Transgender Athletes

[Oggmonster]

Quite different, I'm talking about doping at a state level, it would be surprising to me if USA cycling (or whatever they are called) would be th one aiding Lance in his cheating.

You have to be very naive to think that “marginal gains” and “more training” led to Sky / British cycling dominating and mediocre cyclists at 25 like Froome becoming GOATs.

It is a classical Western view, dirty foreigners cheating against clean locals.

Read Tyler Hamilton's book a few months ago who was a team mate of Armstrong.

Basically they're all on it (or were at the time, probably still are now) and the smallest of percentage of gains due to PEDs would make a huge difference to them. Interesting book really probably pick it up pretty cheap now due to the amount of stuff that's out there about Armstrong.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Interesting to see Tennis brought up here because we had Renee Richards male-to-female transwoman competing and highest rank was 20th and no WTA titles to name. Never made it past 3rd round in US open (eliminated twice in the first round).

There's Cece Telfer, track and field athlete that right wing media I remember having an aneurysm over who hardly did very well either
https://www.outsports.com/2019/3/10/18257930/ncaa-cece-telfer-trans-woman-athlete-track-field

And a lot of trans athletes who compete lose too, and many just give unremarkable performances. They're hardly the unstoppable juggernauts as they're sometimes claimed or believed to be. There's a reasonable article here from a MMA woman's fighter who was previously against Fallon Fox competing here I found interesting
https://www.outsports.com/2021/6/16/22536714/rosi-sexton-mma-trans-athletes-fallon-fox

Its tricky because I think the goalpost isn't as often claimed "we don't want trans athletes to dominate women's sport". Because they've been allowed to compete for a while, 2003 in the Olympics according to IOC guidelines but instead its closer to "we don't any of them winning anything" at all as we're seeing now with Laurel Hubbard potentially getting gold (apparently tricky though since getting a debilitating elbow injury at the 2018 Commonwealth Games) and recently with Veronica Ivy's achievements in cycling.

Yeah, you make some very good points. I’ve generally thought that trans women competing vs cis women is wrong/unfair but it’s easy to forget how tiny this problem really is.

Obviously elite male athletes are far superior to elite female athletes in almost every sport you can imagine but I don’t think many average male athletes would cause the best female athletes many problems.

If you imagine a venn diagram of “men good enough at sports to beat elite female athletes” vs “men who transition” the cross over must be absolutely tiny.

That’s not to say that some biological females won’t lose out to trans women and feel hard done by as a result. But maybe that small number of disaffected athletes is a price worth paying to make trans women feel more accepted in sport at all levels?

 

[Acheron]

With chess there simply is not enough female chess players playing.

Yes, there are few ones but when women play against men of the same elo they perform worse, it can be something psychological but the same happens in other type of sports like motorsports or e-sports.

 

[Stacks]

Sorry to be pedantic but this isn't true and highlights why this is so complicated. A 4 year old male is not beating a 25 year old female at any sport, a 4 ft Male basketball player is not beating a 6ft 4 female player. There is a huge spectrum of overlap between male/female physical attributes and capabilities that are as varied as you and me (ie small, frail, hairless biologically male - tall, large frame, hairy biologically female and anything in between) therefore the most fundamental "base" separation in classification cant be Male/female.

To extend an olive branch, the "common sense of it" splitting male and female does largely group correctly over the general population, however it;

A: doesn't fit every case, therefore failing in its utility as a category especially in a professional athlete level were the edges of the curve are almost essential(human beings define categories for their utility, i'e they have a usefulness, they don't exist outside of social constructs in the vast majority of cases. we say that pieces of wood assembled in a shape we can sit on are "chairs" but chairs as a category of thing don't exist in the universe outside of our interpretation.

B: Doesn't guarantee a fair sporting event. If your aim was to guarantee a fair sporting event you would group virtually every sport into extremely precise categories. 18-24 basketball, weight range limit, height range limit, wing span limit etc.

Why do we enjoy sport, is it to gawp at freaks of nature destroying their competition? is it to try to determine who is the best based on work ethic? talent? intelligence at their sport? these are incredibly hard to nail down.

I don't know what the answer is, it clearly isn't allowing a biological male who experienced a full puberty, now compete as a female at the Olympics. But hiding behind Male/females categories also fails the litmus test.

I kind of agree and disagree. In your examples you have taken extreme ends of the curves.

In the USA out of one hundred men, about 2/3 of them, about 68%, are between 5'7" and 6'. About 2/3 of all American men are 5'10" ± 3". About 1/3 of them are outside this range, with about half of those on each side. So, about 1/6 are 6'1" or taller (TALL), and about 1/6 are 5'6" or shorter (SHORTIES).

Adult women in the United States had a median and average height of 5’3.6" in 2016. 5 ft 9 is tall for a woman but average for a male.

If we wanna look at freak athletes e.g. Basketball, average WNBA player is almost 6 feet tall. Average male is 6 feet 7. The Atlanta dream (WNBA) has 5 guards whose heights start with "5" (5' 9", 5' 10, 5' 6, 5' 8, 5' 8") their tallest is player 6 ft 4. The Atlanta Hawks have a guard listed as 6 ft 1 who is an extremely undersized guard for men's basketball. Even 6 ft 3 is undersized for a guard. To suggest that male/female separation isn't obvious is ignoring the biggest populations of our height and weight distributions. You mentioned that a 4 foot male is not beating a 6 ft 4 female but I am certain 5 ft 9 Isaiah Thomas would annihilate 6 ft 4 Britney Griner who misses uncontested dunks. I have seen Isaiah beat my 6 ft 10 former team mate in a dunk contest for the Washington Huskies!

Nearly all men are taller than the average woman and the differences grow at the extreme ends of the scale which we see in the NBA. As a starting point it does kind of make sense to sort sport based off sex.

Population of American Men in various height categories.

eight Range	S.D.	Expected number
4'7" - 4'10"	-4σ	3,200​
4'10" - 5'1"	-3σ	135,000​
5'1" - 5'4"	-2σ	2,100,000​
5'4" - 5'7"	-1σ	13,600,000​
5'7" - 5'10"	average	34,000,000​
5'10" - 6'1"	average	34,000,000​
6'1" - 6'4"	1σ	13,600,000​
6'4" - 6'7"	2σ	2,100,000​
6'7" - 6'10"	3σ	135,000​
6'10" - 7'1"	4σ	3,200​
7'1" - 7'4"	5σ	28​
7'4" - 7'7"	6σ	0​

 

[Carolina Red]

Looking at the testosterone issue from the other way around, you have case like they had in Texas with Mack Beggs, who won 2 Texas female state championships because the State of Texas refused to reclassify Mack into the male division, despite Mack beginning his transition from female to male, including testosterone treatments, in his freshman year of high school. Mack requested to be reclassified each year, but was refused. He then went on to go 89-0 against female competition in 2017 and 2018. Now, Mack says that he was on testosterone blockers for those seasons, but the physical effects on his body were already very noticeable, especially compared to the female wrestlers.

Obviously with Mack, the situation is reversed… but it does show what a relatively small amount of testosterone can do in separating two otherwise equal athletes (the girls he beat were good wrestlers). When looking at the situation with adult males transitioning to females, I think the case of Mack Beggs is something that should be considered.

On another note, someone mentioned sports with weight classes earlier in the thread…
Wrestling having weight classes helps give an idea of where males and females begin to diverge biologically in terms of speed and strength. South Carolina is not like Texas, in that it does not have separate sanctioned divisions for male and female wrestlers. They compete head to head. I’ve coached a girl that is now a collegiate national tournament qualifier who had a winning record against males at the 106lb and 113lb weight classes, but a losing record for her senior season once she went up to 120lbs. South Carolina also just had its first ever female place winner at our individual state tournament, with a female placing 3rd at 106lbs. She was also the only female to qualify for the tournament. The cut off line for females vs males seems to be around 120-126lbs. That is where I’ve seen technically better female wrestlers simply be overpowered by lesser skilled males. When you look at the highest level, this becomes physically obvious as well. Compare Helen Maroulis at 125lbs and the defending Olympic female freestyle gold medalist at that weight compared to Thomas Gilman, the US men’s wrestler at the same weight who has just qualified for the Olympics for the first time in his international career and is a long shot at finding the podium this year. Helen is the technically better wrestler. I show her technique to wrestlers 10x more often than I show Gilman’s. Gilman would wreck Maroulis just through sheer physicality.

 

[SinNombre]

You realize that his original comment is being made about weight lifting, a sport that he’s already said he is involved with at the Olympic training level?

He isn’t who brought cycling into a discussion about weight lifting.

This is the comment that I replied to

it would be surprising to me if USA cycling (or whatever they are called) would be th one aiding Lance in his cheating.

 

[Carolina Red]

This is the comment that I replied to

I know, but I’m just pointing out that the guy started talking about doping in an Olympic sport he is directly involved in, but somehow cycling is what is being focused on. He’s not claiming to have any knowledge of cycling, he just said he’d be surprised.

 

[Xeno]

This is a simple issue. Transwomen (with an XY chromosome pair) should not be competing in women's sport. Putting transwomen up against biological women is trashing women's rights. If you see it as an issue of competing rights, then there are way more biological women in the world than transwomen. So biological women's rights rule.

XX vs XY isn’t even that simple. You’re simple.

 

[stepic]

The article I read said that Laurel Hubbard is the first.

There you go. The way some people are talking here it’s as if trans women are going to start taking over and dominating women’s sports.

They’ve been able to do so since 2004. And we have one Olympian.

 

[stepic]

This is a simple issue. Transwomen (with an XY chromosome pair) should not be competing in women's sport. Putting transwomen up against biological women is trashing women's rights. If you see it as an issue of competing rights, then there are way more biological women in the world than transwomen. So biological women's rights rule.

Why would putting trans women against women be trashing women’s rights… when trans women are women?

Also, since when does the rule of majority apply to rights? Every discriminated minority in the world says feck that.

 

[Martial'sEmergingSmile]

Interesting to see Tennis brought up here because we had Renee Richards male-to-female transwoman competing and highest rank was 20th and no WTA titles to name. Never made it past 3rd round in US open (eliminated twice in the first round).

The fact that Renee Richards even got to 20th in the world was a genuinely wild achievement.

Long before transitioning, she was a college athlete who excelled at multiple sports. In her own words she had 'pure athleticism' - she was 6ft2, muscular, a starter for the (American) Football team, a baseball pitcher who was invited for trials at the Yankees, a dominant swimmer...the list goes on.

Into her late-30s, and still pre-transition, she was a decent player in the Over-35s scene. Like most of the players she was competing against, she had a full-time job and it was all played purely recreationally.

She transitioned at 41 and after a year's break from all sport she started entering regional women's competitions. She absolutely crushed the fields. At one competition in La Jolla she didn't drop a single game never mind a set, despite playing against women at their peak.

She then played pro for 4 years. The average height of the Women's Tour in 1977 when she played her first US Open was 5ft5. Renee was 6ft2.

Her professional career lasted from age 43-47. Even though the vast majority of her opponents were two decades younger and had dedicated their entire lives to the game, Renee still managed to reach Number 20 in the world.

Renee herself, in her interesting autobiography, is dismissive of people looking on her career as an achievement. She actually has a lot of regrets about it:

"The thought of having 'professional tennis player' in my obituary fills me with embarrassment. Having lived for the past 30 years, having researched scientifically and looked in my own heart, I know that if I'd had surgery in my 20s - or even earlier - and then played on the women's tour, that no genetic woman in the world would have had a chance. They wouldn't have come close. Not even the greats of the game. With more knowledge, it's something I've altered my opinion on dramatically."

 

[Ajr]

Her professional career lasted from age 43-47. Even though the vast majority of her opponents were two decades younger and had dedicated their entire lives to the game, Renee still managed to reach Number 20 in the world.

Renee herself, in her interesting autobiography, is dismissive of people looking on her career as an achievement. She actually has a lot of regrets about it:

"The thought of having 'professional tennis player' in my obituary fills me with embarrassment. Having lived for the past 30 years, having researched scientifically and looked in my own heart, I know that if I'd had surgery in my 20s - or even earlier - and then played on the women's tour, that no genetic woman in the world would have had a chance. They wouldn't have come close. Not even the greats of the game. With more knowledge, it's something I've altered my opinion on dramatically."

What is a difference from now to then are the rules about tracking hormone levels and also the medicine itself trans women take is different.

Athletes would also be required to demonstrate that their total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months prior to their first competition. (Olympic rule)
From my knowledge and the studies I looked at, while over 12 months it does decrease performance rapidly and a lot, probably 2 years or a bit more should be the rule in elite competition.

Interestingly enough tennis is actually stricter than the IOC with half the amount of testosterone allowed by the looks of it?

 

[Carolina Red]

Why would putting trans women against women be trashing women’s rights… when trans women are women?

Also, since when does the rule of majority apply to rights? Every discriminated minority in the world says feck that.

I’m sorry, but when it comes to athletic competition, it just isn’t the same.

“longitudinal studies [53, 63–73] have examined the effects of testosterone suppression on lean body mass or muscle size in transgender women. The collective evidence from these studies suggests that 12 months, which is the most commonly examined intervention period, of testosterone suppression to female-typical reference levels results in a modest (approximately − 5%) loss of lean body mass or muscle size (Table (Table4).4). No study has reported muscle loss exceeding the − 12% found by Gooren and Bunck after 3 years of therapy. Notably, studies have found very consistent changes in lean body mass (using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) after 12 months of treatment, where the change has always been between − 3 and − 5% on average, with slightly greater reductions in the arm compared with the leg region [68]. Thus, given the large baseline differences in muscle mass between males and females (Table (Table1;1; approximately 40%), the reduction achieved by 12 months of testosterone suppression can reasonably be assessed as small relative to the initial superior mass. We, therefore, conclude that the muscle mass advantage males possess over females, and the performance implications thereof, are not removed by the currently studied durations (4 months, 1, 2 and 3 years) of testosterone suppression in transgender women. In sports where muscle mass is important for performance, inclusion is therefore only possible if a large imbalance in fairness, and potentially safety in some sports, is to be tolerated.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7846503/

 

[Wibble]

It is a really complex issue and I don't pretend to have an answer and thankfully we may have some time to better understand the issues as we don't have a huge number of contentious cases at the moment.

So IMO transgender people can't just have their rights to compete denied out of hand because Stuart from Luton thinks it's bollocks. Likewise you can't ignore (mainly) biologically female athletes' right to participate in a fair competition and be rewarded for their years of dedication and training. You also have athletes who aren't transitioning but who aren't strictly biologically 100% men or women e.g. Caster Semenya. Then as I've stated earlier I'm really uncomfortable with a sporting organisation dictating/imposing medical treatments on athletes to comply with sporting rules.

Maybe there isn't an answer that will be morally and ethically fair and manageable? Feck knows.

 

[Sky1981]

It is a really complex issue and I don't pretend to have an answer and thankfully we may have some time to better understand the issues as we don't have a huge number of contentious cases at the moment.

So IMO transgender people can't just have their rights to compete denied out of hand because Stuart from Luton thinks it's bollocks. Likewise you can't ignore (mainly) biologically female athletes' right to participate in a fair competition and be rewarded for their years of dedication and training. You also have athletes who aren't transitioning but who aren't strictly biologically 100% men or women e.g. Caster Semenya. Then as I've stated earlier I'm really uncomfortable with a sporting organisation dictating/imposing medical treatments on athletes to comply with sporting rules.

Maybe there isn't an answer that will be morally and ethically fair and manageable? Feck knows.

100% correct.

Now the issue is, until we find a more soluble solution, do we allow or disallow for the time being?

 

[Stacks]

100% correct.

Now the issue is, until we find a more soluble solution, do we allow or disallow for the time being?

separate category seems the best option but people say it is exclusionary when all sport is exclusionary. There seems to be little controversy about trans males competing with biological males in top level sport. It seems a one way train for some reason

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

I saw an interview, (I think Conan) where Serena admits that she wouldn't win a game against Andy Murray and that she loves playing women's tennis. She said something that the men are so much faster and hit the ball so much harder.

 

[Sky1981]

I don't know about how other countries feel, but Hubard going for New Zealand meant she replaced the original woman athletes who already sacrificed their live to become an Olympic athletes.

How's that fair?

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

It is a really complex issue and I don't pretend to have an answer and thankfully we may have some time to better understand the issues as we don't have a huge number of contentious cases at the moment.

So IMO transgender people can't just have their rights to compete denied out of hand because Stuart from Luton thinks it's bollocks. Likewise you can't ignore (mainly) biologically female athletes' right to participate in a fair competition and be rewarded for their years of dedication and training. You also have athletes who aren't transitioning but who aren't strictly biologically 100% men or women e.g. Caster Semenya. Then as I've stated earlier I'm really uncomfortable with a sporting organisation dictating/imposing medical treatments on athletes to comply with sporting rules.

Maybe there isn't an answer that will be morally and ethically fair and manageable? Feck knows.

No Caster is biologically female.

 

[Alex99]

No Caster is biologically female.

Caster has XY chromosomes and internal (possibly now descended) testes. It really isn't as clear cut as saying she's biologically female just because that's how she may have been raised.

 

[Wibble]

No Caster is biologically female.

I'm not sure it is that clear cut especially as her exact medical status is private.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

I'm not sure it is that clear cut especially as her exact medical status is private.

She has higher levels of testosterone than an average woman but she is still a woman.

 

[Alex99]

She has higher levels of testosterone than an average woman but she is still a woman.

She has XY chromosomes. I don't know why you're ignoring this fact.

 

[stepic]

I’m sorry, but when it comes to athletic competition, it just isn’t the same.

“longitudinal studies [53, 63–73] have examined the effects of testosterone suppression on lean body mass or muscle size in transgender women. The collective evidence from these studies suggests that 12 months, which is the most commonly examined intervention period, of testosterone suppression to female-typical reference levels results in a modest (approximately − 5%) loss of lean body mass or muscle size (Table (Table4).4). No study has reported muscle loss exceeding the − 12% found by Gooren and Bunck after 3 years of therapy. Notably, studies have found very consistent changes in lean body mass (using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) after 12 months of treatment, where the change has always been between − 3 and − 5% on average, with slightly greater reductions in the arm compared with the leg region [68]. Thus, given the large baseline differences in muscle mass between males and females (Table (Table1;1; approximately 40%), the reduction achieved by 12 months of testosterone suppression can reasonably be assessed as small relative to the initial superior mass. We, therefore, conclude that the muscle mass advantage males possess over females, and the performance implications thereof, are not removed by the currently studied durations (4 months, 1, 2 and 3 years) of testosterone suppression in transgender women. In sports where muscle mass is important for performance, inclusion is therefore only possible if a large imbalance in fairness, and potentially safety in some sports, is to be tolerated.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7846503/

either trans women are women or they're not. you can't say 'trans women are women, but not when it comes to athletic competition. in that case they're men'. that is such an absurd hill to die on when it comes to LGBT rights.

and again, as i've already pointed out, there's been one solitary trans woman at the Olympics since 2004, when trans women were first allowed to compete. the discussion in here makes it sound like the women's events are being dominated and taken over by the trans community. that simply isn't the case.

 

[Raees]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...der-and-sex-we-undermine-sporting-competition

 

[Raees]

either trans women are women or they're not. you can't say 'trans women are women, but not when it comes to athletic competition. in that case they're men'. that is such an absurd hill to die on when it comes to LGBT rights.

and again, as i've already pointed out, there's been one solitary trans woman at the Olympics since 2004, when trans women were first allowed to compete. the discussion in here makes it sound like the women's events are being dominated and taken over by the trans community. that simply isn't the case.

It is about being pre emptive as this is becoming more of a thing and if not addressed may completely change the landscape of women's sports in say 20 years.

 

[Alex99]

It is about being pre emptive as this is becoming more of a thing and if not addressed may completely change the landscape of women's sports in say 20 years.

Steptic just seems to want to paint everyone with any concerns as bigoted without going as far as saying it outright. They've been extremely black and white on the subject throughout.

 

[Raees]

Steptic just seems to want to paint everyone with any concerns as bigoted without going as far as saying it outright. They've been extremely black and white on the subject throughout.

Well eventually they will be in the wrong IMO as it simply is not feasible long term. A lot of people just want to stick their head in the sand about it, because too afraid to offend.

 

[Alex99]

Well eventually they will be in the wrong IMO as it simply is not feasible long term. A lot of people just want to stick their head in the sand about it, because too afraid to offend.

For me, it just doesn't sit right that someone aged 43, that didn't transition until their mid-late 30s, and that weightlifted for all of their adult life but wasn't good enough to compete at a high level in male categories, can compete at Olympic level in the female category when the rest of the field is 20 years younger, with people pretending that there's no noticeable biological advantage there.

 

[Wibble]

It is about being pre emptive as this is becoming more of a thing and if not addressed may completely change the landscape of women's sports in say 20 years.

Why? What is going to escalate things?

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

She has XY chromosomes. I don't know why you're ignoring this fact.

If the quote trans women are women is true, then how can you deny that Castor is a woman?

 

[arnie_ni]

Why? What is going to escalate things?

Probably because transition will become more and more regular in the future and it some point it may translate to more and more athletes.

They obviously won't be doing it to increase their chances of sporting success but if its a natural by product of the transition, women athletes rights need to be considered as well.

 

[Alex99]

If the quote trans women are women is true, then how can you deny that Castor is a woman?

Because in this instance we're talking about biology and not identity?

You said:

No Caster is biologically female.

Caster is not biologically female by virtue of having XY chromosomes. She is a biological male, born with an intersex condition that seemingly gave her the outward appearance of a baby girl, and was thus raised as a girl. She can be a woman, but be biologically male. That whole premise is literally the crux of gender identity and transitioning.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Yes, there are few ones but when women play against men of the same elo they perform worse, it can be something psychological but the same happens in other type of sports like motorsports or e-sports.

Look at pianists though. That you have more women playing the piano from a young age, means you get more talented female pianists.

Ever hear of the Polgar sisters. Their father bet that he could teach them to become grandmasters at chess. One of them did.

 

[Mike Smalling]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...der-and-sex-we-undermine-sporting-competition

This seems like a reasonable take.

 

[jojojo]

Why? What is going to escalate things?

A few reasons why people think the balance/numbers may change - things that only matter in theory now, but which have to be considered going forward:
1. Male to female physical transitions are taking place earlier now than in the past. Medical practice has changed and many of the pauses for psychological assessment and counselling are being completed by teenagers. Whereas historically the transition process could take someone years out of their prime adult sporting life. That's before you throw in the fact that historically almost all transitions would be privately funded, - which also tended to mean surgical and even pharmaceutical intervention would be later, whereas now public health care are offering more support.

2. The Olympics committee had previously set the rule as 4 years post-legally declared transition and at least 1 year below the 10nmol/l testosterone limit. They've actually already changed the rules, to focus on testosterone only, and are under pressure to scrap them completely. They then pushed the decision back to individual sports. Broadly though the removal of the 4 year wait + the earlier medical intervention should make it easier for athletes in their 20s to qualify.

3. The bar being raised by a number of lobby groups who have argued that equal treatment for transitioning women should not be dependant on which medical interventions (surgical or pharmaceutical) they have chosen to have or not have. The campaign towards self declaration opens up the possibility of major changes in sporting competition, including cheating.

4. A number of women's sports including football are moving from amateur to semi-pro to pro. The combination of glory and money can tempt people into some genuinely frightening risktaking - so no one should assume that people won't take testosterone lowering drugs for a period just to qualify for a sport where they can be a good pro rather than a decent amateur.
- The special Olympics has long had issues with people mis-declaring their medical status. Having tightened up its criteria and its assessment methodology it now has issues with athletes attempting to change their classification by making a disability worse - either shortterm by reducing medication prior to assessment day or permanently by having an amputated limb stump shortened to suit a category. People don't always behave rationally when it comes to winning medals or making a career in pro sport.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

Because in this instance we're talking about biology and not identity?

You said:


Caster is not biologically female by virtue of having XY chromosomes. She is a biological male, born with an intersex condition that seemingly gave her the outward appearance of a baby girl, and was thus raised as a girl. She can be a woman, but be biologically male. That whole premise is literally the crux of gender identity and transitioning.

This is a tautology

 

[Alex99]

This is a tautology

No it isn't? What are you even on about at this point?

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

No it isn't? What are you even on about at this point?

I don't think what you posted about Caster is accurate. She is a woman with an intersex condition, not a man born and raised as a woman.

 

[Penna]

For me, it just doesn't sit right that someone aged 43, that didn't transition until their mid-late 30s, and that weightlifted for all of their adult life but wasn't good enough to compete at a high level in male categories, can compete at Olympic level in the female category when the rest of the field is 20 years younger, with people pretending that there's no noticeable biological advantage there.

This is exactly how I see it. Laurel is in her 40s now, and yet she's been selected for the Olympics - despite not being anywhere near good enough when she was competing as a man 20 years previously.

In respect of an athlete who's been taking part in a sport for a couple of decades, I can't think of any sport which requires strength, skill and power where you get better in your 40s. Nothing improves in your 40s in respect of sporting prowess.