say again for emphasis. Huh?

Educational objective? Minimizes harm to others?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. Right? "Others."

[Solly Mack]

11. That, and I'm simply bursting with curiosity about what an "important educational objective"

will mean to the various schools/colleges.

[Sympthsical]

13. If I had to guess, I'd say that's French for scholarships

This feels like a trial balloon being sent out as the campaign feels out how to proceed on various issues over the next year and a half.

I bet the administration is sitting back and waiting to see what the backlash looks like.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

15. And "competitive" as well. It's a mess all around.

[AntivaxHunters]

12. As a parent of a trans child this is my red line

This is a big no go for me as the parent of a trans child.
I'd leave the party over this & become an independent. This is ridiculous & a bridge too far. This is how you lose elections.

Let's piss off the entire 🏳️‍🌈 community!. I'm sure that'll work out well..

I'm getting sick & tired of the harm done to people because of policy decisions. This shit ain't it.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

14. I'm so sorry. Time after time after time.

It’s a disgrace.

[vercetti2021]

18. Goes to show

How extendable your child and myself are I guess to this admin.

[lapucelle]

28. As a "group of over 30 doctor's [sic]", did you read the proposed regulation?

Here's what it would do:

- Prohibit schools receiving federal funds from using the "gender assigned at birth" standard.

- Require schools receiving federal funds to adopt "gender identity" as the criterion for "determining" a student athlete's gender.

- Shift the burden to the school to explain, support, and document an important educational purpose that justifies a student's exclusion due to gender (defined as gender identity) rather than require parents and/or students to make the argument for inclusion.

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-us-department-educations-proposed-change-its-title-ix-regulations-students-eligibility-athletic-teams

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9-ath-nprm.pdf

[Johnny2X2X]

34. Thank you

Right wing headlines mislead. This law seems very reasonable and does more to protect trans athletes than what was currently being done.

[lapucelle]

36. It's not perfect, but it does prohibit schools from the blanket use of "gender assigned at birth"

criterion to determine eligibility. That's a major step.

[hunter]

46. I vehemently disagree with the Democratic Party platform on many issues.

I say things on here on DU that make many "mainstream" Democrats cringe. I'm a socialist and a radical environmentalist. I mock "colorblind" white people.

I'm a bit queer, on the autistic spectrum, and have suffered for it.

LGBTQ is just another day in my extended family and has been overtly so since at least the 'sixties.

If I was Emperor of the U.S.A. I'd probably ban high school and college sports as they are now practiced.

That's just a start.

But my politics are ALWAYS practical. The hell if I'm ever going to call myself an "independent" for any reason. In this two party system that we all suffer here in the U.S.A. that would be stupid. There are no "moderate" republicans any more, and no "independents" who are anything but spoilers.

The Republican Party needs to die before we can start talking about how to build another party to replace it, be it leftist or centrist. And I would demand any new party that emerges to respect human rights, unlike so many who call themselves independents, libertarians, greens, etc., too often as a cowardly way of distancing themselves from the fight.

If you don't like what the Democratic Party is doing, locally or nationally, get in there and make some noise. Don't walk away.

[LostOne4Ever]

86. Thank you for standing up for your child!

That is what good parents do

[WhiskeyGrinder]

16. Evening kick.

[vercetti2021]

17. Wow

I'm so fucking disappointed in this admin for pulling this shit. So basically throwing trans people to the wolves because they wanna not alienate people. Why guess what? You fucking did. Me and many other trans people.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

19. I'm so sorry. It's horrifying.

[vercetti2021]

20. I keep saying it over and over

WE DO NOT MATTER TO ANYONE. I will never not believe we matter especially now. We are fucking red meat that is thrown to the wolves on a daily basis. But hey long as we don't piss off "voters" like the centrists and other swing voter morons.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

21. Yep. Politically, trans people are sacrifices to the center.

[vercetti2021]

23. I'll still vote for him

The alternative is much worse for sure. But I feel a knife in my back from this.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

24. I hear you. We have to be able to freely give feedback to those who say they support us. If they

refuse to hear it, do they support us?

[lapucelle]

40. There is a public comment period for the proposed regulation

for anyone interested in freely giving feedback before the new rule is adopted.

[BlackSkimmer]

32. Meantime, a transgender named Dylan Mulvaney is making millions from Bud Lite and Nike.

Last edited Fri Apr 7, 2023, 09:03 AM - Edit history (1)

Dylan is actually modeling sports bras for Nike. Dylan also carries various women's menstrual items around.

I would assume they would not choose a transgender person if they didn't see money in such a move; they see a market.

So Dylan does obviously matter to people, n'est-ce pas?

[vercetti2021]

39. Okay here's the thing with that

I don't give a shit about companies virtue signaling. Unless these companies are giving to transgender organizations. Its a way to sell beer and merch and piss the right off at the same time. These shit means nothing to the rest of us. We want rights and laws protecting us. Not shitty fucking beer and athletic clothing.

[BlackSkimmer]

45. What rights and laws do not protect you?

What laws are needed?

[progressoid]

50. SRSLY? Nearly every state is going after LGBTQ+ folks.

The ACLU is tracking 452 anti-LGBTQ bills in the U.S.


https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights

[BlackSkimmer]

51. Well I was asking what laws are needed?

I know about protective bills, but I was asking about now.

[vercetti2021]

57. They don't get it

They never will. They think there is no issues with trans people yet the writing is literally on the fucking wall.

[progressoid]

61. It's frustrating & infuriating for me, a cis male. I can't imagine what trans people and

all LGBTQ people are going though.

[BlackSkimmer]

89. So you won't answer my question.

And who is "they"?

[Ms. Toad]

93. Here's a start:

Kill all of these proposals and or laws which have been passed.

https://translegislation.com/

[RobinA]

47. Yeah, You Do

keep saying that. Maybe consider that in this case there are female athletes that desire to matter, too. No one is saying you can't do sports.

[BlackSkimmer]

52. ...

Yup.

[Ms. Toad]

59. Women who are transgender are female athletes.

Arguing to the contrary is not acceptable on DU.

For your information, our definition of transphobia includes, but is not limited to: Misgendering, deadnaming, or otherwise refusing to recognize a trans person's gender identity; Arguing that trans people are not "real" men or women; Arguing that trans people should not have the same rights as cis people -- for example, the right to use public restrooms or play sports that match their gender identity; Arguing that there is any scientific basis for discriminating against trans people.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/101312142

[LostOne4Ever]

62. Cis Female athletes are not being threatened by trans women

They both belong and should be able to compete TOGETHER!!!

[LostOne4Ever]

63. Also trans women are female athletes too. (Nt)

[lapucelle]

27. The additional regulation would do the following:

- Stop schools receiving federal funds from prohibitions based on "gender assigned at birth".

- Require schools receiving federal funds to adopt "gender identity" as the criterion for "determining" a student athlete's gender.

- Shift the burden to the school to explain, support, and document a genuine educational purpose that justifies a student's exclusion due to gender (defined as gender identity) rather than require parents and/or students to make the argument for inclusion.

=====================================================

The proposed additional regulation, the current statute, the rationale supporting the change, and instructions for participating during the public commenting period can be found at these .gov websites.

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-us-department-educations-proposed-change-its-title-ix-regulations-students-eligibility-athletic-teams

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9-ath-nprm.pdf

[Marius25]

22. This is definitely the wrong decision.

And we can't even discuss this topic appropriately because of the rules here.

[lapucelle]

25. The proposed regulation would be added as a second part of a current regulation

Current regulation:

Separate teams. Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, a recipient may operate or sponsor separate teams for members of each sex where selection for such teams is based upon competitive skill or the activity involved is a contact sport. However, where a recipient operates or sponsors a team in a particular sport for members of one sex but operates or sponsors no such team for members of the other sex, and athletic opportunities for members of that sex have previously been limited, members of the excluded sex must be allowed to try-out for the team offered unless the sport involved is a contact sport. For the purposes of this part, contact sports include boxing, wrestling, rugby, ice hockey, football, basketball and other sports the purpose or major activity of which involves bodily contact.

Proposed addition:

If a recipient adopts or applies sex-related criteria that would limit or deny a student's eligibility to participate on a male or female team consistent with their gender identity, such criteria must, for each sport, level of competition, and grade or education level: (i) be substantially related to the achievement of an important educational objective, and (ii) minimize harms to students whose opportunity to participate on a male or female team consistent with their gender identity would be limited or denied.

=============================================================

The new regulation would prohibit schools receiving federal funds from blanket prohibitions based on "gender assigned at birth", would require schools receiving federal funds to adopt "gender identity" as the criterion for "determining" a student's gender, and would put the onus on the school to document and show why a student should be excluded based on gender identity rather than force parents and/or students to make the argument for inclusion.

==============================================================

The proposed additional regulation, the current statute, the rationale supporting the change, and instructions for participating during the public commenting period can be found at these .gov websites.

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-us-department-educations-proposed-change-its-title-ix-regulations-students-eligibility-athletic-teams

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9-ath-nprm.pdf

[sheshe2]

29. Thank you, lapucelle.

[lapucelle]

35. WaPo should be ashamed of that misleading, clickbait headline.

The headline just as easily could have read:

"Biden Administration Says Schools May Not Use 'Gender Assigned at Birth" to Ban Trans Athletes from Teams"

[sheshe2]

41. I thought they were better than that.

Guess not. *sigh*

[lapucelle]

49. That explains a lot.

[Johonny]

33. Thanks

[obnoxiousdrunk]

37. Thanks !

[sakabatou]

26. *headdesk*

[LostOne4Ever]

30. Common Joe this isn't you

Joe you are the fighter that got Obama onboard marriage equality.

You can stand up for trans kids too! Drop this turd of a proposal and prove you really do have our backs!

[sheshe2]

42. See post #38.

[LostOne4Ever]

64. Does not change anything

If this was about a cis girl with a hormone or medical issue no one would ever accept them being excluded for any reason. If there was some advantage that their condition gave them then AT MOST people would be discussing possible handicaps and even that would be pushing it.

But because it is trans girls people think it is fine to exclude them.

IT
IS
NOT
OKAY!!!

Trans girls should have every right to participate with other girls at any sport.

[Demsrule86]

80. It certainly does...and if they forbid Trans girls from participating in sports, they lose their

Federal funding.

[LostOne4Ever]

83. That is not what the article says

The Biden administration on Thursday proposed new regulations that would allow schools to bar transgender athletes from participating in competitive high school and college sports, but disallow blanket bans on the athletes that have been approved across the country.

It is literally saying they are allowing bans for the crime of being trans!

“The proposed rule … recognizes that in some instances, particularly in competitive high school and college athletic environments, some schools may adopt policies that limit transgender students’ participation,” the Education Department said in a fact sheet. It said the proposal would give schools “the flexibility to develop their own participation policies.”

What am I reading wrong? It says limits participation. It is not saying the school can allow the school to enact handicaps/modifications/accommodations while allowing trans kids to compete to ensure fairness or an actual policy that is inclusive. It says participation can be limited and trans athletes can even banned! I even bolded the text so it is clear.

Schools that want to limit trans athletes’ participation in sports would have to consider the sport, the level of competition, and the grade or education level involved. For instance, the administration said, elementary school sports should be generally open to transgender students but bans could be allowed for older students, especially at the high school and college levels.

It noted that some teams require advanced skills and others allow anyone to participate, such as intramural or junior varsity squads, and said rules must “reflect these differences in competition.”

Again bans for being trans. It is specifically saying that trans people can compete when there is no real competition involved but once they are playing for trophies and scholarships it is perfectly fine to ban trans girls.

That is not acceptable! It isn’t saying that the school can give them modifications and adjustments to ensure “fairness” but straight out bans.

This, the administration said, was to ensure objectives such as fairness in competition.

How is saying the school can ban you from trying out for scholarships all other girls can try out for or competing with your friends for a title/trophy for the sin of being different, for being trans, in anyway fair?

This is BAD!!! This is the new DOMA/ Don’t ask Don’t tell only directed at children!

You keep on telling us we didn’t read it. Okay quote to me the part that says schools can not prohibit participation in any way. Where it says that schools can’t ban students for being trans at all.

I will be waiting…

[Demsrule86]

78. The headline is deceiving...WAPO can not be trusted I suggest your read the entire post.

[LostOne4Ever]

84. I did

See this post:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17808224

[aocommunalpunch]

31. Way to score on yourself.

Stoopidest shit I hope to read today. Back out of this nightmare YESTERDAY. Christ!

[lapucelle]

38. Did you read the regulation?

Here's what it would do:

- Prohibit schools receiving federal funds from the blanket use of the "gender assigned at birth" standard.

- Require schools receiving federal funds to adopt "gender identity" as the default criterion for "determining" a student athlete's gender.

- Shift the burden to the school to explain, support, and document an important educational purpose that justifies a student's exclusion due to gender (defined as gender identity) rather than require parents and/or students to make the argument for inclusion.

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-us-department-educations-proposed-change-its-title-ix-regulations-students-eligibility-athletic-teams

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9-ath-nprm.pdf

===================================================================

It certainly seems that WaPo tricked a lot of folks yesterday with its misleading, clickbait headline.

Caveat lector.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

43. Schools -- more specifically, school boards -- will have no trouble at all carrying that burden if

they want to.

The language of the fact sheet itself gives full credence to myths about trans people playing sports.

Instead, the Department's approach would allow schools flexibility to develop team eligibility criteria that serve important educational objectives, such as ensuring fairness in competition or preventing sports-related injury. These criteria would have to account for the sport, level of competition, and grade or education level to which they apply. These criteria could not be premised on disapproval of transgender students or a desire to harm a particular student. The criteria also would have to minimize harms to students whose opportunity to participate on a male or female team consistent with their gender identity would be limited or denied.

Those are actual reasons cited now to keep trans people from playing. The Department's fact sheet acknowledges them as valid reasons. This cedes ground to transphobes and says "OK but don't call it a full ban, that's all."

[lapucelle]

44. What makes you think schools / school boards "will have no trouble at all carrying that burden"?

I work in education.

In what way does requiring schools to develop (and document) team eligibility criteria if they seek to exclude trans athletes from competitive sports teams "give full credence to myths about trans people"?

If full credence were being given to myths about trans people, a blanket "gender assigned at birth" criterion would have been allowed to stand, there would be no requirement to show cause if a school tries to use it, and participation in non-competetive sports (i.e. intramurals) wouldn't have been excluded from possible exemption from the newly mandated "gender identity" standard.

Anyone who can formulate a cogent argument for the claims that the "show cause" burden is too easily met and that the proposed regulation "gives full credence to myths about trans people" should consider submitting a public comment before the regulation is adopted.

[Demsrule86]

79. Nonsense...blanket

banning is not allowed and all schools that take federal money must see that opportunities exist for all students ...did you read that?

[LostOne4Ever]

87. No banning based on being trans should be allowed.

We wouldn’t allow or accept this if any other minority group was mentioned.

[jcgoldie]

53. Making concessions to right wing homophobes is not going to help us win

No-one who is triggered by trans athletes competing in sports is going to vote for Joe Biden even if he tries to play to the middle. Might as well stand for what is right because this is not going to help win you any votes.

[maxsolomon]

54. Nuanced policy directive reduced to binary oppositions. So typical.

I think this is reasonable (and a high bar that won't easily be met):

the department’s proposal requires schools that wish to limit trans athletes’ participation to show that the decision relates to an important educational objective and minimizes harm to others.

[lapucelle]

55. That WaPo headline is nothing but misleading mischief.

If the proposed regulation is adopted, schools will no longer be able to use a blanket "gender assigned at birth" standard as the rationale for excluding trans athletes if those schools want to continue to receive federal funds.

That is major.

[LostOne4Ever]

88. There is no nuance in bigotry

Those who push for compromise or third way position are ultimately siding with the oppressor.

For Example:
Slavery
Taking a “nuanced” or third way approach on slavery such as requiring standards of treatment…is still supporting slavery!

Do I need to explain how the third way or nuanced view of racial discrimination resulted in “separate but equal” and everything wrong with it?

Or DOMA?

Or Don’t Ask Don’t Tell?

[maxsolomon]

95. the Biden Admin set a bar that basically can't be met.

yet it's being interpreted to mean they caved to anti-trans bigots.

binary oppositions are not how things work. you don't need to explain anything to me.

[LostOne4Ever]

96. The bar doesn't need to be met to hurt Trans athletes

Just like the RW judge did on the ruling on mifepristone, they will either use junk science or outright make shit up (ignoring all evidence to the contrary) and use that as justification to ban trans athletes.

No matter how air tight you think the loophole might be right wingers will find someway to pry it open.

The only way to deal with this is to leave no loopholes at all. Just as we would not stand for banning black athletes we must not stand for any trans athlete ban. Nor can we even put that on the bargaining table!!!

Simply put, No banning athletes from participation, at all, or for any reason!!! If there is some issue of unfair advantages (which I don’t believe to be proven at the professional athlete level) then we can talk accommodations, handicaps, and modification.

BUT NO BANS OR LIMITS ON PARTICIPATION!!!

[Volaris]

56. Meh..he's doing supply and demand response.

It's a culture war issue; he knows EVENTUALLY the demand for inclusion will outweigh the haters...let's not forgot, President Obama was against gay marriage, until JOE BIDEN decided to shove him over the line (despite the fact he didn't want to otherwise).

From a national-political perspective, I trust Bidens instincts on this one.

(ON EDIT) I'm very much aware of how subjectively injurious this is to all our trans countrymen, and I think you're not wrong...but the point is to KEEP PUSHING (and I think the president believes that as well...it's a bottom up win, or it isn't a win at all).

[Ms. Toad]

60. That didn't make it acceptable when Obama proposed relegating my, then, 27 year marriage

to second class status.

Nor is it acceptable now for Biden to "compromise" on full rights for trans individuals.

Would your reaction be "Meh . . . keep pushing" if those regulations were about participation in white sports/schools/etc. by Black students?

[Beautiful Disaster]

65. This is a good proposal by Biden. People who are against it didn't actually read the proposal.

Which is unfortunate. I get it's an emotional issue but it's important we don't react irrationally and some in this thread are doing exactly that - letting an intentionally misleading headline rile 'em up.

I am not sure how anyone can read the actual proposal and be against it:

Schools that want to limit trans athletes’ participation in sports would have to consider the sport, the level of competition, and the grade or education level involved. For instance, the administration said, elementary school sports should be generally open to transgender students but bans could be allowed for older students, especially at the high school and college levels.

It noted that some teams require advanced skills and others allow anyone to participate, such as intramural or junior varsity squads, and said rules must “reflect these differences in competition.”

The proposed rules, which will be subject to public comment, are the administration’s interpretation of the federal Title IX law, and would apply to all public K-12 schools, as well as colleges and universities that receive federal funding.

That sounds like a good plan.

But this thread is proof-positive that it's easy to spread disinformation to every group - just write up a contentious, disingenuous headline and expect people won't actually read the changes. I'm sad DU fell for it.

[LostOne4Ever]

66. How?

Because there should not be ANY LIMIT ON TRANS ATHLETES AT ALL!!!

It does not matter the sport.
It does not matter the level of competition.
It does not matter the grade of educational level.

Trans women/girls are women/girls and should compete with all the other women/girls.

[Beautiful Disaster]

68. This makes no sense.

So, zero limits whatsoever? What do you constitute as trans? Someone calling themselves trans? That's all you would consider as a trans athlete? There has to be some integrity here. It's pretty simple.

The proposal by Biden is pretty strong and provides justification that I think is reasonable. Or you'd run the risk of people just claiming to be trans to get the athletic advantage and that is wholly offensive to those who actually are trans.

[LostOne4Ever]

70. It makes perfect sense!

Last edited Sat Apr 8, 2023, 06:33 AM - Edit history (4)

Trans people must be fully included.

You are distracting from the issue at hand by bringing up completely different issues. I am not against keeping cis men from robbing any woman or girl (cis or trans) of their opportunities.

But that is NOT what this is saying or about. That is a distraction which is brought up in these discussions to invalidate trans people by implying that trans women are not women and just duplicitous men.

How they go about doing that, whether through handicaps or other accommodations to ensure that it is women, and just women (cis and trans) on a fair playing field can be discussed and hashed out in ways that do not involve trans exclusion.

Trans women are women deserve a chance to fully participate with other women in sports. Period.

No limits on participation should even be considered. To quote directly from the post I was replying to:

Schools that want to limit trans athletes’ participation in sports would have to consider the sport, the level of competition, and the grade or education level involved. For instance, the administration said, elementary school sports should be generally open to transgender students but bans could be allowed for older students, especially at the high school and college levels.

The bolded is clearly about limiting participation and installing bans and that is unacceptable! We can hash the details of how they participate sport by sport and accommodation and modification by each individual accommodation and modification. But we must not accept any limit on participation.

No limit. Trans women deserve the same opportunity to participate!!!

[Ms. Toad]

75. Accusing people of claiming to be trans to gain athletic advantage

is both right wing, trans-hostile propaganda, and not permitted on DU.

For your information, our definition of transphobia includes, but is not limited to: Misgendering, deadnaming, or otherwise refusing to recognize a trans person's gender identity; Arguing that trans people are not "real" men or women; Arguing that trans people should not have the same rights as cis people -- for example, the right to use public restrooms or play sports that match their gender identity; Arguing that there is any scientific basis for discriminating against trans people.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/101312142

[Ms. Toad]

67. Wow. Merely because someone disagrees without, you accuse them of

not bothering to read it.

Permitting schools to exclude trans athletes from participation in sports which match their gender is a kick in the teeth to trans individuals. It is a vain attempt to split the baby so that the proposal will be acceptable to people trying to erase trans individual. It never will be acceptable to such individuals, and trans individals are people, not hypothetical babies to be split.

Title IX has already been interpreted to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender. This regulation says, "But wait!! Tnere are exceptions!!" It is no more acceptable than "don't ask, don't tell," (you can be gay in the military, you just can't talk about it) or Obama's support of legal recognition of same gender relationships as long as they were not actually recognized as marriages (we'll give you some rights as long as you forfeit the right to call your relationship a marriage).

I know very well what the proposal says. Your assumption/accusation that I "fell for it," or "didn't actually read it" is offensive.

[Beautiful Disaster]

69. Exactly.

If people read it, they'd see it's a reasonable decision. But some are letting their emotions get the best of 'em. The headline is a lie. I have no sympathy for people who distort the truth - whether on our side or not. Kudos to Biden for this. He should be praised for taking a bold step in mitigating the division of such an issue and frankly, it's insulting that you're misconstruing his position.

[Ms. Toad]

72. So you are accusing me of being a liar. Got it.

As someone who had been through this split the baby compromise crap before with Clinton and Obama on things that more directly impact my life, I am not willing to support it when it is my trans friends who are being sacrificed.

I explained that we simply disagree, and why, and you still insist that I can't have read the proposal because you read it and believe it is reasonable, and accuse me of either lying, or of misconstruing it. Neither is true.

[Demsrule86]

81. There is a great deal of that on this thread...I can't understand why after being told to read

the proposal and that WAPO is lying people still don't read it. It is on this thread. You don't even have to look at WAPO. I suggest that we all get behind Biden. We simply can't allow the GOP to sneak into the presidentcy via media lies.

[Ms. Toad]

82. Please don't accuse people who disagree with the proposal

of not having read it or of somehow being Republican operatives.

I've been through this before, and am not willing to support another "Don't ask, Don't tell" type of compromise. That, as is this proposal, was an attempt to appease bigots. That was a disaster for LGBT individuals, and appeasing bigots never works.

Replace trans individuals with blacks, and race-segregated teams. Would it be acceptable to have a general rule that Blacks can't be discriminated against, but to permit a local school board (steeped in the racism of the local community) to decide that discrimination is necessary in some instances to achieve some important educational purpose? And, as for minimizing harm to blacks, I'm sure you recall when separate but equal was deemed not harmful.

It is incredibly offensive to insist that people who disagree with the proposal just haven't read it.

[Volaris]

74. No, it wouldn't, and I suppose taking that into account means Biden missed on this one.

[Deminpenn]

71. Before puberty, kids are pretty much equal as far as

physical ability and build. It's why girls and boys can and do compete together in youth sports. The problem happens after puberty. Boys start growing after puberty and girls stop. Boys are able to add more weight and muscle mass, too. Just as importantly, the onset of puberty is different for both sexes. If a post puberty female identifies as male, they generally would not be competitive with boys, who are now starting to grow, on boys teams. However, if a post puberty male identifies as female and competes on girls team, they would have a distinct physical advantage. That's the rub.

[Ms. Toad]

77. Arguing there is a scientific basis for discrimination

is not permitted on DU, per EarlG.

For your information, our definition of transphobia includes, but is not limited to: Misgendering, deadnaming, or otherwise refusing to recognize a trans person's gender identity; Arguing that trans people are not "real" men or women; Arguing that trans people should not have the same rights as cis people -- for example, the right to use public restrooms or play sports that match their gender identity; Arguing that there is any scientific basis for discriminating against trans people.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/101312142

[LostOne4Ever]

85. Puberty blockers are safe, effective, and a real thing

If anything they put trans athletes at a disadvantage.

For those who have undergone the wrong puberty handicaps, accommodations, and modifications exist.

And as Ms Toad points out… arguing for a scientific* basis in discrimination is against the rules here.





* to be clear any “scientific” reason is always nested in pseudoscience and bias. Just as eugenics was.

[gulliver]

73. I'd be interested in the opinion of people who categorize themselves as trans on this

What's their democratically representative opinion? As usual, I have no interest in the opinions of self-elected, volunteer speakers or allies. Without the backing of some form of one-person-one-vote process, folks only legitimately speak for themselves. The burden of proof is on activists to show they aren't merely seeking attention or, perhaps unintentionally, damaging the cause they elected themselves to speak for.

[Ms. Toad]

76. You have at least two trans individuals who have spoken in this thread,

And who have posted on this issue numerous times in other threads, and who have identified themselves as trans. You are being disingenuous in suggesting you haven't heard from them yet.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

94. Biden DOE Trans Sports Rule has been widely (purposefully) misconstrued

This proposed rule is getting bad press by journalists who have no legal background

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet