Transgender athlete

[Augustus]

I didn't imply the latter, and I do care about fairness, which is one reason I do believe transgender people should have the opportunity to compete with other people as there's so few of them willing to do that. If another athlete doesn't want to compete against them, that's their choice.

It is certainly unfair from a competitive perspective, and some girls and women will miss out on life changing opportunities as a result of unfair competition. This number will only continue to grow.

Platitudes also also don’t change the fact that it is a health and safety issue in many sports.

There have to be cutoff points established and tough decisions made even if you support trans women competing in women’s categories (self ID only would end professional women’s sport).

I don’t think you would say to girls and women that if you don’t like the increased risk of life changing injury then tough, it’s your choice.

Where would you establish these cutoff points?

( in contact sports such as rugby the expert advice has been that it’s unsafe and transwomen should not be allowed to compete)

 

[metis]

It is certainly unfair from a competitive perspective, and some girls and women will miss out on life changing opportunities as a result of unfair competition. This number will only continue to grow.

Platitudes also also don’t change the fact that it is a health and safety issue in many sports.

There have to be cutoff points established and tough decisions made even if you support trans women competing in women’s categories (self ID only would end professional women’s sport).

I don’t think you would say to girls and women that if you don’t like the increased risk of life changing injury then tough, it’s your choice.

Where would you establish these cutoff points?

( in contact sports such as rugby the expert advice has been that it’s unsafe and transwomen should not be allowed to compete)

It's "sports", not life or death. Thus, what other sexual discrimination is next is the question? IMO, transgender people should have a right to compete for hopefully the enjoyment of it as I'm an old "gym rat" myself.

 

[Augustus]

It's "sports", not life or death. Thus, what other sexual discrimination is next is the question? IMO, transgender people should have a right to compete for hopefully the enjoyment of it as I'm an old "gym rat" myself.

Sports can be a matter of life and death, or at least a matter of normal life versus permanently debilitating injury.

Their right to compete guarantees more serious injuries, this is a simple fact and is the reason transwomen have been banned from certain sports. A rugby study put the risk of injury at 20-30% greater based purely on mass (so including other factor may increase this significantly).

Also, knowing that the injury risk is greater, those who organise sports may be legally responsible, and thus the threat of legal action could lead to schools, etc. choosing not to give women the chance to play certain sports.

How many additional life changing injuries would you say is an acceptable price to pay? How many women being put off playing certain sports due to risk of serious injury would be acceptable?

If you are interested in a sports scientist involved in World Rugby's transgender safety group

'That's ideology, not science' - Renowned sports scientist steps in on transwomen in rugby debate

Ross Tucker has waded into the debate over the participation of transwomen in rugby and the safety concerns around their participation in women's rugby.

www.rugbypass.com

 

[metis]

Sports can be a matter of life and death, or at least a matter of normal life versus permanently debilitating injury.

Their right to compete guarantees more serious injuries, this is a simple fact and is the reason transwomen have been banned from certain sports. A rugby study put the risk of injury at 20-30% greater based purely on mass (so including other factor may increase this significantly).

Also, knowing that the injury risk is greater, those who organise sports may be legally responsible, and thus the threat of legal action could lead to schools, etc. choosing not to give women the chance to play certain sports.

How many additional life changing injuries would you say is an acceptable price to pay? How many women being put off playing certain sports due to risk of serious injury would be acceptable?

If you are interested in a sports scientist involved in World Rugby's transgender safety group

'That's ideology, not science' - Renowned sports scientist steps in on transwomen in rugby debate

Ross Tucker has waded into the debate over the participation of transwomen in rugby and the safety concerns around their participation in women's rugby.

www.rugbypass.com

I saw much the same arguments when Title Nine was proposed, and those turn out to also be nonsensical.

I do not believe in having sexual discrimination; thus, I simply cannot agree with anyone who says that it's all fine & dandy. Coaches and referees have a duty to try and make each sports event less injurious, and that can and is being done at pretty much all sports events.

fini

 

[Augustus]

do not believe in having sexual discrimination; thus, I simply cannot agree with anyone who says that it's all fine & dandy.

This is just an empty platitude unless you explain how you think things should work.

I asked earlier but you didn’t answer, do you believe in self-ID? If you do then I’d be amazed as you are rational, not a radical ideologue and understand it would basically end high level women's sport (you understand humans will lie in order to earn large sums of money).

If you don’t then you have to “discriminate” at some point by deciding which transwomen can compete in female categories. For example, only those who have undergone 2 years of testosterone suppression.

I assume you would want this cutoff point to be based on science and evidence, not ideology, so when sports like rugby do base their “discrimination” on science and evidence why do you dismiss it as irrational prejudice?

saw much the same arguments when Title Nine was proposed, and those turn out to also be nonsensical.

You don’t consider the laws of physics to be nonsensical though, why are you (implicitly) assuming they don’t apply to transwomen?

Can you explain how massive size and strength mismatches don't significantly increase risk in rugby?

Would you allow a post-transition 15 year old who had undergone male puberty and was an elite male boxer to fight a 14 year old cis girl at boxing?

We have protected categories in sport to allow women to play sports safely and fairly. Why is it “sexual discrimination” to protect this right?

Coaches and referees have a duty to try and make each sports event less injurious, and that can and is being done at pretty much all sports events

Coaches are there to win and referees are there to apply rules.

Governing bodies exist to make rules and ensure fairness, safety, etc.

You simply dismissed them doing this based on scientific studies as scaremongering.

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is just an empty platitude unless you explain how you think things should work.

I asked earlier but you didn’t answer, do you believe in self-ID? If you do then I’d be amazed as you are rational, not a radical ideologue and understand it would basically end high level women's sport (you understand humans will lie in order to earn large sums of money).

If you don’t then you have to “discriminate” at some point by deciding which transwomen can compete in female categories. For example, only those who have undergone 2 years of testosterone suppression.

I assume you would want this cutoff point to be based on science and evidence, not ideology, so when sports like rugby do base their “discrimination” on science and evidence why do you dismiss it as irrational prejudice?



You don’t consider the laws of physics to be nonsensical though, why are you (implicitly) assuming they don’t apply to transwomen?

Can you explain how massive size and strength mismatches don't significantly increase risk in rugby?

Would you allow a post-transition 15 year old who had undergone male puberty and was an elite male boxer to fight a 14 year old cis girl at boxing?

We have protected categories in sport to allow women to play sports safely and fairly. Why is it “sexual discrimination” to protect this right?




Coaches are there to win and referees are there to apply rules.

Governing bodies exist to make rules and ensure fairness, safety, etc.

You simply dismissed them doing this based on scientific studies as scaremongering.

A minor clarification. The standard for the Olympics is two years of hormone suppression. And yes, that does not appear to be enough for some sports. Adapting to this idea is in its infancy. Changes will be made. In the NCAA the standard is only one year. That is largely because the time that one can be an NCAA athlete is very limited. One can almost have a career in the Olympics. In the NCAA one is limited to five years.

 

[Augustus]

A minor clarification. The standard for the Olympics is two years of hormone suppression. And yes, that does not appear to be enough for some sports

It’s not enough for any sport that uses strength and/or aerobic capacity to any extent if the goal is competitive fairness.

(I know that wasn’t quite what you meant)

Adapting to this idea is in its infancy. Changes will be made. In the NCAA the standard is only one year. That is largely because the time that one can be an NCAA athlete is very limited. One can almost have a career in the Olympics. In the NCAA one is limited to five years.

This is an example of the kind of fudges that characterise these kind of decisions.

No one can quite work out what they are trying to achieve: inclusivity or competitive fairness.

So they draw pretty arbitrary lines based on nothing much and aren’t really transparent about how they arrive at their decisions. For example, I’ve never seen an open admission they accept competitive unfairness, increased injury risk etc in the name of inclusivity. They tend to hide behind the fact that we don’t have all the information we would like yet on specific details, while ignoring that the information we have is pretty clear on the general trends.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It’s not enough for any sport that uses strength and/or aerobic capacity to any extent if the goal is competitive fairness.

(I know that wasn’t quite what you meant)



This is an example of the kind of fudges that characterise these kind of decisions.

No one can quite work out what they are trying to achieve: inclusivity or competitive fairness.

So they draw pretty arbitrary lines based on nothing much and aren’t really transparent about how they arrive at their decisions. For example, I’ve never seen an open admission they accept competitive unfairness, increased injury risk etc in the name of inclusivity. They tend to hide behind the fact that we don’t have all the information we would like yet on specific details, while ignoring that the information we have is pretty clear on the general trends.

Like I said, it is going to take them a while to get it right. There are definite problems right now. There are some sports that transwmen that transitioned after puberty may not be able to participate in as women. Puberty changes the body too much. I do not think that combat sports can ever have post puberty transwomen in them and be fair. This is only one example but it shows the issues that can arise:

Fallon Fox - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[metis]

You simply dismissed them doing this based on scientific studies as scaremongering.

No, it's you who is doing "fearmongering", which is what we also heard when Title 9 was passed.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I support lgbtq's but I think transgenders in sports is unfair for obvious reasons. They should have there own league. That would be cool. I guess I don't really care either way though. Just tryin to think of a fair way. I mean can you imagine a bodybuilder size trans 230 lb. on a football field with 130 lb women? I mean where do u draw the line? It's nonsensical.

It sounds like high school sports with all cis, non-coed teams is what it sounds like.

Do you remember what it was like when you were 14 or 15? Huge size differences depending how far each kid was in their puberty journey.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Why don't they just go by biology instead of gender? If you are a biological male; you play on the men's team, and if you are a biological female, you play on the women's team regardless of how you see yourself. That should solve everything.

How are you defining "biological male" and "biological female"?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Call me reductionist, but I think two things in this domain:

- transitioning shouldn't start too early
- People with XX should compete with people with XX, and XYs should compete with XYs

So women with CAIS should compete against cis men?

Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If this is about "fairness," why only focus on sex/gender?

I mean, I'll never be a pro cyclist because I just don't have - and can't develop through training - the VO2max of an elite rider. If the genes of a trans athlete are an issue of fairness, what about the genes of elite cis athletes that let them do better than the rest of us?

 

[icehorse]

So women with CAIS should compete against cis men?

Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If this is about "fairness," why only focus on sex/gender?

I mean, I'll never be a pro cyclist because I just don't have - and can't develop through training - the VO2max of an elite rider. If the genes of a trans athlete are an issue of fairness, what about the genes of elite cis athletes that let them do better than the rest of us?

It's a fair line of questions. I don't know of any perfect answers, so I would fall back to the idea "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

In other words, look for solutions that handle most of the situations, even if those solutions fail on the rare outliers.

==

And, being 5'8" and 155 pounds, I was not able to pursue my dreams of being a wide receiver

 

[PureX]

Designated size, weight, strength and skill categories in sports would pretty much put an end to this nonsense. And would make the competitions much more even and fair.

 

[metis]

Designated size, weight, strength and skill categories in sports would pretty much put an end to this nonsense. And would make the competitions much more even and fair.

Now that I can agree with. Here in the States, we do have some high school wrestlers in mixed matches, especially if there's not enough female wrestlers for a separate league.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's a fair line of questions. I don't know of any perfect answers, so I would fall back to the idea "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

In other words, look for solutions that handle most of the situations, even if those solutions fail on the rare outliers.

==

And, being 5'8" and 155 pounds, I was not able to pursue my dreams of being a wide receiver

I would say that ostracizing trans athletes is the opposite of "the good."

 

[Augustus]

No, it's you who is doing "fearmongering", which is what we also heard when Title 9 was passed.

Never took you for someone who would ignore basic science in favour of virtue signalling ideological platitudes.

I note you failed to say whether you supported self id again, and if you don’t you are guilty of the same “fearmongering” and “sexual discrimination” you accuse others of anyway, while also ignoring basic science.

Those who claim others are being prejudiced never seem to be able to propose a workable solution that both avoids discrimination and protects women’s sport.

Funny that.

 

[Augustus]

Designated size, weight, strength and skill categories in sports would pretty much put an end to this nonsense. And would make the competitions much more even and fair.

It’s also the worst idea in history, logistically impossible, would ruin most sports and could only ever be proposed by someone with no interest in sports whatsoever.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I support lgbtq's but I think transgenders in sports is unfair for obvious reasons. They should have there own league. That would be cool. I guess I don't really care either way though. Just tryin to think of a fair way. I mean can you imagine a bodybuilder size trans 230 lb. on a football field with 130 lb women? I mean where do u draw the line? It's nonsensical. I mean if your going to do something then do it right? You can't discriminate against the gladiator can u?

I don't think there's any solution right now that would apply to all sports, because their rules and physical requirements also vary. In contact sports such as boxing, I think it's perfectly valid to argue that trans women and cis women generally shouldn't be placed against each other in a competitive setting. That wouldn't just be unfair to a lot of the athletes; it would create a fertile ground for serious injuries in many cases.

I don't have any answers concerning a workable solution, but I believe exploration of this subject should prioritize taking into account trans women's identity, the fairness of competition, and competitors' safety. I'm against categorically stating that trans women should be excluded from all women's sports regardless of restrictions or requirements, and I'm also against categorically dismissing concerns about participation of trans women in women's sports as "transphobic," "discriminatory," etc.

While transphobia does underlie a lot of the vitriol aimed at trans athletes, there are many people who support trans rights but also understandably don't think the answer to this issue in sports is to simply allow trans women and cis women to compete against each other without any regard for biological differences.

 

[Augustus]

It's a fair line of questions. I don't know of any perfect answers, so I would fall back to the idea "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

In other words, look for solutions that handle most of the situations, even if those solutions fail on the rare outliers.

==

And, being 5'8" and 155 pounds, I was not able to pursue my dreams of being a wide receiver

It’s a pretty specious line of questions really.

Once you select for elite athletes, being the tallest doesn’t make you the best basketball player, largest lung capacity or biggest feet doesn’t make you the best swimmer, etc. Being given any biological metric wouldn’t enable you to pick the winner consistently. They increase your probability of being an elite athlete, but don’t define your rank within the category.

An elite male athlete who transitions though will absolutely dominate the female category. You could very easily pick the winner every time. Having undergone male puberty would define your rank within the category.

It also allows sub-elite males to become elite females after transition (for example Lia Thomas).

The advantage of male puberty is qualitatively different to any other metric.

Also we ban PEDs based on fairness, we don’t say “but it was unfair to start with so just allow this too”.