Dang, you get right to the meat of the matter Sarah. Great insights.
“Queer women” is an expression that indicates discomfort with the label Lesbian. Decades ago, there were lesbians (same-sex attracted females) who called themselves “gay women.” Same problem, different generation: the word Lesbian (and Lezzie) has always been used as an insult. Even though lesbians have always fought for our rights, it wasn't until gay men joined our movement en mass that we were taken seriously. Then queer theory started infiltrating society with it's exciting ideas about tearing society down. Not just gay rights, but revolution! Once universities and schools began glorifying the word Queer, those wanting to appear cool began using it to describe both their sexual orientation and their gender nonconformity. The label infiltrated mainstream culture once it became a status symbol.
Remember, everyone can self-identify as queer, not just homosexuals and those who call themselves transgender. Straight people can be queer. It's easy for a heterosexual guy to pierce his ears, grow his hair, don what he believes to be feminine attire and speak with an affect often demonstrated by gay or gender nonconforming actors in popular TV shows or movies. A slightly effeminate man who emphasizes that feature will have women flocking to him because he seems safer than some big masculine guy, especially to teens and early 20s women. That's why straight women have always flocked to gay men for friendship – the safety factor. Or because they want friends who aren't constantly pressuring them for sex. The man who emphasizes his feminine side seems safer to young women, many of whom will eventually have sex with him. That's my theory, at least. I've ever heard many young lesbians say they gave in to pressure from their “friend” to have “penetrative sex.” Lol. In a sense, it's like the “sneaky fucker” dynamic with other animals that result in low status males getting sexual access to females. (It's actually a thing, look it up.)
Most importantly, giving yourself a label is an easy way to opt into an oppressed category, something many young people are desperate to do today. They have been brainwashed into believing that white people are inherently bad, which instills a deep sense of white guilt in Caucasian youth and adults. They've also been indoctrinated to believe if you are “cisgender” then you are automatically the oppressor of “transgender” people. You can't opt out of your race, but if you're desperately trying to not be assumed to be an oppressor, you can opt into the lgbTQIA2S+ via self-identifying as queer. Hence, this self-victimization is mostly a white phenomena, albeit the coolness factor has created inroads into darker skinned communities. Yes, the lowercase lgb was intentional there. Lesbians are irrelevant in youth circles and at universities. The label is just not as cool as queer. It's a fad thing.
If I wrote this up as an article, would you guest publish me?
I see your point that these gender identitarians are close to recognizing that sex is real and matters, and that they are saying that some people get to have boundaries. BUT:
1) Are they stating that females get to have female-only sports? Or are they still fighting us on that point? I would bet the latter. Are they no longer participating in vicious mobs and other attacks against those who resist gender ideology? Or are they still attacking us and throwing women/girls/children/the First Amendment under the bus? I would bet the latter.
2) Your title says that a "safe" place has been created for the women in this "queer"-etc group, but that claim hinges on hoping that males don't show up, or if they do, they're unusually weak. As we know from the invasion of female sports, even one man can disrupt the rights and safety of vast numbers of females. Its not accurate to say they've created a safe space.
3) By creating their so-called queer-trans-nonbinary team, these women are funneling women away from women's sports, and funneling attention and money that could/should go to women's sports away from women's sports. We need more money, attention, and female participants in female sports, not less, and
4) I can't celebrate anything that promotes the self-loathing madness of gender ideology. This "queer" team sends a message to vulnerable girls and boys, that there's something heroic, rational, liberating, authentic, kind, healthy, etc etc etc about rejecting their sexual anatomy. It's part of full-blown indoctrination leading to ever-increasing body dissociation among children, and severe psychological and physical harm. .
So, yeah, they're at least sort of saying sex matters (for gender ideologues). But this is not a good development. Praising this league and/or attending its matches is short-sighted. It undermines the work we are doing to re-establishing rationality and reclaim our rights. Publicly ask them to apply their same logic to female sports: sex matters, boundaries are valid. Point out the hypocrisy if they don't. But don't celebrate and elevate a further entrenchment of gender identity madness. Don't make the indoctrination of children and the failure to address sexual assault and other causes of children's body dissociation, worse than it already it.
Thanks for this reply. I was focused on LL's acknowledgement that sex matters (and a seeming understanding that males who identify as trans or nonbinary still have sports advantage), and that LL was able to set boundaries. I did not think of the points you raise, though I agree with them for the most part.
As to #1) I didn't ask the LL leadership these questions before I wrote the post, but I will today when I send them this article. I'll post any response I get.
2) Just as LL defined their group, they also define what safe means to them. Unless the female people who are accounting for LL's growth have simply convinced themselves that the male players do not dominate play or present a safety risk even if they do (which is entirely possible), their growth seems to indicate female players do feel safe.
3) I'm not sure it's valid to say all females must in existing female leagues because women's sports need the money and attention. I supported the idea of creating their own space rather than forcing the existing LGBTQ leagues to accommodate them. It's similar to the idea of a third transgender category in addition to male and female, which I don't usually support for the reasons you state—it takes money away from women's sports. But notably, most third category attempts have been unsuccessful (no one joined), but in LL's case, they have proven quite successful. So far
4) I'm totally with you here, on all counts
As we have seen, it's very difficult to fight an ideology with facts, with morality, with anything "from the outside." Gender ideologues reflexively double down. The most effective loosening of the grip of ideology comes from within, when people within transgenderism start to see the reality of sex, for example. I thought LL represented an instance of this happening
Btw, I sent Lavender League this article and asked questions about whether they endorsed female-only spaces and the ability of women to set boundaries, but I did not receive a reply.
This reminds me of another Portland social group for lesbians which is trying to walk the tightrope bridging "lesbian" with other "identities", and calls itself Out and About Lesbians.
Their intro says:
"Greetings to grown women/afab-loving-women/afab humans (regardless of identity as lesbian, gay, queer, bi, trans, non-binary, etc.) from the greater Portland–Vancouver metro area. This affinity group (folks linked by a commonality) aims to create a safe and welcoming space for lesbian / queer folks to enjoy socializing together as their authentic selves." https://www.meetup.com/meetup-group-outandaboutlesbians/?eventOrigin=event_home_page
Note how this does not come out and say it is for females, but instead using the now common acronym "afab" which means "assigned female at birth". So they are using the prescribed transgender language while not submitting to actual transgender ideology which would require them to admit those "amab" (assigned male at birth) if such males IDed as women or nonbinary.
Language changes, people, as does culture! There is no way of knowing right now when "lesbian" will fall out of use and what it will be replaced by to refer to female homosexuals. The above attempt to define who the group is for shows how these women (females!) who really do want to have social activities that exclude (!) males are trying to encourage participation by females who are not comfortable being called lesbians and not comfortable being referred to as "female".
For all we know, someday "AFAB" will be how most people refer to women and girls, and it will be acceptable for females to gather under this "banner" without incurring the wrath of excluded males and their allies.
This is analogous to how a West Coast spa (probably in Washington state) recently tried to keep males out of female spaces by saying one side was for people with penises and the other side for people with vaginas. They were trying to avoid saying male/female or men/women. The spa ended up caving and allowing males who IDed as women to access the women's side of the facility, after the woke folks demonstrated outside the premises and discouraged anyone from entering it. But at least the spa mgmt attempted to outmaneuver men intent on accessing women's spaces.
It seems LL is NOT female only. They're clear about including nonbinary and trans people, who may be male. But the circumstances of their creation and the strong emphasis on policing male advantage makes LL very female-friendly. As another commenter noted, males get very little validation from LL, so LL is maybe not very attractive to males
Here is the website for the Lavender League: https://lavenderleaguepdx.org/events They play very close to where I live, so I will likely go watch sometime soon. I will be interested to see how many spectators they draw. Back in the day (1970s) women's softball drew a lot of spectators and there were several lesbian teams. The Oregon Historical Society quarterly recently ran an article about lesbian softball teams in the 1970s and how they enabled many younger lesbians to come out and feel supported. https://www.ohs.org/oregon-historical-quarterly/back-issues/spring-2024.cfm I started Portland Gay Liberation in 1970 with two gay men, which was the first lesbian/gay social and activist organization in Oregon. I did not play softball, but I sure did spend a lot of time socializing at those lesbian softball games!
I tried to say that Lavender League IS playing by the rules of reality. The league was created because some players recognized male advantage in sports, and they created a league that recognizes that. My main point in this post is that Lavender League, hailed by progressives, is successful BECAUSE they define and defend their group. It's an inclusion measure for queer women, nonbinary and trans people, and therefore necessarily excludes those who don't meet those criteria. Women have not been able to pull that off. SOME women have, if you have an identity. For example, there are a number of native women's running groups. They are super successful, providing a safe space for a very niche group--native women runners. They necessarily exclude all men and non-native women. They are quite exclusive, but that's what makes them effective as inclusion measures for native women. These groups are the darlings of Democrats and liberals, the very same people who call women hateful bigots for wanting single-sex sports. I think Lavender League is fantastic! I think native women's running groups are fantastic! Women's sports are an inclusion measure for women. That necessarily excludes males. Why is that a problem?
And while I agree with you mostly, I’m not seeing the significance of your insight - if they won’t acknowledge it, and they most definitely won’t, what difference does it make? In the end, you’re waiting (very eloquently) in vain. There will be no “aha” moment because the AGPs will not allow it.
Most of the males probably aren’t a big physical threat I imagine, since they’re mostly out of shape since they mostly spend their time inside jacking off to sissy porn.
But it’s more of a rec league than a competitive league, yes? So, different expectations. If these were college or professional athletes with a lot to potentially gain or lose, it’d be different.
Again, my point is that they have defined their group—queer women, nonbinary, and trans people—that, yes, includes males. But they necessarily exclude straight and gay men and women. Excluding those who do not meet the group's criteria is what I want for women's sports
This is totally a recreational league. Also, here in Portland there are very few adult males over 25 who ID as transwomen who have any athletic inclinations. Maybe none, since AGPS are so focused on looking feminine, so they do not want to "sweat" (lol). The males who are pushing their way onto high school and college women's teams are much younger males.
Lesbians have not always been called lesbians! Some same-sex attracted females prefer to be called gay women. The etymology of the English word "lesbian" is very interesting: https://www.etymonline.com/word/lesbian I only recently started calling myself a lesbian after seeing how important it was to claim and own that word, just as it is now so important to claim and own the word "woman". As I mentioned elsewhere in these comments, I started Portland Gay Liberation in 1970 with two gay men, and back then most same-sex attracted women here called themselves gay women, not lesbians.
That’s interesting history. I use the word lesbian to describe myself, and I agree it’s especially important to do so now. The “L” in the ever-expanding alphabet group is the only letter that is sex-specific, so it’s surely a thorn in the sides of the sex denialists.
What queer means is especially unclear since many quite conventional heterosexual women now call themselves queer in the Portland metro area. When someone says that they are queer, I have no idea what they mean by that. Could be that they are straight women who are polyamorous or into BDSM or simply think they are "not like other girls".
I suspect that they don’t have a problem with trans-identified males wanting to join because there is nothing validating for them about Lavender League. And why would gay men, who are already not passing the ball to women, want to join? As you note, this is basically the only female league that’s socially acceptable to the anti-woman mob. I do wonder whether there are safety issues between medicalized vs. non-medicalized females, although they’re still worlds less powerful than males.
I do not think that testosterone significantly increases the strength of females, unless they work out and train a lot. And even then they still do not have the fast twitch muscles that males have and can never develop the strength or speed that males can. Of more concern to me is the effect on emotional expression that testosterone has on females, especially when they start taking it. Some (many?) report awareness of how much more anger and aggressiveness they feel, corroborated by reports by people close to them. Sounds like the women in this league will police themselves when anyone, female or male, becomes aggressive in a way that poses a danger to others.
I wondered the same thing. It seems they have covered that territory in their policies that require players to be "attentive and cautious" and "be mindful of their body and strength with respect to other players." For males and females on T, I think this means they self-regulate their effort, pull back, in other words.
My guess is this plays out similar to coed softball games. Men get to be the heroes, but not at the expense of hurting a woman. These big strong hitters could certainly smash the ball right through a female pitcher or shortstop. But they wouldn't get laid that night because their wife or girlfriend is on the team. So instead they pop it out past the outfield players and get a home run. Women don't get that glory very often because men on the other team catch better than women. But we're better at being second class, so everyone still has a good time.
This league is mostly females, so they could of course compete in amateur girls' and women's soccer competitions here in Portland, where women's soccer is really popular thanks to the prominence of the women's professional soccer team, the Portland Thorns. https://www.thorns.com/
They are actually not being hypocritical. They are young females (women!) struggling to figure out how they fit into our misogynist culture since they are gender nonconforming in a city and state controlled by woke Democrats who push gender ideology including our lesbian governor and prominent lesbian and gay male legislators. Judges here insist that male criminal defendants who say they are women be referred to as she/her. These young females have been steeped in a strong cultural brew of insistence that "identity" is most important, not sex. They are trying to escape being treated as women are treated in our society. Some think they are better off presenting as "masculine" with beards and male register voices. Some think that by IDing as nonbinary they will not be treated the way women are. The LGB organizations here have morphed into LGBTQWTF, with many straight "allies". I have been kicked out of various lesbian social groups for daring to say they should not allow males to attend, and also out of important Democratic women's organizations for speaking up against transgender ideology. Just by daring to say that males have a competitive advantage and can endanger females in soccer, these young women are moving the needle on rolling back the supremacy of gender ideology in Portland and in Oregon.
Tha ks for tsking the time to comment and give more details on this situation. I'd like my comment stricken from the record. It is definitely a worthwhile endeavor and something I wish was happening all over the world. It always gives me hope and courage when I see other defiant women and girls.
Dang, you get right to the meat of the matter Sarah. Great insights.
“Queer women” is an expression that indicates discomfort with the label Lesbian. Decades ago, there were lesbians (same-sex attracted females) who called themselves “gay women.” Same problem, different generation: the word Lesbian (and Lezzie) has always been used as an insult. Even though lesbians have always fought for our rights, it wasn't until gay men joined our movement en mass that we were taken seriously. Then queer theory started infiltrating society with it's exciting ideas about tearing society down. Not just gay rights, but revolution! Once universities and schools began glorifying the word Queer, those wanting to appear cool began using it to describe both their sexual orientation and their gender nonconformity. The label infiltrated mainstream culture once it became a status symbol.
Remember, everyone can self-identify as queer, not just homosexuals and those who call themselves transgender. Straight people can be queer. It's easy for a heterosexual guy to pierce his ears, grow his hair, don what he believes to be feminine attire and speak with an affect often demonstrated by gay or gender nonconforming actors in popular TV shows or movies. A slightly effeminate man who emphasizes that feature will have women flocking to him because he seems safer than some big masculine guy, especially to teens and early 20s women. That's why straight women have always flocked to gay men for friendship – the safety factor. Or because they want friends who aren't constantly pressuring them for sex. The man who emphasizes his feminine side seems safer to young women, many of whom will eventually have sex with him. That's my theory, at least. I've ever heard many young lesbians say they gave in to pressure from their “friend” to have “penetrative sex.” Lol. In a sense, it's like the “sneaky fucker” dynamic with other animals that result in low status males getting sexual access to females. (It's actually a thing, look it up.)
Most importantly, giving yourself a label is an easy way to opt into an oppressed category, something many young people are desperate to do today. They have been brainwashed into believing that white people are inherently bad, which instills a deep sense of white guilt in Caucasian youth and adults. They've also been indoctrinated to believe if you are “cisgender” then you are automatically the oppressor of “transgender” people. You can't opt out of your race, but if you're desperately trying to not be assumed to be an oppressor, you can opt into the lgbTQIA2S+ via self-identifying as queer. Hence, this self-victimization is mostly a white phenomena, albeit the coolness factor has created inroads into darker skinned communities. Yes, the lowercase lgb was intentional there. Lesbians are irrelevant in youth circles and at universities. The label is just not as cool as queer. It's a fad thing.
If I wrote this up as an article, would you guest publish me?
I see your point that these gender identitarians are close to recognizing that sex is real and matters, and that they are saying that some people get to have boundaries. BUT:
1) Are they stating that females get to have female-only sports? Or are they still fighting us on that point? I would bet the latter. Are they no longer participating in vicious mobs and other attacks against those who resist gender ideology? Or are they still attacking us and throwing women/girls/children/the First Amendment under the bus? I would bet the latter.
2) Your title says that a "safe" place has been created for the women in this "queer"-etc group, but that claim hinges on hoping that males don't show up, or if they do, they're unusually weak. As we know from the invasion of female sports, even one man can disrupt the rights and safety of vast numbers of females. Its not accurate to say they've created a safe space.
3) By creating their so-called queer-trans-nonbinary team, these women are funneling women away from women's sports, and funneling attention and money that could/should go to women's sports away from women's sports. We need more money, attention, and female participants in female sports, not less, and
4) I can't celebrate anything that promotes the self-loathing madness of gender ideology. This "queer" team sends a message to vulnerable girls and boys, that there's something heroic, rational, liberating, authentic, kind, healthy, etc etc etc about rejecting their sexual anatomy. It's part of full-blown indoctrination leading to ever-increasing body dissociation among children, and severe psychological and physical harm. .
So, yeah, they're at least sort of saying sex matters (for gender ideologues). But this is not a good development. Praising this league and/or attending its matches is short-sighted. It undermines the work we are doing to re-establishing rationality and reclaim our rights. Publicly ask them to apply their same logic to female sports: sex matters, boundaries are valid. Point out the hypocrisy if they don't. But don't celebrate and elevate a further entrenchment of gender identity madness. Don't make the indoctrination of children and the failure to address sexual assault and other causes of children's body dissociation, worse than it already it.
Thanks for this reply. I was focused on LL's acknowledgement that sex matters (and a seeming understanding that males who identify as trans or nonbinary still have sports advantage), and that LL was able to set boundaries. I did not think of the points you raise, though I agree with them for the most part.
As to #1) I didn't ask the LL leadership these questions before I wrote the post, but I will today when I send them this article. I'll post any response I get.
2) Just as LL defined their group, they also define what safe means to them. Unless the female people who are accounting for LL's growth have simply convinced themselves that the male players do not dominate play or present a safety risk even if they do (which is entirely possible), their growth seems to indicate female players do feel safe.
3) I'm not sure it's valid to say all females must in existing female leagues because women's sports need the money and attention. I supported the idea of creating their own space rather than forcing the existing LGBTQ leagues to accommodate them. It's similar to the idea of a third transgender category in addition to male and female, which I don't usually support for the reasons you state—it takes money away from women's sports. But notably, most third category attempts have been unsuccessful (no one joined), but in LL's case, they have proven quite successful. So far
4) I'm totally with you here, on all counts
As we have seen, it's very difficult to fight an ideology with facts, with morality, with anything "from the outside." Gender ideologues reflexively double down. The most effective loosening of the grip of ideology comes from within, when people within transgenderism start to see the reality of sex, for example. I thought LL represented an instance of this happening
Btw, I sent Lavender League this article and asked questions about whether they endorsed female-only spaces and the ability of women to set boundaries, but I did not receive a reply.
This reminds me of another Portland social group for lesbians which is trying to walk the tightrope bridging "lesbian" with other "identities", and calls itself Out and About Lesbians.
Their intro says:
"Greetings to grown women/afab-loving-women/afab humans (regardless of identity as lesbian, gay, queer, bi, trans, non-binary, etc.) from the greater Portland–Vancouver metro area. This affinity group (folks linked by a commonality) aims to create a safe and welcoming space for lesbian / queer folks to enjoy socializing together as their authentic selves." https://www.meetup.com/meetup-group-outandaboutlesbians/?eventOrigin=event_home_page
Note how this does not come out and say it is for females, but instead using the now common acronym "afab" which means "assigned female at birth". So they are using the prescribed transgender language while not submitting to actual transgender ideology which would require them to admit those "amab" (assigned male at birth) if such males IDed as women or nonbinary.
Language changes, people, as does culture! There is no way of knowing right now when "lesbian" will fall out of use and what it will be replaced by to refer to female homosexuals. The above attempt to define who the group is for shows how these women (females!) who really do want to have social activities that exclude (!) males are trying to encourage participation by females who are not comfortable being called lesbians and not comfortable being referred to as "female".
For all we know, someday "AFAB" will be how most people refer to women and girls, and it will be acceptable for females to gather under this "banner" without incurring the wrath of excluded males and their allies.
This is analogous to how a West Coast spa (probably in Washington state) recently tried to keep males out of female spaces by saying one side was for people with penises and the other side for people with vaginas. They were trying to avoid saying male/female or men/women. The spa ended up caving and allowing males who IDed as women to access the women's side of the facility, after the woke folks demonstrated outside the premises and discouraged anyone from entering it. But at least the spa mgmt attempted to outmaneuver men intent on accessing women's spaces.
It seems LL is NOT female only. They're clear about including nonbinary and trans people, who may be male. But the circumstances of their creation and the strong emphasis on policing male advantage makes LL very female-friendly. As another commenter noted, males get very little validation from LL, so LL is maybe not very attractive to males
Here is the website for the Lavender League: https://lavenderleaguepdx.org/events They play very close to where I live, so I will likely go watch sometime soon. I will be interested to see how many spectators they draw. Back in the day (1970s) women's softball drew a lot of spectators and there were several lesbian teams. The Oregon Historical Society quarterly recently ran an article about lesbian softball teams in the 1970s and how they enabled many younger lesbians to come out and feel supported. https://www.ohs.org/oregon-historical-quarterly/back-issues/spring-2024.cfm I started Portland Gay Liberation in 1970 with two gay men, which was the first lesbian/gay social and activist organization in Oregon. I did not play softball, but I sure did spend a lot of time socializing at those lesbian softball games!
So why can't women have their own leagues as well?
I'm sorry. You're trying so hard.
But you will never, ever, ever beat them at their own game, playing by their rules.
The happy middle requires compromise, and the narcissistic male AGPs will never allow that.
The way we win is by playing our game, by our rules - reality.
I tried to say that Lavender League IS playing by the rules of reality. The league was created because some players recognized male advantage in sports, and they created a league that recognizes that. My main point in this post is that Lavender League, hailed by progressives, is successful BECAUSE they define and defend their group. It's an inclusion measure for queer women, nonbinary and trans people, and therefore necessarily excludes those who don't meet those criteria. Women have not been able to pull that off. SOME women have, if you have an identity. For example, there are a number of native women's running groups. They are super successful, providing a safe space for a very niche group--native women runners. They necessarily exclude all men and non-native women. They are quite exclusive, but that's what makes them effective as inclusion measures for native women. These groups are the darlings of Democrats and liberals, the very same people who call women hateful bigots for wanting single-sex sports. I think Lavender League is fantastic! I think native women's running groups are fantastic! Women's sports are an inclusion measure for women. That necessarily excludes males. Why is that a problem?
They allow males though. So, not really.
And while I agree with you mostly, I’m not seeing the significance of your insight - if they won’t acknowledge it, and they most definitely won’t, what difference does it make? In the end, you’re waiting (very eloquently) in vain. There will be no “aha” moment because the AGPs will not allow it.
Most of the males probably aren’t a big physical threat I imagine, since they’re mostly out of shape since they mostly spend their time inside jacking off to sissy porn.
But it’s more of a rec league than a competitive league, yes? So, different expectations. If these were college or professional athletes with a lot to potentially gain or lose, it’d be different.
Again, my point is that they have defined their group—queer women, nonbinary, and trans people—that, yes, includes males. But they necessarily exclude straight and gay men and women. Excluding those who do not meet the group's criteria is what I want for women's sports
I hear ya, pardon my skipping past your wanting your point acknowledged & validated to my male focus on evaluation of potential for success.
This is totally a recreational league. Also, here in Portland there are very few adult males over 25 who ID as transwomen who have any athletic inclinations. Maybe none, since AGPS are so focused on looking feminine, so they do not want to "sweat" (lol). The males who are pushing their way onto high school and college women's teams are much younger males.
Lesbian erasure is alive and well in the alphabet tribe.
Lesbians have not always been called lesbians! Some same-sex attracted females prefer to be called gay women. The etymology of the English word "lesbian" is very interesting: https://www.etymonline.com/word/lesbian I only recently started calling myself a lesbian after seeing how important it was to claim and own that word, just as it is now so important to claim and own the word "woman". As I mentioned elsewhere in these comments, I started Portland Gay Liberation in 1970 with two gay men, and back then most same-sex attracted women here called themselves gay women, not lesbians.
That’s interesting history. I use the word lesbian to describe myself, and I agree it’s especially important to do so now. The “L” in the ever-expanding alphabet group is the only letter that is sex-specific, so it’s surely a thorn in the sides of the sex denialists.
What percentage of these women are principally just refugees from our standards and ideals of femininity?
So, where are lesbians who don't identify as "queer women" supposed to go?
I don't even know the definition of "queer woman." And how are queer women different from lesbians, nonbinary, and trans-identified women? Educate me
My guess is that lesbian is used as a porn category in a way that queer is not.
What queer means is especially unclear since many quite conventional heterosexual women now call themselves queer in the Portland metro area. When someone says that they are queer, I have no idea what they mean by that. Could be that they are straight women who are polyamorous or into BDSM or simply think they are "not like other girls".
I suspect that they don’t have a problem with trans-identified males wanting to join because there is nothing validating for them about Lavender League. And why would gay men, who are already not passing the ball to women, want to join? As you note, this is basically the only female league that’s socially acceptable to the anti-woman mob. I do wonder whether there are safety issues between medicalized vs. non-medicalized females, although they’re still worlds less powerful than males.
I do not think that testosterone significantly increases the strength of females, unless they work out and train a lot. And even then they still do not have the fast twitch muscles that males have and can never develop the strength or speed that males can. Of more concern to me is the effect on emotional expression that testosterone has on females, especially when they start taking it. Some (many?) report awareness of how much more anger and aggressiveness they feel, corroborated by reports by people close to them. Sounds like the women in this league will police themselves when anyone, female or male, becomes aggressive in a way that poses a danger to others.
I wondered the same thing. It seems they have covered that territory in their policies that require players to be "attentive and cautious" and "be mindful of their body and strength with respect to other players." For males and females on T, I think this means they self-regulate their effort, pull back, in other words.
My guess is this plays out similar to coed softball games. Men get to be the heroes, but not at the expense of hurting a woman. These big strong hitters could certainly smash the ball right through a female pitcher or shortstop. But they wouldn't get laid that night because their wife or girlfriend is on the team. So instead they pop it out past the outfield players and get a home run. Women don't get that glory very often because men on the other team catch better than women. But we're better at being second class, so everyone still has a good time.
This league is mostly females, so they could of course compete in amateur girls' and women's soccer competitions here in Portland, where women's soccer is really popular thanks to the prominence of the women's professional soccer team, the Portland Thorns. https://www.thorns.com/
I am not sure whether I should laugh or point out the hypocrisy.
They are actually not being hypocritical. They are young females (women!) struggling to figure out how they fit into our misogynist culture since they are gender nonconforming in a city and state controlled by woke Democrats who push gender ideology including our lesbian governor and prominent lesbian and gay male legislators. Judges here insist that male criminal defendants who say they are women be referred to as she/her. These young females have been steeped in a strong cultural brew of insistence that "identity" is most important, not sex. They are trying to escape being treated as women are treated in our society. Some think they are better off presenting as "masculine" with beards and male register voices. Some think that by IDing as nonbinary they will not be treated the way women are. The LGB organizations here have morphed into LGBTQWTF, with many straight "allies". I have been kicked out of various lesbian social groups for daring to say they should not allow males to attend, and also out of important Democratic women's organizations for speaking up against transgender ideology. Just by daring to say that males have a competitive advantage and can endanger females in soccer, these young women are moving the needle on rolling back the supremacy of gender ideology in Portland and in Oregon.
Tha ks for tsking the time to comment and give more details on this situation. I'd like my comment stricken from the record. It is definitely a worthwhile endeavor and something I wish was happening all over the world. It always gives me hope and courage when I see other defiant women and girls.
This is a fascinating story. Thank you for sharing
Sounds exclusionary to me 🤷♀️😂 I would love to see a Portlandia sketch on this…