Transgender Athletes

[ChaddyP]

Again...you are then denying the identity of an entire group of people on the basis of possibly/probably having an inherent natural advantage over other people of their same gender. Even if you don't realize it, you're saying transwomen are not really women. That's what it comes down to

I get the counter argument that if trans women start dominating sports that might negatively impact the engagement of cis women with sports. Are we at that point already? And if we are, what's more important here? The vast majority of people who play sports don't turn pro, and even among those who do, it's always a very small select few who reach the top. It's not like there isn't already a natural selection largely based on genetics, geography(place of birth is unfortunately very important still, due to uneven resources/funding), etc

I never said that any group shouldn't be able to compete period, I'm saying that trans women should not be allowed to compete in female track competitions. Your argument that it's not currently widespread dominance is irrelevant to my point.

If you think that they shouldn't have their own category, or they shouldn't be forced to compete with cis men, then fine. Advocate for free for all sexes in track. Where no matter what you were born as or what you identify with, all compete in the same 100 meter race. As that's literally the only way you can do this. Just be done with sex class in track sport.

 

[McGrathsipan]

What that says is you don't genuinely consider trans-women, women. Usain Bolt had massive genetic, physical advantages over every other person he competed against. Should we have excluded him from competing?

I get the desire to protect cis women athletes, there is no easy or simple solution here, but not at the cost of denying an entire group of people their identity

Trans women are trams women. Not biological women. Biology has everything to do with athleticism whether you want to admit it or not

Biological women athletes should absolutely be protected in competition.

You claiming an entire group of people are being denied identity is hysterical. What about the women that have trained for years?

 

[Carolina Red]

It's not like there isn't already a natural selection largely based on genetics

Hmmmm

 

[Carolina Red]

Trans women are trams women. Not biological women. Biology has everything to do with athleticism whether you want to admit it or not

Biological women athletes should absolutely be protected in competition.

You claiming an entire group of people are being denied identity is hysterical. What about the women that have trained for years?

Well damn, now you’re on his ignore list.

 

[Agent Red]

Again...you are then denying the identity of an entire group of people on the basis of possibly/probably having an inherent natural advantage over other people of their same gender. Even if you don't realize it, you're saying transwomen are not really women. That's what it comes down to

I get the counter argument that if trans women start dominating sports that might negatively impact the engagement of cis women with sports. Are we at that point already? And if we are, what's more important here? The vast majority of people who play sports don't turn pro, and even among those who do, it's always a very small select few who reach the top. It's not like there isn't already a natural selection largely based on genetics, geography(place of birth is unfortunately very important still, due to uneven resources/funding), etc

There is a biological difference between trans women and cis women though, that gives a proven biological advantage. It's not "possibly" like we're not really sure of it. "Trans women are women" is a basic statement of inclusion but I don't think it requires us to ignore basic facts like that and then not have proper discussions about what the possible solutions are to challenges like this where there isn't an obvious way to be fair and inclusive to everyone.

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

Again...you are then denying the identity of an entire group of people on the basis of possibly/probably having an inherent natural advantage over other people of their same gender. Even if you don't realize it, you're saying transwomen are not really women. That's what it comes down to

I get the counter argument that if trans women start dominating sports that might negatively impact the engagement of cis women with sports. Are we at that point already? And if we are, what's more important here? The vast majority of people who play sports don't turn pro, and even among those who do, it's always a very small select few who reach the top. It's not like there isn't already a natural selection largely based on genetics, geography(place of birth is unfortunately very important still, due to uneven resources/funding), etc

Nobody is denying anyone their identity. You're just using that as your argument because you cannot come up with a valid reason as to why they should be allowed to compete in a category of weaker cis women. They're women but with the ability of a male due to genetics which does not change based on what you identify as. They have the strength, genetics and power of a man even though they're women. If a cis woman loses against another cis woman there won't be any questions or doubts that it's a loss because it's a fair fight. If they lose against a transwoman then it's not a fair loss. It's a loss against someone who will always have an edge due to strength, endurance, ability, power, speed just to name a few criteria that makes it an unfair competition.

 

[DON’T PANIC ™]

Nobody is denying anyone their identity. You're just using that as your argument because you cannot come up with a valid reason as to why they should be allowed to compete in a category of weaker cis women. They're women but with the ability of a male due to genetics which does not change based on what you identify as. They have the strength, genetics and power of a man even though they're women. If a cis woman loses against another cis woman there won't be any questions or doubts that it's a loss because it's a fair fight. If they lose against a transwoman then it's not a fair loss. It's a loss against someone who will always have an edge due to strength, endurance, ability, power, speed just to name a few criteria that makes it an unfair competition.

I couldn’t agree more. Well said.

 

[berbatrick]

And in some, she didn’t. And neither did a lot of other biological females.

What does it mean if she beats 15 trans women but not the 16th? Did the 16th bet her because of her testosterone, but the 15th were injecting too much estrogen? When she did lose to a cis girl, was that difference down to testosterone? Is it possible, in your opinion, for a trans woman to beat a cis woman, for a reason un-linked to gender?

 

[Carolina Red]

What does it mean if she beats 15 trans women but not the 16th? Did the 16th bet her because of her testosterone, but the 15th were injecting too much estrogen? When she did lose to a cis girl, was that difference down to testosterone? Is it possible, in your opinion, for a trans woman to beat a cis woman, for a reason un-linked to gender?

Probably. Anything is possible. But it shouldn’t happen in a female sports division. Period.

 

[Suedesi]

There's a Monty Python sketch for that

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

There's a Monty Python sketch for that

I would have gladly passed my labor pains to anyone who wanted it if I could. Not knowing if my baby was gonna come out of my butt or my vagina isn’t a feeling I'm particularly attached to..

 

[giorno]

There is a biological difference between trans women and cis women though, that gives a proven biological advantage.

And there are biological differences between cis women. And cis men

It's not "possibly" like we're not really sure of it. "Trans women are women" is a basic statement of inclusion but I don't think it requires us to ignore basic facts like that and then not have proper discussions about what the possible solutions are to challenges like this where there isn't an obvious way to be fair and inclusive to everyone.

We are having a discussion. Nobodies denying it's a topic that requires discussion to find possible solutions. It's significantly more nuanced then "well they have an advantage/they're not really women so it's unfair". Personally I think right now the best thing go do would be to allow them to compete in certain sports, compete with certain caveats in others(fighting sports especially). Maybe in 10-20 years time things will be at a point where there really is a need to separate trans and cis women. Maybe not.

Nobody is denying anyone their identity. You're just using that as your argument because you cannot come up with a valid reason as to why they should be allowed to compete in a category of weaker cis women.

No i'm not. They're women. Separating them from other women based on genetics is effectively denying their identity. Even if you that's not your intention

They're women but with the ability of a male due to genetics which does not change based on what you identify as. They have the strength, genetics and power of a man

They don't actually. There is a signficant difference between men and post-transition women, biologically. Trans women do not have the strenght and power of a man

If a cis woman loses against another cis woman there won't be any questions or doubts that it's a loss because it's a fair fight. If they lose against a transwoman then it's not a fair loss. It's a loss against someone who will always have an edge due to strength, endurance, ability, power, speed just to name a few criteria that makes it an unfair competition.

And, again, everybody who ever lost to Phelps, Bolt, etc can say the same thing. Yes, I get it, there's a difference of scale between Bolt being born with especially explosive muscle fibers, or Phelps being born with a particularly aerodynamic body, or Indurain being born with absurd endurance, etc, compared to simply being born male. But, ultimately, competitive sports by definition are not meant to be fair fights, they're meant to find out who is best at it, and the best will always be the best because they had natural advantages. Unfair advantage, because they were born in the fecking wrong body? Give them a break

 

[hobbers]

No i'm not. They're women. Separating them from other women based on genetics is effectively denying their identity. Even if you that's not your intention

You can say this as much as you want but it's still going to be nonsense.

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

And there are biological differences between cis women. And cis men

We are having a discussion. Nobodies denying it's a topic that requires discussion to find possible solutions. It's significantly more nuanced then "well they have an advantage/they're not really women so it's unfair". Personally I think right now the best thing go do would be to allow them to compete in certain sports, compete with certain caveats in others(fighting sports especially). Maybe in 10-20 years time things will be at a point where there really is a need to separate trans and cis women. Maybe not.

No i'm not. They're women. Separating them from other women based on genetics is effectively denying their identity. Even if you that's not your intention


They don't actually. There is a signficant difference between men and post-transition women, biologically. Trans women do not have the strenght and power of a man


And, again, everybody who ever lost to Phelps, Bolt, etc can say the same thing. Yes, I get it, there's a difference of scale between Bolt being born with especially explosive muscle fibers, or Phelps being born with a particularly aerodynamic body, or Indurain being born with absurd endurance, etc, compared to simply being born male. But, ultimately, competitive sports by definition are not meant to be fair fights, they're meant to find out who is best at it, and the best will always be the best because they had natural advantages. Unfair advantage, because they were born in the fecking wrong body? Give them a break

So why are heavyweight boxers not allowed to compete with featherweights? They can't because it's a different class. They're not physically matched. It's not the cis women fault they were born in the wrong body so why do they have to be the ones who have to take the hit for it? Is it their fault? Is it somehow their responsibility to make it right?
Even a transitioning male is stronger than most females, especially once who is still training for a competitive sport.
Why are steroids and enhancement drugs illegal? Because it creates a unfair physical advantage for those who use it. Bottom line it's unfair. I sympathize with them but wanting to be included shouldn't take away from anyone. It's hypocritical because they're ultimately doing the same thing they don't want done to them...UNFAIR TREATMENT.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

While this is undoubtedly true, what does it say about the core of the souls of athletes who compete as men against men, generally to a mediocre level, but then transition and are very eager to compete against women knowing they now have a big advantage?

I don't necessarily disagree with you because biological advantages of male born people obviously comes into play, regardless of the already utilised limitations on testosterone and other tests carried out to ensure that fairplay is carried out, when it comes to physical activities, in these sports. And maybe those these existing processes need to be advertised more to improve general confidence, somewhat...?

But at the same time the human factor also needs to be accepted and recognised. And as the parent of a transitioning child I know, at least from a personal level listening to my kid and how they feel; it's frightening how often these examples in sport are used as a reason to attack their existence. And then politicians, more than happy to feck around and steal, suddenly decide that gender is going to be to focus of their political campaigns - which aren't in any way divisive purely because hate brings them votes. And now the media report it because, if it isn't clearly already the talking point which it already is after public figures have been piggybacking off of it, it certainly brings the clicks to their website... But ultimately we all collectively begin to forget the most important factor. The Human factor...

Too often we all look through these situations through a lense that forgets that we're not just discussing "person A" or "person B". These are real people who are affected by often arbitrary decisions made by sporting - and political - committees that prefer to follow the "out of sight, out of mind" mentality without a single thought about how their actions affect the people they're challenging.

Until you've had to comfort and reassure a young kid at 4am because they don't want to live anymore, because all they see online is hate about people like them, it's difficult to appreciate that this is more than just about empty, unassociated names, on a news report.

If we're talking about souls then let's get the morality and humanity parts sorted out first.

 

[stepic]

honestly the way people go on about the advantages trans women have over women, you’d think there’d be at least one trans woman on the planet who massively dominates their sport like Bolt did in his.

 

[17Larsson]

I don't necessarily disagree with you because biological advantages of male born people obviously comes into play, regardless of the already utilised limitations on testosterone and other tests carried out to ensure that fairplay is carried out, when it comes to physical activities, in these sports. And maybe those these existing processes need to be advertised more to improve general confidence, somewhat...?

But at the same time the human factor also needs to be accepted and recognised. And as the parent of a transitioning child I know, at least from a personal level listening to my kid and how they feel; it's frightening how often these examples in sport are used as a reason to attack their existence. And then politicians, more than happy to feck around and steal, suddenly decide that gender is going to be to focus of their political campaigns - which aren't in any way divisive purely because hate brings them votes. And now the media report it because, if it isn't clearly already the talking point which it already is after public figures have been piggybacking off of it, it certainly brings the clicks to their website... But ultimately we all collectively begin to forget the most important factor. The Human factor...

Too often we all look through these situations through a lense that forgets that we're not just discussing "person A" or "person B". These are real people who are affected by often arbitrary decisions made by sporting - and political - committees that prefer to follow the "out of sight, out of mind" mentality without a single thought about how their actions affect the people they're challenging.

Until you've had to comfort and reassure a young kid at 4am because they don't want to live anymore, because all they see online is hate about people like them, it's difficult to appreciate that this is more than just about empty, unassociated names, on a news report.

If we're talking about souls then let's get the morality and humanity parts sorted out first.

You have a child going through this? What age do you mind me asking?

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

honestly the way people go on about the incredibly massive advantages trans women have over poor wee cis women, you’d think there’d be at least one trans woman on the planet who massively dominates their sport like Bolt did in his.

I guess we’ll keep waiting.

Why the condescending tone? Our capabilities should not even be compared to someone with a superior genetic makeup. It's ridiculous the way some try to invalidate a legitimate concern that has scientific data to back it up.
Calling them "poor cis woman" is very insulting when these women work their asses to compete in a specific category only to be faced with even more challenges in the form of an athlete who is far more superior.
Why then do you not see more transmen compete in the men's category if they measure up equally? Why is it that the number of transwomen who are competing in the women's category greater than transmen competing in the men's category if they're all of equal ability?

 

[Gambit]

Thanks to this whole ridiculous debate, I have learnt there is a part of me that likes to watch the world burn. I've always enjoyed pointless and silly things. It is incredible that it's even an issue when it's so obvious. I say go for it. I fully support trans athletes competing in sports they are biologically superior in. I think trans should complete in boxing and MMA and everything you can think of. I will be here laughing my arse off. Watching the snake eat itself over this absurd issue is even better.

 

[jojojo]

Asking why there are no trans-women currently dominating a female only event is a bit disingenuous. Historically it was more or less impossible for a trans-woman to compete in top level women's events. The IOC rules for the Olympics basically reflected practice throughout sport.

It used to be a straightforward ban, with some women having to go through sex tests (of varying levels of complexity/intrusiveness) to prove their status.

It then moved to permit some trans-women to compete - but only after multiple years of social and legal transition, medical procedures and testosterone testing. Effectively this excluded anyone in their sporting prime and most trans-women globally.

Trying to improve inclusion opportunities sent the IOC down a simpler self declaration of "living as a woman" for at least two years and monitoring for low testosterone. This actually caused more problems for DSD and intersex women - for whom testosterone testing may not be the fairest method.

After various tried/failed attempts to refine the rules, the IOC gave up making rules. They asked the individual sports to decide on their own, but starting from a principle of inclusion.

We're now watching the fallout of that decision as various international, national and local sports bodies try to make their own rules. Some more inclusive - self declaration, no physical transition requirement and no testosterone or other testing. Some effectively going back to an outright ban and rules that meant DSD athletes needed medication to compete.

Athletics has recently decided to draw its line as "having gone through male puberty" though I'm not quite sure how they propose to define/test for that.

In other words - we're now seeing the test cases. When a transwoman starts winning, the sporting authority involved starts putting the rules back to where they were - the only difference being are they going back 2 years, 5 years, 10 years or more.

 

[prateik]

Apologies in advance if I say something silly.. and I'm sure its been brought up several times before, but

Why not have Male and Female sports instead of Men and Women..
People can compete in whatever category they belong to.

 

[VorZakone]

Did someone really post "poor wee cis women"?

 

[Cloud7]

Did someone really post "poor wee cis women"?

I don't pretend to have all the answers, and I'm not even sure where my stance is in this discussion, but after the way women have been treated for most of human history, that comment is in such poor taste it's unbelievable.

 

[jojojo]

Apologies in advance if I say something silly.. and I'm sure its been brought up several times before, but

Why not have Male and Female sports instead of Men and Women..
People can compete in whatever category they belong to.

I suspect that in many sports we will end up with an open category and a female one, but we'll still struggle to define female because it's more complex medically/scientifically than it first sounds.

 

[KirkDuyt]

This debate is so very much hampered by the fact that anyone suggesting it might not be fair to cis girls is shouted down quite violently by some. Surely no one (mostly no one on here I think judging by most of the caf) wants to deny trans kids their love of sports. It's just a concern about the fairness. That's not being a transphobe that's, just, I dunno, logical? It's obviously a very difficult to dissect issue since simply saying, give them their own catagory is problematic seeing the small group and outright banning them excludes a group of doing the thing they love.

 

[arnie_ni]

This debate is so very much hampered by the fact that anyone suggesting it might not be fair to cis girls is shouted down quite violently by some. Surely no one (mostly no one on here I think judging by most of the caf) wants to deny trans kids their love of sports. It's just a concern about the fairness. That's not being a transphobe that's, just, I dunno, logical? It's obviously a very difficult to dissect issue since simply saying, give them their own catagory is problematic seeing the small group and outright banning them excludes a group of doing the thing they love.

Agreed. There's no correct answer here. But there needs to be some protection of cis women when it comes to sport who are naturally at a biological disadvantage.

That doesn't automatically make you transphobic

 

[foolsgold]

Trans women are trams women. Not biological women. Biology has everything to do with athleticism whether you want to admit it or not

Biological women athletes should absolutely be protected in competition.

You claiming an entire group of people are being denied identity is hysterical. What about the women that have trained for years?

This is pretty unarguable really. In track and field athletics for example a competitive boy will start beating women's world records at around 15 years old. The cardiovascular advantage is baked in for life. it's true in a lot of sports, I'm a fairly ok middle aged male road cyclist, I'm not remotely competitive in mens racing but my times are as good as or better than excellent women 20 years younger than me.

 

[Gavinb33]

Transgender athletes would only impact womens sports in a big way in most male sports a trans man would not stand very much of chance I wonder why that is?

 

[Escobar]

Trans women are trams women. Not biological women. Biology has everything to do with athleticism whether you want to admit it or not

Biological women athletes should absolutely be protected in competition.

You claiming an entire group of people are being denied identity is hysterical. What about the women that have trained for years?

That this is even up for a debate is mind blowing.

 

[Escobar]

Transgender athletes would only impact womens sports in a big way in most male sports a trans man would not stand very much of chance I wonder why that is?

Yeah, sooo strange (irony on) that we dont have any transgender man that wants to compete against man, for example in MMA or basektball.

 

[Escobar]

I suspect that in many sports we will end up with an open category and a female one, but we'll still struggle to define female because it's more complex medically/scientifically than it first sounds.

No we do not. It is cery clear, scientifically there is no debate

 

[Doracle]

The Connecticut policy allows transgender athletes to compete purely on the basis of gender identification I think? It’s a potential massive performance advantage at 17/18 if I’ve understood that correctly.

Fair enough to let them all compete but could they not have 2 winners in this type of scenario/extend the number of finalists, rather than pretending everyone is equal?

 

[cafecillos]

Probably. Anything is possible. But it shouldn’t happen in a female sports division. Period.

Nope, it doesn't matter how sure you think you are or how much you know about biology (plenty of biology experts on the Caf, it seems), there's certainly a debate to be had, and there's certainly a debate being had right now, both on the Caf and elsewhere, so that "period" shite is probably better left off the arguments. And even if we categorically agreed that "it shouldn't happen in a female sports division", which we don't, we'd still had to figure out the alternative, and the whole "trans division" idea is very likely not it, as there are so few trans athletes that it would simply be unfeasible in many sports and/or age brackets within sports. I'm not so sure about the "open" category idea, it sounds more workable, but I'm sure plenty of issues would arise when examined in depth.

 

[Escobar]

I'm weaker and slower than Bolt. Should Bolt be forbidden from competing against me because of it?

And no. The correct statement is I'm not a woman. Biology has nothing to do with it

The next person to use the term biological woman is going on ignore. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt here, though it's disheartening

What a stupid and wrong argument on all possible levels. And on top, it is easy to claim as a man, but for girls/women, it is an issue

 

[dove]

That this is even up for a debate is mind blowing.

This. Like how can anyone seriously argue that there is no unfair advantage in transgender women competing with non transgender is beyond me but that's the result of years of radical left brainwashing I suppose. We struggle to define woman nowadays because people are afraid to offend some group and be called whatever-phobic. Madness.

 

[cafecillos]

Transgender athletes would only impact womens sports in a big way in most male sports a trans man would not stand very much of chance I wonder why that is?

No, you don't.

You see, this is the sort of sarcasm and constant mockery that makes it very difficult to believe that many people who are apparently defending cis women on this are not doing it out of plain transphobia.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

So sometimes she lost to trans women, and also lost to other cis women

Sometimes she beat trans women, and also beat other cis women

sounds like sports to me. What’s the issue again besides blatant transphobia? Oh right yes trans women should never be allowed to beat a cis woman ever, got it

There is an MMA observational quip in there somewhere.

 

[VorZakone]

This. Like how can anyone seriously argue that there is no unfair advantage in transgender women competing with non transgender is beyond me but that's the result of years of radical left brainwashing I suppose. We struggle to define woman nowadays because people are afraid to offend some group and be called whatever-phobic. Madness.

I'm not sure this is really the case. Most acknowledge the biology aspect but they prioritize transgender participation over the complains of biological women.

 

[Gavinb33]

This. Like how can anyone seriously argue that there is no unfair advantage in transgender women competing with non transgender is beyond me but that's the result of years of radical left brainwashing I suppose. We struggle to define woman nowadays because people are afraid to offend some group and be called whatever-phobic. Madness.

Agreed the current ideology means to question one thing is to question everything and anything other than 100% of what the TA's are asking for means being labelled transphobic

 

[Gavinb33]

No, you don't.

You see, this is the sort of sarcasm and constant mockery that makes it very difficult to believe that many people who are apparently defending cis women on this are not doing it out of plain transphobia.

It's not transphobic it's true, imagine a biological women who has transitioned to a man (which is fine be who you want to be) going to race Usain Bolt in 100 meters at his peak there wouldn't be much of an argument on who would win no.

A biological man who transitioned to be a women again completely fine, going to race against Dina Asher Smith you could make a legitimate argument that person could win that race in a way you couldn't for the trans man surely you see that or not for fear of being labelled transphobic

Maybe sarcasm is not the one but the rest is so blindingly obvious that I do not see this being an argument in any way