it's the root of the entire discussion.
Transgender Athletes
- Thread starter Stack
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
I’m just saying it’s good of you to decide that, for all trans people.
But she was still female. I should post the source but I know it's been suggested she wouldn't beat any male player due to the inherent biological differences between men and women.
edit: comment on quora in relation to her level and who she'd be beaten by - "mid-level male college player or very strong high school aged player" (https://www.quora.com/Can-Serena-Williams-beat-any-of-the-5-top-ranked-male-players)
This seems to be based on some sort of universal tennis rating - https://www.universaltennis.com
I totally get what you're saying, but can't you just say "I don't think a transgender woman should participate with cis women in boxing because they might have an unfair physical advantage"? I mean, I've heard transgender women say this. Your point would be made and you won't need to use a term normally used to offend them by bigots. Win win.
Bone structure is affected by your biological sex and the balance of hormones that you have during your growth from gestation to the end of puberty. That's the main reason behind the physical and athletic differences between males and females. It's also why males and females are separated in sport and why males on average are superior athletes, they have big advantages.
Is a transwoman a woman? Maybe, I don't really know because people like yourself blur the lines, when it suits you, you talk about transwomen and ciswomen which implies that there is a distinction and other times you reduce it to women.
Maybe best guess is that a transwoman is considered a male that identify as a woman. And in this conversation the key context is male vs female.
Last edited:
You are laughable
Stick to making shit threads in the other forums dude.
One of the many crazy things to this whole debate is when people repeatedly point out that the number of trans women competing in women’s sports (yet) is very low, while also arguing that the fact we’re not seeing a trans women dominate any sport (yet) means there’s nothing to worry about. Do you think the two might be connected?
You see a similar tortured logic when discussing the the biological advantages of going through puberty as a male. Getting hung up on tiny sample sizes relating the performance of trans women. When all you really need to do is look at the enormous body of evidence from mens vs women sports over the last century. There’s a huge gulf between the world records in basically any sport you can think of. There’s an obvious reason for this.
You see a similar tortured logic when discussing the the biological advantages of going through puberty as a male. Getting hung up on tiny sample sizes relating the performance of trans women. When all you really need to do is look at the enormous body of evidence from mens vs women sports over the last century. There’s a huge gulf between the world records in basically any sport you can think of. There’s an obvious reason for this.
trans in an adjective, just like brown-haired is an adjective. a woman with brown hair is still a woman... right?
it might help if you stopped using the terf dog whistle spelling of 'transwoman' and write it out properly.
Fair enough, can you explain to me what the cis and trans adjectives designate?
You realize that the NCAA keeps records, right?
NCAAs
1st - 500y free
5th - 200y free
8th - 100y free
Ivy League Championships
1st - 500y free
1st - 200y free
1st - 100y free
Penn vs Dartmouth & Yale
1st - 500y free
1st - 200y free
6th - 100y free
Zippy Invitational
1st - 1650y free
1st - 500y free
1st - 200y free
5th - 50y free
Penn vs Princeton & Cornell
1st - 500y free
1st - 200y free
1st - 100y free
Penn vs Brown
1st - 1000y free
1st - 500y free
1st - 200y free
Penn vs Villanova
1st - 500y free
1st - 200y free
1st - 100y free
Penn vs Columbia
1st - 200y free
1st - 100y free
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/18/9787...s-have-an-unfair-edge-what-does-the-science-s
I particularly like this line:
https://sites.tufts.edu/cmph357/202...letes-access-to-sports-is-a-healthcare-issue/
I particularly like this line:
I think this gets lost in this debate. For the sake of some high school wins which 99% of people forget all about (I have a bunch of medals from basketball and handball I don't really care about nowadays, I guess it's the same for most who won sports events in high school) we are sacrificing the well being of an entire group, a group already very vulnerable because of discrimination pretty much everywhere.
https://sites.tufts.edu/cmph357/202...letes-access-to-sports-is-a-healthcare-issue/
The conversation quickly moves to professional sports. But if we stick to school sports, I honestly can't understand how some are so willing to add to the misery of an already targeted group.
Amazing then how so many HS coaches get fired for losing
Perhaps a
please don't quote snippets of a post to make a point. what's the difference between a cis woman finishing 4th behind 2 other cis women and 1 other trans woman? all 3 of them likely had natural advantages over the woman who finished 4th, but it's only an issue when the woman is trans and not cis? do you see why that sounds problematic?
Because they might miss the podium. They might miss an opportunity for a scholarship. The sacrifices they made to be able to come third have been pushed aside. Also, it wasn't a snippet, everyone can read your post here, my point is the blaise attitude to where women athletes finish as if it doesn't matter (get rid of podiums then) is symptomatic of a wider mentality that women do not matter and have to accommodate, or else they're troublesome bigots.
as for Serena Williams, she is an example of a physically dominant presence on the tennis court, which highlights the advantages she had over other women. frankly i don't appreciate the racist implications in your post. it's not racist to suggest Serena was a physically dominant tennis player, to go along with all her other technical and mental talents.
I am not implying anything, it's just curious that every day I see this debate taking place on Twitter or Reddit, one side always invokes WoC when discussing trans women and I've seen many WoC dislike this because they're being compared, again, to people not biologically female. For what it is worth, I don't think you're racist, it's just I want to call out this observation as I think it is clumsy and a little odd.
What is also interesting is Serena and Venus played a male tennis player in an exhibition and were rounding beaten. Serena is also on record as saying she wouldn't want to play in the mens game when asked, as it is, to quote "so much faster, quicker and they hit the ball much harder".
We do have to approach this in a way that enables trans women to not be excluded but to balance this with fairness with cis-women. I won't be solved overnight but debate and dialogue is good in my opinion.
Good lord, please don't post that cretin Matt Walsh in here.
Walsh sucks. The person he’s interviewing, however, was a teammate of Lia Thomas.
This is a good observation. It goes from discussing gender identity, to biological sex, then to identity again. The goalposts always seem to move.
I showed you where her times place her; 8th, 1st, 5th etc. That is across all women. So she went from 550th to top ten.
I agree, when it comes to PE or primary and secondary school sports, I think inclusivity is a better route. I suppose stateside, athletes are selected out of high school - it's a lot different to the UK.
Huh? What's the right way of spelling trans woman/transwoman?
Yeah, it's absurd. They shouldn't be, let's fix that unhealthy mentality instead of banning kids from sports.
Does that extend to every levels and context? Regardless of safety, finances, scholarships, etc?
In a non-competitve context sports could be unisex but in a competitive context, females would be largely excluded from top level sports around the age of 13-15 years old.
Can you clarify your first question?
School sports should only be competitive in a healthy way, never coming on the back of exclusion. I've read that kids who start transitioning very early have little no no advantage when they are 13. Even if they have, it will be so small and happen so rarely, that in my view it is not a good argument to justify excluding kids from school sports.
I’m with you on the school sports. Inclusivity should be the number one aim of school sports. Making sure as many kids as possible play sports. Everything else is secondary in importance.
I think the US complicates things though. They take school sports super seriously and that influences stuff like scholarships to university etc. In the UK/Europe elite young athletes are more likely to be competing at the highest possible level for a club rather than for a school team.
I can't make it clearer. There are direct consequences for girls and young women. For every transwoman that reach the top of woman sport, you have a cis-woman that lost a scholarship or lost the opportunity to glory or money. Being good at a certain level at youth level opens doors to better academies, better schools, better competitions, better education and so on.
And you are over egging the exclusion angle, very little people would have an issue with transwomen or transmen competing in male sports, in fact we are talking about people that were officially competing and not excluded.
PS: People do have an issue with transmen competing in sports combat for safety reasons.
i reckon you can probably google it yourself. it's pretty basic, clear language.
is this the entirety of her races? i was trying to find her overall record but couldn't.
but it's OK for a trans woman to miss an opportunity for a scholarship? i'm not being blasé, i'm just advocating for inclusion. again, it only seems to be an issue if a cis woman finishes behind a trans woman, not another cis woman, who may also have superior genetics or opportunity or any host of other advantages. there is an issue with that for me.
yes, it's trans woman. trans is an adjective. you don't spell it brunettewoman do you?
Nope, you tell me. You used the distinction, you qualify it.
Then you have an issue with the whole concept of competitive sport. Which is strange for someone posting on a website dedicated to exactly that.
Yes, this is a good point.
Pogue, can you stop posting stuff I agree with, it's making me lightheaded.
but it's OK for a trans woman to miss an opportunity for a scholarship? i'm not being blasé, i'm just advocating for inclusion. again, it only seems to be an issue if a cis woman finishes behind a trans woman, not another cis woman, who may also have superior genetics or opportunity or any host of other advantages. there is an issue with that for me.
While it is not OK, trans women already missed an opportunity for a scholarship because they no longer compete in their birth sex category, nor places high enough to receive a scholarship offer.
Athletic scholarships are inherently exclusionary. You have to hit certain criteria to receive one. They don't give them to every athlete. Sports are inherently a meritocracy and exclusionary. If you want to make a critique and campaign for removing athletic scholarships to top Ivy League colleges, that's fine I guess. Unfortunately, it doesn't change the fact that if Lia Thomas didn't transition, they wouldn't be winning the top races or having access to the prizes and opportunities that open up to those who excel athletically in college.
OK, why not add extra scholarships? Isn't that better than excluding young kids from sports, which we all know is really important for their health? More scholarships, more opportunities, no kids excluded, it seems like a better situation all around.
I don't think I am, we're literally seeing bills passing all over the place to exclude these kids.
That's true, it sounds more complicated in the US, but it just seems cruel (and sadly we know most politicians do it for their own selfish reasons, not because they give two shits about school sports or women's sports) that the focus seems to be on excluding these kids rather than change the system to accommodate more kids while still giving scholarships opportunitie to top athletes.
It sure is easier to just bans transgender kids, but ultimately it's a choice.
But school sports should not be. You just agreed to that. So lets make that distinction between professional sports and school sports. If scholarships are that much of a concern, just add a few more, I doubt the number of transgender girls getting scholarships would be that big to actually make a difference to universities.
Again they are not excluded. As an example was Lia Thomas excluded before moving to female swimming? Is there actually a problem with Lia Thomas, who is born a male to compete with other male born athletes? No one prevented that and we have records of it.
And more scholarship don't fix the issue when it comes to fairness. If we stick to Lia Thomas the 500th male isn't going to get access to the same schools than the 8th woman, even if you add scholarship hundreds of male and females are unfairly downgraded for no good reason.
And I would agree with you, if it was a case of exclusion but it's not.
The only way, which isn't a perfect solution, is to just create new categories for each so you'd have mens, womens, transmens and transfemales events. There's really no other way if you want to avoid banning.
Male and Female categories allow females to compete at an elite level, just make male category unisex and leave female sport alone. That's an easy answer.
Male category, female category and open category is probably the best. But you could only apply for one category, with the female category ringfenced for biological females.
I can't get past the idea that women should decide what the rules are for their own particular sport and men should keep their noses out of it.
I agree that's what it should be.