Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

What's not good enough is you not reading the sources I already provided, that give those reasons, they aren't mine, they are girls like Becky Pepper-Jackson's reasons. And she's no man.

My points are rock solid and you don't like them and have begun all capsing now to shift the goalposts. Good.

https://news.wfsu.org/state-news/2023-01-09/a-federal-judge-has-reopened-the-fight-over-floridas-transgender-athlete-law

https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-blocks-utah-ban-on-transgender-youth-playing-in-girls-sports/

https://www.wibw.com/2022/07/19/federal-judge-blocks-new-guidance-transgender-athletes-20-states/

Another law review I found that suggests how the law might handle it esp for school sports:

"Although both fully inclusive and partially inclusive policies are consistent with the Constitution and Title IX, athletic policy decision makers should deeply consider which values they want to promote. State officials need to balance concerns over fair competition and safety with acknowledging the dignity and well-being of trans students. A policy that requires a trans girl to undergo hormone therapy for a year before competing against other girls might unduly burden a student who cannot afford expensive hormone treatments.311 Such a policy might also pressure a trans girl to pursue medical intervention that she might not otherwise desire.312 Partially inclusive athletic policies will prevent a trans girl who decides not to undergo hormone therapy, either because of prohibitive costs or a wish to maintain her natural hormonal levels, from making a full social transition if she is barred from playing on female sports teams. The full social transition is integral to a trans individual’s emotional health.313 Furthermore, a rule that bars trans girls who have not undergone hormone treatment from playing on girls’ teams may effectively “out” a trans student to her classmates. The NCAA model is constitutional, but a more trans-friendly approach might be a better fit for secondary schools. High school athletic associations need to decide whether preventing athletes like Yearwood from winning girls’ state championships is worth the emotional toll placed on trans girls who are prohibited from playing sports with their female classmates. After losing the 100-meter dash to Yearwood, Kate Hall, a junior who had won the event the previous year, was noticeably disappointed.314 As Hall fought back tears, she told a reporter, “I can’t really say what I want to say, but there’s not much I can do about it . . . . You can’t blame anyone . . . . From what I know [Yearwood] is really nice and that’s all that matters. She’s not rude and obnoxious.”315 Hall, through her grace and composure in defeat, proves that, although at times painful, fully inclusive policies are necessary to affirm the dignity of trans adolescents. This issue is bigger than one athlete or one track meet. Interscholastic sports should be in service of larger educational goals, and there is no more important lesson than teaching young people that their trans classmates deserve the opportunity to fully live their truth, including playing sports consistent with their gender identity. "

Clearly, some people will just want to be mad and nothing will ever change their minds. Yes, all these judges across all these jurisdictions in the United States, they're all activist woke judges, that must be it. It's not like the state judges in these red states are liberal by any means. You act like Trump hadn't appointed over a quarter of the entire federal bunch and the Trump stacked supreme court refused to reinstate these transgender bans when they've come to their desk or anything. 😂 What stage of the debate is it when people deflect to such pithy conspiracy theories?

On the whole SGBs are taking a much more holistic approach than you are trying to give them credit for.

I can't say the same for legislative bodies, which again are heavily influenced by not resolving a problem (ie. with the sports or with fairness in a timely manner) but in keeping voters riled up about things to win elections over (and that fervor needs to hold through clear to election season - this played out for decades with abortion, they kept the drama going with seasonal dead-on-arrival bills, constantly trolling the judiciary to overturn Roe while they kept marketing to voters to let them pack the court (which they did when they held up Obama's appointees (for SCOTUS, and the lower benches) and shoved in ACB right before a general election, etc etc)).

SGBs as NGOs don't have nearly the same authority or restrictions on their authority, under the law, as applies in the case of this trying to be effected out into statewide/national bans. What might be good for one SGB might not be good for another, and a one size fits all legislative approach is consistently getting beat up in the courts (those same 'activist woke' courts that overturned abortion rights, gutted the voting rights act and the civil rights act, much woke on the bench clearly /rant)

Good article. Thanks for posting.

The last paragraph sums up this debate nicely :

All people are created equal, and possess equal moral worth, but we are not all created the same. To protect equal opportunity, there are times when the law should recognize differences. And in the realm of athletics, if we want to both secure and continue the remarkable advances women have made in the 51 years since Congress passed Title IX, it’s important to remember that sex still matters, and sex distinctions in the law should remain.

"Right" and "morality" these are no what judges rule on, they rule on the law remember. Quite a porkie to imply they neither deal with logic nor evidence nor reason. The judiciary isn't a papacy. Dred Scott v Sanford wasn't written because the Justices really thought they had a moral right to slaves, they wrote it because the constitution was very clear that it was not a document that granted full personhood to blacks, they were 3/5ths of a person. The ruling necessitated the Reconstruction Amendments.

If judges aren't arbiters of right and wrong, I don't think anonymous users online are the arbiters, and I don't care if you want to opine or spin that these judges in all these different cases are all simultaneously off their rockers using the much the exact same legal reasoning as one another. SGBs, even the White House, take a more holistic approach then the sweeping bans you have touted yourself on here, implicitly as "right" and "moral."

The someone was me, the sport was swimming, and the end result of all their consultation etc was that their sex categories are strictly defined by sex-based criteria. Transgender athletes are free to participate in which category that corresponds with their sex, irrespective of their gender identity. I'm glad to see you supporting this as a model approach. It's exactly the approach that Seb Cooe specifically called out in the article above. It's exactly the approach that nearly everyone else in this thread agrees with. If you now agree that defining sex-based categories on the basis of sex characteristics is the correct approach then we're all in agreement.

You're the one saying that SGBs are taking a more holistic approach than the "fairness over inclusion" approach. You have yet to provide any evidence of that.

But that is the holistic approach, if you reread the first few pages/executive summary of the document you previously linked to.

That they determined, for Swimming, and in this case only for Swimming, at the levels they govern. The ruling doesn't exclude the ... random generative example, the Boulder Colorado Teens Swimming League from taking its own holistic approaches and making a different set of rules that are not the same rules as the olympic swimming for trans athletes. Each SGB, responsible for its own little fief of sports as a whole, taking their own separate holistic approaches, will yield results that works for them, their sports, their competitions/classes/tiers, their age groups, then as a whole Sports regards the issue overall holistically, rather than a bunch of fundamentalist politicians imposing statewide, nationwide bans across the entirety of sports, from the casual to the olympian.

You're just trying to disregard what I said by circling all the way back to the OP, with nothing else but more sophistry? Okay. Nothing I said above excludes the swimming SGB Thomas competes in from re-evaluating its rules as many times as it wants?

Maybe, but that might not be the case for all trans athletes, like Becky Pepper-Jackson, "She is not among the top performers, the court filings say." (WaPo) there could easily be more than 1 or several factors in play. Becky has no testosterone advantage.