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

Where Killips placed previously is not relevant, her sense of defeat that women will never beat a trans woman in the race is proven wrong by the results of the same race, with biological women taking first and second place.

Re: "Patterns" like I said you're not worth engaging with seriously, making sweeping claims that are easily disproved and now blowing dogwhistles about conspiracy theories that trans women are just 'faking it' for the sports notoriety. That's a separate matter of fraud if applicable.

For someone who admits that they are not a sports expert nor are you an athlete, you are doing a lot of batting in favour of letting transwomen compete against biological women. Also, I don't know why you said you are cisgendered because that doesn't make any difference when it comes to setting rules for sport. Why would it? You also aren't really agnostic either when it comes to competition rules/admittance rules because you believe that transwomen should be allowed to take part in female sports.

It's clear to see that there are competing interests here, or conflicting rights is possibly a more accurate way of putting it. Biological females will lose out if transwomen are allowed to compete in their events because transwomen will have an unfair biological advantage if they've gone through male puberty. I think you'll even admit that if a transwoman has gone through male puberty, they have a physical advantage over biological females due to the physiological differences between men and women. Transwomen will lose out if they aren't allowed to compete in biological women's sports. They won't get to compete in their chosen category. Someone will lose out eitherways.

There'll be no palatable solution for everyone, I'm sure of it. I would suggest creating a transwoman category but that category would never be accepted by transwomen because they believe that they are female (even though they are biologically male) and therefore they think they should be allowed to enter the female category event. I don't mean to be insulting to transwomen, but it's accurate to say they are biologically male. There are outliers of course such as intersex etc. where it's ambiguous which category they belong in but they are the exception rather than the rule.

I'm ok with kids being prescribed puberty blockers for precocious puberty. I've yet to be convinced that there's a medical reason to issue puberty blockers to trans kids. Especially if they want to stave off puberty for the sake of taking part in sports. Taking them for sport is an absolutely dumb reason. I find it hard to believe anyone would do that. Maybe I'm naive. I realise that people will say that the kid being trans is a good enough reason but I wouldn't agree although I'm sure you'll say I'm not a medical doctor. I'd feel the same way about giving a kid a sex change. If someone is an adult, fire away, have a sex change, take whatever hormonal drugs you want, but I don't think that's the way to go with children. These are kids who aren't considered old enough to determine their bed time yet they are considered old enough to take life altering drugs.

Anyway, like I said, someone will lose out eitherways.

Droll.

You must have flogged that exact horse at least a dozen previous times in this thread, I'm not interested in refreshing it every 4 to 6 weeks. I prefer moving the conversation forward and onward

Excellent points and solid take. There are no easy answers which means a lot of this will be hashed out in courts and policy rooms around the world and involving all sorts of people seeking injury claims until consensus metes out.

That is the exact question I was asking that poster, and they avoided answering it time and time again.

Please, tell me what your answer is then, because I have no clue whatsoever.

At age 12, a child with precocious puberty will no longer be receiving puberty blockers as undergoing puberty at age 12 is normal. Puberty blockers don't come without a risk of side effects, but as with most medicines a decision is made on whether the risks of using the medicine outweighs the risks of not using the medicine. In a child with precocious puberty, the treatment is reduced from about the age of nine and is finished completely about the age of eleven because the risks associated with a slightly earlier than normal puberty are lower than the risks of taking puberty blockers.

Senate Bill 480 doesn't stop puberty blockers being used for precocious puberty. Section 13c2 specifically says that treatment is not prohibited where an individual has abnormal sex steroid hormone production.

Welcome to who?

No luck with that I see. Must be one of those unknowable mysteries rooted in the discredited world of biology, compassion and reason.

Women athletes are being discriminated against by the bill?