Why transwomen should ditch cis femenism

The moment you ditch some group is the moment where everyone in that group likes you less. There is a reason to tolerate certain comments just so that you can keep relations as they are and not become worse.

The claim that transgender women are "outpacing" cisgender women in sports is a subject of intense debate, largely focused on whether hormone therapy eliminates biological advantages derived from male puberty

. Research on this topic is often contested, with studies producing mixed or limited findings. 

Key points regarding athletic performance and competition:

1. Performance Data: Some studies suggest that after 12–36 months of hormone therapy, trans women may lose significant muscle mass. However, other studies have indicated that some advantages, such as hemoglobin levels and, in some cases, running speed (up to 12% faster), might persist for up to two years or more after beginning hormone therapy.
2. Context of Findings: Research often indicates that while absolute strength or lean mass may remain higher, relative performance (e.g., strength corrected for lean mass) in trans women can become comparable to cisgender women.
3. Scientific Limitations: Many studies in this area have small sample sizes or lack proper control groups. Some research suggests that trans women may even face disadvantages in certain metrics, such as lower VO2 max, compared to cis women.
4. Policy and Perception: Concerns about fairness have led some organizations to restrict or ban the participation of trans women in certain female sports categories. Conversely, other viewpoints emphasize that this debate often overlooks the diversity of performance within cisgender athletes and that instances of trans women winning are rare. 

There is no broad consensus that transgender women are universally dominating or "outpacing" cisgender women across all sports. 

Cis women already don't like transwomen;

And responding to that with ditching support will just make them like them less and achieve literally nothing good for trans people who are already at the point where they cannot afford to be more hated.

Why don’t you follow your own advice?

Trans women are part of society and have existed throughout history and across cultures for centuries

. As a demographic, they are increasingly visible in popular culture and daily life. 

However, the experience of trans women in society is often marked by a contrast between increasing visibility and significant challenges: 

1. Human Rights & Legal Protections: In many jurisdictions, trans women are protected by human rights codes that prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, and services based on gender identity and expression. Conversely, in other areas, there is a lack of comprehensive federal non-discrimination laws, leaving them vulnerable to inequality.
2. Discrimination and Violence: Transgender people are among the most disadvantaged groups, frequently facing high levels of harassment, stigma, and violence. Research indicates that nearly all trans people (98% in some studies) have reported at least one incident of transphobia.
3. Social & Economic Impact: Trans women often face higher risks of unemployment and housing instability.
4. Healthcare: Access to gender-affirming care is a major issue, as it is considered a necessary, life-saving service.
5. Inclusion in Women's Spaces: The inclusion of trans women in women-only spaces (shelters, bathrooms, sports) is a subject of active debate and evolving legal frameworks. 

Despite these challenges, there is a strong movement for the social inclusion, equality, and dignity of trans women. 

This is why many of the trans have started calling cis feminist TERFs (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) and even called for violence against cis women, which is insane.

I remember reading an article supporting TW in sports, because I wanted to see what the arguments in favor of doing this were; I knew most of the population was against allowing this in the first place.

The article basically gave two reasons. The first was that banning TW doesn't help women because it bans TW, which it considers women. This seems like circular logic. The second was because "sports was never really fair," i.e. tall and strong people always win. This is so ridiculous.

Underage boys were forced into prostitution and slavery and were made to dress effeminate in Ancient Rome and Greece. Transness and sodomy create abusive behaviors and manipulation

We get it, you hate trans people.

It’s not hate if you want to help them.

It is.

The question of whether transgender athletes should be banned from sports is a subject of significant debate involving athletic governing bodies, medical experts, and the legal system. As of late 2025, policies and perspectives vary widely depending on the level of competition and the specific sport.

Current Policy Landscape (2025)

1. Elite and International Sports: Several major international federations, including World Athletics and the International Cycling Union (UCI), have implemented bans or strict restrictions on transgender women competing in female categories, primarily citing the preservation of "sporting fairness".
2. Olympic Status: In late 2025, reports indicate the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has moved closer to a ban on transgender women in female events to "protect the female category," a shift from its previous hormone-based inclusion framework.
3. U.S. Federal Policy: In early 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports," which seeks to prohibit transgender women and girls from participating in female sports at institutions receiving federal funding.
4. Collegiate Sports: Following federal directives in 2025, the NCAA reversed its long-standing inclusion policy, effectively banning transgender women from women's sports. 

Arguments for Banning or Restricting Participation

1. Physiological Advantage: Critics argue that individuals who have gone through male puberty retain permanent biological advantages in bone structure, lung capacity, and muscle mass that hormone therapy cannot fully reverse.
2. Fairness and Safety: Proponents of bans, such as World Athletics, emphasize that the female category was created to provide a protected space for biological females to compete fairly and safely.
3. Title IX Integrity: Some argue that allowing transgender women in female sports undermines Title IX by taking away opportunities, scholarships, and podium spots from biological women. 

Arguments for Inclusion

1. Human Rights and Well-being: Advocacy groups like the ACLU and GLAAD argue that sports participation is a fundamental right and essential for the mental health and social integration of transgender youth.
2. Impact of Hormone Therapy: Some medical experts and athletes suggest that prolonged testosterone suppression reduces strength and aerobic capacity to levels comparable to cisgender women, mitigating many biological advantages.
3. Broader Inequities: Proponents of inclusion point out that transgender athletes make up a tiny fraction of participants (e.g., fewer than 10 out of 510,000 NCAA athletes in 2024) and that the real threats to women's sports are unequal funding, facilities, and harassment. 

Public Opinion

1. General Sentiment: Recent 2025 polling suggests a significant majority of Americans (roughly 66% to 79% depending on the study) support requiring athletes to compete based on their sex assigned at birth.
2. Demographic Split: Younger Americans and political liberals remain more likely to support inclusion based on gender identity, though overall support has trended downward since 2021. 

The majority feel the same that TW should be treated as men.

RFK is not qualified . His brain worms ate his convictions.

Not true.

As of 2025, political stances on COVID-19 vaccine mandates remain sharply divided along traditional lines, with "left-leaning" groups generally supporting them and "right-leaning" groups opposing them. While most active mandates have been lifted as the public health situation evolved, the underlying ideological divide persists:

1. Left-Wing Alignment: Historically and into 2025, liberal or left-wing ideologies (such as Left-Wing Authoritarianism) have been strongly associated with support for vaccine mandates and punitive measures for the unvaccinated. Parties like Canada’s Liberals and NDP have consistently advocated for mandates in federal sectors and travel as essential safety measures.
2. Right-Wing Alignment: Conservative and libertarian ideologies continue to strongly oppose mandates, framing them as government overreach and a violation of personal medical freedom. Conservative leaders have frequently tabled legislation to permanently ban future vaccine mandates for employment and travel.
3. Shift in Anti-Vaccine Movements: Research notes that while vaccine hesitancy once had roots in both left-wing (natural health concerns) and right-wing (libertarian) circles, the movement shifted significantly toward the right during the pandemic, focusing heavily on individual liberties.
4. 2025 Context: In 2025, debates have refocused on potential policy changes under new administrations. For example, high-level appointees in the 2025 U.S. administration, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have publicly questioned vaccine safety, reflecting a broader right-leaning effort to reevaluate and limit national vaccination policies.