Tulsi Gabbard Introduces Anti-Transgender Bill After Claiming To Be LGBTQ-friendly
Source: Huffingtonpost
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) introduced legislation in the House on Thursday that would bar schools from receiving federal funding if they allow transgender girls and women and non-binary people to compete on sports teams consistent with their gender identities.
The bill — co-sponsored by Republican Rep. Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma — was met with immediate outrage from transgender activists and allies who labeled the legislation “blatantly transphobic.”
Read more: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tulsi-gabbard-anti-transgender-bill-title-ix_n_5fd2de33c5b66a75841389b5
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
dchill
(42,660 posts)
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)
AZ8theist
(7,151 posts)I can't believe the Democrats who supported this DINO in the primary.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)(I read profiles.)
mahina
(20,521 posts)At the legislature
I have to give her credit for being able to shut peoples brains off by giving them just the sop she knows they want to hear that makes them think she has their values. She never had our values.
She quit because she knew she was going to be beaten.
Now we have to work on Kai. He has potential. His Dad was such a good man.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)
Miguelito Loveless
(5,534 posts)at times.
RobinA
(10,476 posts)must agree with every other Democrat?
RobinA
(10,476 posts)must agree with every other Democrat?
FreeState
(10,702 posts)your an asshole - no matter what party.
mahina
(20,521 posts)They know without it they are going nowhere.
OAITW r.2.0
(31,731 posts)Gabbard is what you wish the Republican Party was today. That doesn't make her a Democrat.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)
Cha
(317,722 posts)Kai Kahele is my new Rep & he will be an excellent Democratic Rep
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)She told us.
My Pet Orangutan
(12,595 posts)I think what most people did not realize at the time was that Hillary saw the threat to the Republic so clearly that she was prepared to put politics to one side and give it to us straight.
(Gawd this is a clumsy sentence, but I don't know how to say it in any other way)
yardwork
(69,095 posts)Hillary has been right about a lot of things.
Cha
(317,722 posts)Frickining Scenario!
Towlie
(5,561 posts)
←
Other entities, such as political discussion forums on the Internet, could call out and label the rogues, but no political party can afford the luxury of turning members away. Like a religion, a political party must count as their members all who say they're members.
onenote
(46,063 posts)Towlie
(5,561 posts)
←
Wikipedia: Fourth term (116th Congress)
Also, according to that section,
But those are just facts offered without comment. I would never violate the DU rule that says "Don't bash Democratic public figures."
mahina
(20,521 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 11, 2020, 04:26 PM - Edit history (1)
It could obviously be argued that she has a D behind her name so she needs the definition but she just can’t do these things and be a Democrat
Towlie
(5,561 posts)
←
I'm not defending the rule, but logically, if you could maneuver around it with the No True Scotsman fallacy then there wouldn't be any point in having the rule.
mahina
(20,521 posts)Towlie
(5,561 posts)
←
A Scotsman read about an Englishman who committed a terrible crime. He said "No Scotsman would do anything like that!"
The next day he read about a Scotsman who committed an ever worse crime. He said "No true Scotsman would do anything like that!"
A member of any political party is anyone who says they're a member. DU says to not bash Democrats. I don't necessarily support that policy but my point is that I don't believe they'd allow you to justify bashing a Democrat by simply redefining Democrats as people you don't want to bash.
mahina
(20,521 posts)The Democratic Party of Hawaii had a platform that includes support for equality for LGBTQ
people and she is on the record bashing them?
We do. She does.
mahina
(20,521 posts)It could obviously be argued that she has a day behind her name so she needs the definition but she just can’t do these things and be a Democrat
relayerbob
(7,394 posts)before her Fox News (or will it be OANN?) gig starts
Mopar151
(10,346 posts)Incredibly unimpressive. Perhaps she was cute once🤔
Lithos
(26,609 posts)He would randomly just blurt out his support of either Tulsi or Yang. For some reason he thought I would find Yang objectionable which I didn't. (For the record, I agree with Yang about a significantly important developing societal issue - just think his solution is a bit naive and too simple for what is a more complicated issue.). But Tulsi, that one got me - I saw through her years ago and always thought she was an opportunist.
L-
Vivienne235729
(3,748 posts)ANYONE supporting her.
dhill926
(16,953 posts)
a la izquierda
(12,264 posts)I never did understand some of the love for her here and in other Democratic circles I frequent.
Ford_Prefect
(8,544 posts)Such legislation will also fail in the same fashion. This is a pernicious and punitive attack on children and adults alike.
SunSeeker
(57,888 posts)
betsuni
(28,891 posts)"the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, the personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party." Um. that's the Democrat Party. Tulsi.
Whotheone
(20 posts)A straight ban is absurd, it is the worst way to handle it and will just create a further rift between everyone.
It would be far more logical to create a national standard providing a guide of what's required to create a fair playing field for all with no question of bias against anyone.
I don't understand why these things always to seem to go to the extreme right rather than finding a reasonable and thoughtful solution.
obamanut2012
(29,246 posts)Welcome to DU!
Roisin Ni Fiachra
(2,574 posts)Sooooo glad she's gone from Congress in January.
From the OP:
"We knew she was a liar, a fraud"
dsc
(53,339 posts)told we were being unfair to her, and she had changed. Well, I for one, am owed an apology.
On the merits of this issue, the case out of CT to site one example, was a trans girl supposedly dominating track in CT. The girl in question was 2 and 9 in meets. Yep this supposedly dominate girl had a record equivalent to the Bengals (2-9-1). For the record the Bengals clinched last place in the AFC North and will have the 2nd worst record in the NFL (the Jets will be worse). Literally no one thinks the Bengals are a dominate team in the NFL. So, on what planet is a girl who is 2-9 dominate in track.
obamanut2012
(29,246 posts)One calling out someone who defended Rowling being anti-trans, the other two calling our Gabbard.
I also think I should be apologized to, and have the three posts unhidden.
Lots of folks on here love Rowling and think she's right, and will also defend Gabbard's stance on this, my friend. After some of the comments on the recent Elliot Page announcement... good lord.
Jimbo S
(3,037 posts)I've been an affectionate of track and field for 40 years. Teams and individuals don't have win-loss records. Are you saying this athlete won two races and did not win nine races? So, this person won two races and possibly finish second the other nine times? I am not familiar with this story. Could you provide a link or something for me to google? I am curious.
dsc
(53,339 posts)but here is an article where the complaining person beat the transgender athlete. https://www.outsports.com/2020/2/18/21140680/high-school-connecticut-terry-miller-chelsea-mitchell-track-andraya-yearwood-ciac-adf-transphobia
Jimbo S
(3,037 posts)I may have come across earlier in the spring. All three people in the article have legitimate concerns. How does an athletic organization and society develop a just system? World Athletics (formerly IAAF) is still working on a long-term solution.
Also, the article answers my question above. Miller has been defeated, but by the state champion. Mitchell and Miller appear to be the two fastest sprinters in CT. So it appears Miller has beaten all other competition, and is that fair? Lots of shades of gray.
FreeState
(10,702 posts)on DU you get people supporting treating trans people different. It's embrace and heartbreaking all at the same time.
Roy Rolling
(7,524 posts)“You fucked up! You trusted us!” She was an unreliable ally to those working for LGBT rights.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Sadly, I recall several Gabbard loyalists here as well.
CaptYossarian
(6,448 posts)vercetti2021
(10,481 posts)Gtfo outta here you self serving bitch!
malthaussen
(18,481 posts)... have a measurable advantage over athletes who are physically female. Testosterone is a real thing, regardless of the gender one identifies with. Rugby World Union has prohibited trans females from playing on women's teams. The Olympic Committee has regulations re testosterone levels for athletes to compete as women.
So what we have here is a big ol' can of worms. Let's imagine that trans females had the unrestricted right to compete in all girls's and women's sports. The field would slowly come to be dominated by trans females, who cannot remove the physical advantages (testosterone, muscle mass, skeletal structure, heart and lung size and efficiency, etc) that they possess, no matter how much they might want to (and if they are competitive in sports, why would they want to give up a competitive edge?). Would that eventually discourage biological females from competing, seeing that they must overcome a physical advantage that is a total accident of birth? Or should fixes be introduced, for example different starting lines for different athletes based on testosterone levels? Would this not require intrusive and demeaning testing and questioning, which kind of defeats the whole idea of acknowledging and accepting that an individual's gender is a matter of their own decision?
It is a great offense to honor, liberty, and the individual's right to their own persons to deny them any goods on the basis of some accident of birth. In this particular case, pitting physical males against physical females for distinction in sports devised to be competitive among physical females, justice would appear to be in conflict with fairness. Where's Solomon when you need him?
-- Mal
Ellen Forradalom
(16,186 posts)We need reasonable, realistic, open discussion on the rights of all parties here. Title IX enshrines in law hard-won sex-based rights for women and girls. Equality for women in sports and education has profoundly transformed our society for the better. Changing the definition from sex to gender has many impacts and these need to be considered carefully to maximize benefit for all concerned.
FreeState
(10,702 posts)Ellen Forradalom
(16,186 posts)Of decisions that affect them. This is true across the political spectrum.
FreeState
(10,702 posts)acting like they aren't is transphobic.
Ellen Forradalom
(16,186 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 11, 2020, 09:19 PM - Edit history (1)
To discipline malthaussen for discussing physical male and female bodies.
Thought so. Your misogyny is showing.
Mosby
(19,335 posts)There is clear evidence that biological males have profound advantages over biological women in sports. The benefits go beyond current testosterone levels.
Ellen Forradalom
(16,186 posts)That person was only here to slap an unruly female.
Javaman
(65,417 posts)DSandra
(1,718 posts)And we don’t need someone with a (D) endorsing another veiled attack on trans people.
Tulsi should know the real intentions behind such legislation. Seems she’s too much of a TERF and bigot to get along with loyal Democrats.
brush
(61,033 posts)unless she's trying to get a TV gig in right wing media. Wasn't she supposed to be an LGBTQ ally? So with less than a month left in office, what's the intent of glomming unto such a controversial bill that abandons principle unless it's to get exposure to winger hiring managers?
One thing I'm pretty sure she's learning in the last couple of years is that looks only takes one so far, and in her case, brains and principles haven't stepped to the fore to take over when needed.
Response to Lunabell (Original post)
Post removed
FreeState
(10,702 posts)FACT: Trans athletes do not have an unfair advantage in sports.
MYTH: Trans athletes’ physiological characteristics provide an unfair advantage over cis athletes.
Women and girls who are trans face discrimination and violence that makes it difficult to even stay in school. According to the U.S. Trans Survey, 22 percent of trans women who were perceived as trans in school were harassed so badly they had to leave school because of it. Another 10 percent were kicked out of school. The idea that women and girls have an advantage because they are trans ignores the actual conditions of their lives.
Trans athletes vary in athletic ability just like cisgender athletes. “One high jumper could be taller and have longer legs than another, but the other could have perfect form, and then do better,” explains Andraya Yearwood, a student track athlete and ACLU client. “One sprinter could have parents who spend so much money on personal training for their child, which in turn, would cause that child to run faster," she adds. In Connecticut, where cisgender girl runners have tried to block Andraya from participating in the sport she loves, the very same cis girls who have claimed that trans athletes have an “unfair” advantage have consistently performed as well as or better than transgender competitors.
"A person’s genetic make-up and internal and external reproductive anatomy are not useful indicators of athletic performance,”according to Dr. Joshua D. Safer. “For a trans woman athlete who meets NCAA standards, “there is no inherent reason why her physiological characteristics related to athletic performance should be treated differently from the physiological characteristics of a non-transgender woman.”
https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbt-rights/four-myths-about-trans-athletes-debunked/
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Tired of reading right wing bullshit on DU.
Happy Hoosier
(9,446 posts)Blue_Tires
(57,596 posts)onetexan
(13,913 posts)
drmeow
(5,961 posts)LGBTQ issues Gabbard has views which are as left as Warren and Sanders. LGBTQ issues seem to be her Achilles heel.
Steelrolled
(2,022 posts)there are exceptions.
Of course, as you move towards the local level, politicians becomes much less binary, to the point where the D or R tag seems fairly arbitrary.
FunkyLeprechaun
(2,383 posts)It’s pro-women’s rights.
There’s been recent studies, one covered by the Guardian on Tuesday. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short
Emma Hilton does her studies on the science of sport and she was one of the scientists that provided evidence to World Rugby, which WR agreed with.
Not only that, there are women in sport who have competed against TW (Selina Soule is one) and they were told to train harder to beat the TW and have found it impossible to do so. Women have lost out on athletic scholarships and prizes due to the inclusion of TW in their sport.
Also there are many trans people who agree with Gabbard. Here’s a transman commenting on Chasten Buttigeig’s tweet on this issue:
@_Mars_F: biological sex differences matter. It isn’t transphobic to say this. I get it’s difficult for the tRaNs community to grasp this concept considering the denial of sex is necessary to religiously follow gender ideology. Make no mistake, though, science NOT ideology will prevail.
I disagree with Gabbard on a lot of issues but she is correct here.
Captain Stern
(2,250 posts)This is a sensitive topic, and whenever it comes up it tends to go off on different tangents.
In my opinion, to start from the ground up, we need to ask and answer one fundamental question:
"Why do we have separate leagues for males and females?"
Why is there a 'PGA" (Professional Golfers Association) and a LPGA (Ladies Professional Golfers Association)? Why are there separate divisions in Tennis? Why do colleges have separate basketball teams for men and women?
The answer isn't so males and females could have separate locker rooms. The answer is so that females that excel at their sport would have a place where they could compete on a level playing field. As great as Serena Williams is (possibly the best of all time), none of us would have ever heard of her, if there wasn't a such thing as women's tennis. She wouldn't have qualified for any major tournaments, much less won any of them if there was just one tournament open to everybody.
I think that sports that require power and speed give folks (regardless of gender) with male bodies a real, and distinct, advantage over folks with female bodies.
The easiest answer is to stop calling different leagues "men's" leagues, or "women's" leagues.....call them 'xx chromosome' leagues or 'xy chromosome' leagues. Let folks of either gender play in either league, as long as they have the required chromosomes to qualify.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)than the two to which you refer. Science is leaving transphobia behind. Carefully-couched bigotry with a thin veneer of half-science is still bigotry.
https://genetics.thetech.org/ask-a-geneticist/transgender-intersex-sex-chromosomes
Mosby
(19,335 posts)There are 60 types of DSD, including 46XX and 46XY DSD. Sometimes the differences aren't noticed until puberty.
The differences can be genetic, gonadal, anatomical or a combination of the three. The complexities and manifestation makes it difficult for sports to develop guidelines that work for transgender and DSD, especially given people's privacy rights.
Caster Semana case in point.
Captain Stern
(2,250 posts)I think it mostly supports what I said.
From the article:
"Now this is important: having differences in sex chromosomes doesn’t mean that someone is transgender. Because remember, being transgender has more to do with how someone feels(emphasis is from the article)."
"Certainly there are people who have differences in their sex chromosomes who are transgender, just as there are people who do not have these differences and are transgender. Research does not suggest that people who have these differences are more likely to be transgender."
"Both the sex chromosome differences and being intersex affects how someone’s body is working physically. However, neither of these things necessarily means these people are transgender, since being transgender has to do with how someone feels about their gender."
I'm saying let biology determine which sports leagues folks play in. Leave which gender folks are up to them.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)That’s a TERFy argument, and I’m just so weary of those.
Captain Stern
(2,250 posts)I'm saying that in sports (mostly ones where power/size/speed are important) where it's necessary to separate folks to give females a chance to play ....we should use biology, instead of gender.
No one should be excluded from participating at all based on what their gender is.
janterry
(4,429 posts)n/t
FunkyLeprechaun
(2,383 posts)All of them have said, “PLEASE PLEASE do not include us in the trans debate.” They’ve all gone into detail of their conditions, which can be debilitating.
Intersex people are still either male or female.
Here’s a detrans intersex person talking about this matter, and she often defuses the myths of intersex people,
Link to tweet
?s=21
I had absolutely no idea and did conflate being intersex with being trans for a time. I learned so much from them.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)I just can’t stand it when people make sweeping statements about people being biologically male or female. It’s isn’t, as you’re aware, as simple as that.
FunkyLeprechaun
(2,383 posts)Are you conflating gender with sex?
Biology plays a very important role in how men compete in sport compared to women.
Here’s a website that compares high school boys performances in sport to Olympian women in comparable sport: http://boysvswomen.com/#/
I too felt the same as you, I thought it was fantastic that TW were being included in women’s sport and a year or so ago I would have condemned Gabbard’s bill.
Until I read women’s stories, including:
The woman who had her orbital bone broken by a transwoman (Fallon Fox, MMA, and later tweeted bragging about breaking her opponents face and said she’d do it again)
The woman whose leg was broken in routine practice by a transwoman (Hannah Mouncey, Australian handball)
The woman who complained about a transwoman in the cycling competitions (Rachel McKinnon, who later told the woman to train harder)
The women who stood by, despondent, in the bronze and silver podiums while a transwoman stood proudly with the gold medal (Laurel Hubbard, weightlifting, and the picture can be seen here: https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1082023/transgender-hubbard-beats-samoan-stars)
The women track and field stars who trained their whole lives to be beaten by transwomen who only transitioned the year or so before (Terry Miller, Andraya Yearwood and Cece Tefler)
In the late 1990s, Venus and Serena Williams, at the time the top female tennis players in the world, once said they could beat any man outside the top 200. They were roundly demolished by the 203rd seed in straight sets. John McEnroe commented that if Serena were to compete in the men’s tennis, she would barely crack the top 700.
Seeing their stories, with the accompanying pictures and even video (Miller and Yearwood were so far ahead of their female competition, Hubbard effortlessly lifting weights when the women clearly struggled), made me completely change my mind.
janterry
(4,429 posts)Not seeing much engagement with that, here. But fingers crossed that the science will win out
