Who are you agreeing with? You’re the one that posted the article, I’m just explaining to you what it said since you apparently didn’t read it. Am I living in some kind of Bizarro World here? What are you contributing here to this conversation?
“That there is every indication that proper regulation can level the playing field”
This is what I was referencing in my reply.
The quote from that article points to initial differences that then fall off over time.
So it seems that in certain physical sports there may need to be some regulation (I’m not sure how that would work without being quite invasive for trans athletes though, any thoughts?) to ensure a level playing field for all women both cis and trans.
If I’ve caused some offence, which the aggressiveness of your reply seems to imply, I apologise, it was never my intent.
This has been such a funny thread to read through. You post a source, that apparently you didn’t read because it goes counter to all of your arguments, then you start arguing with other people against your very own source. Acting offended that people won’t defend your Source against you. It’s simply hilarious.
Sadly, many, including you, seem to have missed my point, or disingenuously refused to engage with the point I have been trying to make. I wanted a conversation to form an opinion, because they’re isn’t consensus. Many of he replies have only proven that and lots have assumed my intent, or been quite rude. I can understand why many people don’t bother to engage with the trans community and their allies tbh.
Seems like if someone really wanted to form for themselves and informed opinion based upon facts and research they should probably read the articles they are using as sources. Probably also shouldn’t use Lemmy to form your opinions.
So forgive me if I find you disingenuous. You are just asking questions I get it. Totally. Sure.
Well, articles don’t talk back, I enjoy conversation.
Also none of these links actually say that there aren’t differences even after gaht, but I dont want to start an argument again.
And that is part of what I’m forming an opinion about, if there are still differences then how can that be sorted out so everyone is happy.
I can understand suspicion, and I’m sorry if I’ve caused offence.
However from my experience if a group wants other people who are ignorant, don’t accept or are actively against something to change their opinions or be more accepting then that requires conversation, sometimes that isn’t easy. I certainly haven’t found all the insults and assumptions about my intent easy to fight through.
However to those that have engaged with me I thank you all for it.
Who are you agreeing with? You’re the one that posted the article, I’m just explaining to you what it said since you apparently didn’t read it. Am I living in some kind of Bizarro World here? What are you contributing here to this conversation?
“That there is every indication that proper regulation can level the playing field”
This is what I was referencing in my reply.
The quote from that article points to initial differences that then fall off over time.
So it seems that in certain physical sports there may need to be some regulation (I’m not sure how that would work without being quite invasive for trans athletes though, any thoughts?) to ensure a level playing field for all women both cis and trans.
If I’ve caused some offence, which the aggressiveness of your reply seems to imply, I apologise, it was never my intent.
Super concerning that you don’t know the difference between aggressiveness and bewilderment.
That’s what you took away from my comment? Ok…
This has been such a funny thread to read through. You post a source, that apparently you didn’t read because it goes counter to all of your arguments, then you start arguing with other people against your very own source. Acting offended that people won’t defend your Source against you. It’s simply hilarious.
Sadly, many, including you, seem to have missed my point, or disingenuously refused to engage with the point I have been trying to make. I wanted a conversation to form an opinion, because they’re isn’t consensus. Many of he replies have only proven that and lots have assumed my intent, or been quite rude. I can understand why many people don’t bother to engage with the trans community and their allies tbh.
Seems like if someone really wanted to form for themselves and informed opinion based upon facts and research they should probably read the articles they are using as sources. Probably also shouldn’t use Lemmy to form your opinions.
So forgive me if I find you disingenuous. You are just asking questions I get it. Totally. Sure.
Well, articles don’t talk back, I enjoy conversation.
Also none of these links actually say that there aren’t differences even after gaht, but I dont want to start an argument again.
And that is part of what I’m forming an opinion about, if there are still differences then how can that be sorted out so everyone is happy.
I can understand suspicion, and I’m sorry if I’ve caused offence.
However from my experience if a group wants other people who are ignorant, don’t accept or are actively against something to change their opinions or be more accepting then that requires conversation, sometimes that isn’t easy. I certainly haven’t found all the insults and assumptions about my intent easy to fight through.
However to those that have engaged with me I thank you all for it.