Let’s be clear. This question is one that is designed to drive a wedge between the rights of transgender people and the rights of cis-gender women. The conclusion we are supposed to draw is that acceptance of transgender people into sports will ultimately mean that cis-gender women will no longer be competitive in sports and that women’s sports will be taken over by transgender women, in particular women who transition, not from a sense of personal identity, but from motivation to win money and fame at sports. It is essentially a variation of the bathroom argument, saying that there are lots of otherwise cisgender men who would choose to exploit acceptance of transgender people for ends that have nothing to do with identity.
When Tamsin expresses her* unhappiness at this “line of questioning” being brought up, she is completely justified. Rage would be justified. Reasoning along this line is the path of bigotry. The evidence for negative consequences of transgender people participating in any aspect of society is non-existent and based on conjecture and arguing this way is an attempt to preemptively deny rights to people who are struggling to even be acknowledged as human beings. If it were up to me, this thread would be locked and removed.
*If this isn’t the right pronoun set, I apologize. I couldn’t find a reference to it.
