Every fight for more rights for more people has had this tension.
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
But I recognize that such ideals haven't really succeeded in western society; so maybe it's easier to wear what you want as a particular traditional gender that you pick. And that's really just another way to look at the same thing. And maybe society understands that more?
I don't speak for everyone but I think for some people this is a big part of it. Fighting for what you just described here is hard enough already. Many people just want to live their lives and be happy. Also, non-binary people exist and are generally considered to be a part of the trans umbrella. I think the first step to building a society where gender truely doesn't matter starts with building a society where all trans people are welcomed and accepted.
In addition to what others have said, I'd like to add a little more information.
Hormones work by changing your gene expression. Every one of us has all the DNA for both typically male and typically female traits. Hormones play a part in deciding what parts of your DNA are active within your cells and what parts aren't. There's a complicated set of interactions that decides what hormones you produce naturally and how your body responds to them. Sometimes something happens in an atypical way with that complex set of interactions and that's how intersex people exist.
(There are examples of people with XY chromosomes who have internal testes but are insensitive to testosterone and grow up female, and even examples of people with XY chromosomes who have functioning uteruses and have given birth naturally. It can get very complicated)
When you go on HRT as part of a medical transition, the instructions your cells are following in your DNA switch to the instructions tied to those hormones. That's how trans people's bodies change. Their cells are actually functioning differently.
A trans women on estrogen for a long enough time will eventually have their blood proteins go to a more typically female profile. They'll also see their risk factor for certain diseases switch. The risk of cardiovascular disease goes down (typically something that affects more males) and their risk for autoimmune disease go up (typically something that affects more females).
So are trans woman biologically men? Eh, not quite. Saying somebody is biologically male/female is a little reductive. It can be complicated.
Understand it might be hard for her at first even if she's very supportive of trans people. You've had years to process these feelings, you can't necessarily expect her to me able to process everything herself right away. It might have implications for her own sexuality, the future she imagined together with you, etc.
My partner and I are going through similar things. It's still hard sometimes but we're both really trying to make things work, so I have hope it'll all work out. Open and honest communication is very important.
One thing we've had to work on is including each other in our processing, instead of one of us doing processing on these things and then presenting it all at once to the other.
My point, this entire conversion, is the issue is complicated and needs more research. Yes some statistical differences in strength seem to remain. That doesn't always translate to an advantage in a specific sport though. As I've mentioned before, and your own post references too, bone density doesn't change. Moving around heavier bones with less muscles is a factor in determining any specific sport advantage.
You also ignore this entire section directly after the part you mention:
relative percentage lean mass and fat mass (and muscle strength corrected for lean mass), hemoglobin, and VO2 peak corrected for weight was no different to cisgender women. After 2 years of GAHT, no advantage was observed for physical performance measured by running time or in trans women. By 4 years, there was no advantage in sit-ups.
Surely there's more to it than just strength right?
Again, my entire point is the issue is hard to study and needs more research. Surely you can see the value in using non-athletic populations in studies in order to get a sample size, even though its not perfect, right?
You are the one saying the issue is a 100% decided scientific fact. You have a greater burden of proof associated with that claim, which you have not demonstrated. Until you do I'm done with this convention.
What actual scientific research was I responding to? You said "Then why do they keep winning in every sport that requires strength and endurance?" There's 0 "scientific research" in that very firm claim.
He references scientific research and demonstrates the ginned up hysteria I mentioned.
We can each go around finding articles that prove the point of either side. The truth is that the topic is complicated and needs more research. Picking out the few studies that prove your point and ignoring the ones that don't isn't engaging with the body of scientific knowledge in good faith. See my other comment to you too.
In nonathletic trans men starting testosterone therapy, within 1 year, muscle mass and strength increased and, by 3 years, physical performance (push-ups, sit-ups, run time) improved to the level of cisgender men. In nonathletic trans women, feminizing hormone therapy increased fat mass by approximately 30% and decreased muscle mass by approximately 5% after 12 months, and steadily declined beyond 3 years. While absolute lean mass remains higher in trans women, relative percentage lean mass and fat mass (and muscle strength corrected for lean mass), hemoglobin, and VO2 peak corrected for weight was no different to cisgender women. After 2 years of GAHT, no advantage was observed for physical performance measured by running time or in trans women. By 4 years, there was no advantage in sit-ups. While push-up performance declined in trans women, a statistical advantage remained relative to cisgender women.
You can't prove a negative. You need to provide a source that trans women "keep winning in every sport that requires strength and endurance." keep and every are big claims there.
The truth is more nuanced and highly depends on the individual person and their history. Some trans women never go through a male puberty, for example. Trans women on estrogen and testosterone blockers lose a significant amount of muscle mass. Depending on the sport that can actually be a disadvantage because they're moving around typically heavier phrames with less muscle. There's also differences, typically, in things like center of gravity. Less muscle mass (for their size/frame), a heavier frame, and higher center of gravity could cause a disadvantage for an individual in sports like wrestling, as another example.
The truth is we don't actually know very well, scientifically speaking, and it needs to be studied more. A big problem in studying it more is that there are so few trans athletes and the sample sizes are very small.
Saying trans women are flat out better in "every sport that requires strength and endurance" is outright hyperbole bordering on being flat out wrong and does not engage with current scientific knowledge on the topic in good faith.
Never been a huge fan of his humor personally, but the core content here is nuanced and on point. https://youtu.be/flSS1tjoxf0
Newsom hasn't indicated he'll do any of that though. He's more of the same centrism that got us here. He's not a progressive, which by this comment I assume you are.
It does matter less than being more involved though. If that's all you can do that's perfectly fine, but if we really want to fix things we need those who can to be more involved, that's all.
I agree with you, both parties are not the same and we need to make sure the fascists don't win any elections. But the person above you didn't say not to vote, they just said voting isn't enough, which is true. Voting is a form of harm reduction, but it's also the least effective form of civic engagement. If we want to really change this shit, we have to get more involved than just voting every few years.
Every fight for more rights for more people has had this tension.
-- MLK
I don't speak for everyone but I think for some people this is a big part of it. Fighting for what you just described here is hard enough already. Many people just want to live their lives and be happy. Also, non-binary people exist and are generally considered to be a part of the trans umbrella. I think the first step to building a society where gender truely doesn't matter starts with building a society where all trans people are welcomed and accepted.
In addition to what others have said, I'd like to add a little more information.
Hormones work by changing your gene expression. Every one of us has all the DNA for both typically male and typically female traits. Hormones play a part in deciding what parts of your DNA are active within your cells and what parts aren't. There's a complicated set of interactions that decides what hormones you produce naturally and how your body responds to them. Sometimes something happens in an atypical way with that complex set of interactions and that's how intersex people exist.
(There are examples of people with XY chromosomes who have internal testes but are insensitive to testosterone and grow up female, and even examples of people with XY chromosomes who have functioning uteruses and have given birth naturally. It can get very complicated)
When you go on HRT as part of a medical transition, the instructions your cells are following in your DNA switch to the instructions tied to those hormones. That's how trans people's bodies change. Their cells are actually functioning differently.
A trans women on estrogen for a long enough time will eventually have their blood proteins go to a more typically female profile. They'll also see their risk factor for certain diseases switch. The risk of cardiovascular disease goes down (typically something that affects more males) and their risk for autoimmune disease go up (typically something that affects more females).
So are trans woman biologically men? Eh, not quite. Saying somebody is biologically male/female is a little reductive. It can be complicated.
Understand it might be hard for her at first even if she's very supportive of trans people. You've had years to process these feelings, you can't necessarily expect her to me able to process everything herself right away. It might have implications for her own sexuality, the future she imagined together with you, etc.
My partner and I are going through similar things. It's still hard sometimes but we're both really trying to make things work, so I have hope it'll all work out. Open and honest communication is very important.
One thing we've had to work on is including each other in our processing, instead of one of us doing processing on these things and then presenting it all at once to the other.
My point, this entire conversion, is the issue is complicated and needs more research. Yes some statistical differences in strength seem to remain. That doesn't always translate to an advantage in a specific sport though. As I've mentioned before, and your own post references too, bone density doesn't change. Moving around heavier bones with less muscles is a factor in determining any specific sport advantage.
You also ignore this entire section directly after the part you mention:
Surely there's more to it than just strength right?
Again, my entire point is the issue is hard to study and needs more research. Surely you can see the value in using non-athletic populations in studies in order to get a sample size, even though its not perfect, right?
You are the one saying the issue is a 100% decided scientific fact. You have a greater burden of proof associated with that claim, which you have not demonstrated. Until you do I'm done with this convention.
What actual scientific research was I responding to? You said "Then why do they keep winning in every sport that requires strength and endurance?" There's 0 "scientific research" in that very firm claim.
He references scientific research and demonstrates the ginned up hysteria I mentioned.
We can each go around finding articles that prove the point of either side. The truth is that the topic is complicated and needs more research. Picking out the few studies that prove your point and ignoring the ones that don't isn't engaging with the body of scientific knowledge in good faith. See my other comment to you too.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37437247/
You can't prove a negative. You need to provide a source that trans women "keep winning in every sport that requires strength and endurance." keep and every are big claims there.
The truth is more nuanced and highly depends on the individual person and their history. Some trans women never go through a male puberty, for example. Trans women on estrogen and testosterone blockers lose a significant amount of muscle mass. Depending on the sport that can actually be a disadvantage because they're moving around typically heavier phrames with less muscle. There's also differences, typically, in things like center of gravity. Less muscle mass (for their size/frame), a heavier frame, and higher center of gravity could cause a disadvantage for an individual in sports like wrestling, as another example.
The truth is we don't actually know very well, scientifically speaking, and it needs to be studied more. A big problem in studying it more is that there are so few trans athletes and the sample sizes are very small.
Saying trans women are flat out better in "every sport that requires strength and endurance" is outright hyperbole bordering on being flat out wrong and does not engage with current scientific knowledge on the topic in good faith.
Never been a huge fan of his humor personally, but the core content here is nuanced and on point. https://youtu.be/flSS1tjoxf0
Umm, they don't.
The perception they do is ginned up hysteria.
Newsom hasn't indicated he'll do any of that though. He's more of the same centrism that got us here. He's not a progressive, which by this comment I assume you are.
This ignores:
No thanks
It does matter less than being more involved though. If that's all you can do that's perfectly fine, but if we really want to fix things we need those who can to be more involved, that's all.
I agree with you, both parties are not the same and we need to make sure the fascists don't win any elections. But the person above you didn't say not to vote, they just said voting isn't enough, which is true. Voting is a form of harm reduction, but it's also the least effective form of civic engagement. If we want to really change this shit, we have to get more involved than just voting every few years.
I can help with docker and linux stuff if you need it, I work with them daily.
Consensus. And those who don't agree are free to separate and do their own thing based on their own consensus.
If you can't get the consensus/consent of the people your ideas will impact, you have no right to execute on those ideas.