Firstly I shall start off by linking the source material to this touchy subject...
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/feb/24/terr...
How does everyone else feel about this?
The story being the two transgender (Male to female) competed and came 1st and 2nd in a womens meet in the US.(also breaking all previous records)
I'm all for transgender people to identify with however they feel and hope we can all live with each other and be understanding.
However, some lines must be drawn... I've said for a long time that when the claim becomes a biological claim... I.e. X not only identifies as female but claims to actually be one.
This will lead to a very slippery slope!
I really feel for biological women and their chances in sport to succeed... if this continues I worry that essentially all sports will be competed by males and trans male to females.
The statistics are all there, look at any event and women cannot compete with biological men.
One example is the womens 100m sprint, joyner has an over 30yr old world record in the event at 10.49 seconds.
However, this would not even make the top 250 times of mens this year alone!
I suppose I've always been a 2nd wave feminist at heart and want women to have a fair chance and equal opportunities not only in work but yes, in sport and any other path.
Could a trans only event help aid this? I would like them to get the spot light and feel valued too, although I fear there would be an obvious backlash to an individual event.
Thoughts?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
This is one of those areas where I disagree with the "Liberal Left." A transgender is a 4th or 5th gender. Male, Female, Micros, Transgenders, Hermaphrodites and I fully admit there is a large range of genders. I have no problem with them identifying as a gender. I have no problem, generally, calling them by their chosen gender identity. (I have a problem with them lying to me about their gender, especially as a single man well traveled in Asia. I have a few stories.) Transgender men are not women. They are "Transgenders." Transgender men are not women. They are transgenders. IMO - If you are going to go through the trouble of becoming a transgender you should be proud of yourself and your accomplishment and simply call yourself a transgender. I am opposed to transgenders participating in sports events as their surgically altered gender. For transgender females competing as men, they are allowed to use hormones which gives them an unfair advantage. For transgender men competing as women, they have a biological advantage (University found that men’s upper body muscles were twice as strong as women’s (Miller et al., 1993). The authors noted that the difference was linked to the type of muscle fibers, and their data suggested it was an innate difference, rather than a result of men’s inclination to work out more.
University of Iowa: Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks, including mental rotation, which is the ability to identify how a 3-D object would appear if rotated in space. A new study shows a connection between this sex-linked ability and the structure of the parietal lobe, the brain region that controls this type of skill. (This gives them a distinct advantage in sports like tennis, baseball, etc....) Nov. 5 by the journal Brain and Cognition.
A transgender male should not be allowed to compete as a female. IMO. They can call themselves whatever they want but in the end, THEY ARE, biologically different than the sex they have converted to.
A Trans only event is a fine option.
I honestly don't know how to answer this topic. It's certainly of little concern or immediate relevance to me.
I think society can organize events as seems acceptable. I doubt the international community as represented in events such as the Olympic Games will allow transgender individuals into women's events any time soon for example.
@Sapporo
Actually, trans women have been able to compete in the Olympics since 2004. They were required to be on hormones (which includes a testosterone blocker) for 2 years. That has since been lowered to 1 year. However, no openly trans person has competed in the Olympics yet. They also have a limit on the amount of testosterone a competing woman is allowed to have. Dutee Chand, a ciswoman, was disqualified in 2014 because her natural testosterone levels were above the range they deemed "normal" for female athletes.
Thanks for the info. I learned something today. Are hormones the great equalizer or are there still significant biological differences in the muscles and brains? (I gotta leave this one for the biologists.) I fully get trying to make the completion fair. But in the case of a transgender, can it be fair? I lean towards "No."
I totally see where you're coming from. I think hormones are the thing that make the most difference (talk to any transwoman or transman about how much both their bodies and brains changed when going on hormone treatment), but there are still other variations that may not change. My view is just that if we're going to divide by gender, we should allow all people of that gender to participate, even if they have physical advantages.
Also a small note: In common usage, "transgender" in an adjective, not a noun. I know it's a pretty new term for most. Calling someone "a transgender" would be the same as calling someone "a gay". Rather, we'd say that someone "is transgender" or "is gay".
The only sports that mean anything to me are kids' sports. I grew up paying rugby. I watched my daughter playing field hockey and my son playing soccer. Now my granddaughters are starting. They're pretty hopeless, but it's fun to watch them trying their best and experiencing a triumph once in while.
Adult sports are all about people wrecking their long-term health with steroids and injuries, while making lots of money for doing things that a horse or an otter could do 10 times better. The performers sacrifice their childhoods to practice every waking hour. And the whole point is to sell breakfast cereals and shoes.
A character in Kurt Vonnegut's "Breakfast of Champions" sums it up well when he asks the father of an Olympic swimming champion, "What kind of man would turn his daughter into an outboard motor?"
This is where biology and social issues mix. Personally I am a very strong supporter of equal rights, no matter what gender. I hold to the agenda that everyone is to be treated equally, no one group should be allowed to bulldoze over any other group. No matter how any group was treated in the past, that does not confer them any special status. It is just a sad part of our history, hopefully something we can learn from.
If you were born with a male body, you have certain advantages and disadvantages compared to one born with a female body. And vice versa. No amount of surgery or hormones will change that.
The only true way for equality in sports is to strip away any distinctions or groups. If a person born a female desires to pay ice hockey, there is no special league, that person plays with whoever also competes. And if that person finds themselves competing against players much stronger and heavier, it was their choice to compete in that discipline.
Traditionally we had two distinct groups, males and females. And as we all know, now we have a multitude. And it extends beyond just gender issues. We have the Special Olympics for those mentally challenged, and we have the Paralympic Games. Just for the record, I hold each of those groups dear to my heart and hold everyone to high esteem.
But where do we stop? Because now each new group dilutes the prestige of any championship or medal.
I perceive this issue as one of two paths. We either strive for true equality, or we continue to make divisions.
I cast my lot with equality.
Having actually dated a transgender that was originally male, my whole take is as she saw it: "Society, yes. Sports, no." Made perfect sense to me then, still does now.
rmfr
Thank you all for taking the time to comment, it has certainly been interesting to see different takes on the matter.
I have to make a point in regards to David Killens post, "Traditionally we had two distinct groups, males and females. And as we all know, now we have a multitude."
I don't on the whole agree with this if we are talking sexes I.e. biological sex.
I completely agree anyone can self identify as anything they wish and equally I would call them as they wish to be called... not a problem!
But biological sex is what it is and there is no multitude of options in my opinion, given that all mammels can only reproduce via male/female... it is how we have evolved.
I also had a little thought that if we was to have a 'utopia' where all males lived (preferably, the most highly fertile) and paired them with trans persons of a Male to female kind, how many generations would that civilisation last?
Again, I'm all for trans people being treated with dignity and self identifying, but I do not buy the claim put forward as a biological one.
"I have to make a point in regards to David Killens post, "Traditionally we had two distinct groups, males and females. And as we all know, now we have a multitude.""
I was referring from an organizational viewpoint, where competition organizers need to find categories.
My apologies David, and I concur with that.
I nearly posted a similar response David. I saw Randomhero and just let it go. Thanks for the clarification. I completely agree.
@OP by Randomhero1982
Many sports have lots of rules that the organizing bodies put in to try to make them fair.
Perhaps I am just shortsighted, but why not just a rule where transgender (esp men to women) has to have a sustained estrogen level over at least a years period of time (as well as the time of the competition) if they want to participate. An estrogen (and possibly others like testosterone) levels that would put them in line physically with other people of the gender divided sport they want to play in.
A real measurable line. A line placed via careful scientific finding and research. Just like how athletes must submit to test for steroids etc. in many competitions.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Just ban all sports. Problem solved.
I would miss baseball so much, even as a brit I never miss a Yankees game lol
Peurii: Just ban all sports. Problem solved
I agree. I miss the good ole days when men could chop down trees and chase Tin Men through the streets of town wielding axes and crow bars. We did fine without sports for centuries. We could do just fine without them again.
@Cog Re: "I miss the good ole days when men could chop down trees and chase Tin Men through the streets of town wielding axes and crow bars."
I have to admit, I got some damn good exercise back in those days.
I don't see the problem with some transwomen having an "advantage" over some/all ciswomen. We're fine with the many different variations of advantage amongst ciswomen. A 5'10" ciswoman doesn't have a chance of being the world's best gymnast. We don't claim that as unfair. A 5'2" ciswoman has almost no shot at playing in the WNBA. We don't say it's unfair that the 6'+ players take away opportunity from shorter women. There are plenty of advantages that individuals are just born with, whether that's height, muscle mass, weight, etc. Yeah, some transwomen will have a physical advantage over the majority or even all ciswomen, but they're women, and if we're dividing a sport by gender, they should be playing with other women.
But there are other ways that fairness can be approached. Telling certain women that they aren't allowed to compete with other women because they have a physical advantage (isn't having an advantage a big point of sport?) seems the wrong way to approach it. Depending on the sport, we could divide participants by height, weight, muscle mass, or even hormone levels instead of gender. Note that ciswomen who have naturally high levels of testosterone are hypothesized to be tougher physical competitors than ciswomen with lower testosterone. Dividing by hormone levels could give those ciswomen with lower testosterone levels a chance to be at the top of their competing class. Dividing by height could give the ciswoman who is 5'10" the opportunity to be a badass in her gymnastics tier. I'm all for working to even the playing field so that individuals, regardless of gender, can compete against other people with similar physical ability.
For those of you who disagree: If we won't allow transwomen to compete against ciswomen because they have too much of a physical advantage, would we disqualify a ciswoman whose body was uncommonly strong/tall/etc and had the same natural physical advantages? Would you allow a transwoman to compete with ciswomen if she was deemed to have the same physical ability?
(Edited for clarity)
@Stone Jade
You bring up interesting points I agree with.
Playings devil's advocate here, another thorny issue that complicates matters.
Many of us are aware of Lance Armstrong and how he cheated to win tour de France, and later it turned out "cheating" is widespread in pro level cycling. Blood doping, hidden batteries and motors, and ofcourse things like steroids and testosterone plus many other methods.
At the highest levels of any competitive sport, the difference between winning and losing quickly begins to be razor thin. A 5% increase in muscle mass for the relevant muscles at this level is absolutely the difference between winning or losing.
Many sports out of necessity, (athletes ruining their bodies in a short time period,) ban steroids and possibly even testosterone. If a transgender woman has elevated levels of muscle mass, steroids and testosterone due to the genderswap, how is that fair when other woman are barred from access to steroids and testosterone?
Devil's advocate gets even more interesting when you say: why can't someone that is not disabled be banned from participating in special olympics? Are people allowed to form a sport and setup rules that define the sport, with some of those being testosterone, estrogen, steroids, biological sex being some of those?
What about those folks that have prosthetics that give them an advantage over people with normal limbs? Rules in a game attempt to keep the game fair, where do you draw the line at cheating?
To me it comes down to the sport organization and rule makers to decide how to keep a sport fair.
Also note: I consider myself an LGBTQ ally and have several LGBTQ friends as well as acquaintances. To me, if the lgbtq crowd wants equality, then they should respect the rules of the sport. But in turn, highly recognized popular sports should also make changes as needed to their rules to best accomadate any new realities lgbTq represent.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
@LogicFTW
"If a transgender woman has elevated levels of muscle mass, steroids and testosterone due to the genderswap, how is that fair when other woman are barred from access to steroids and testosterone?"
All women are born with different levels of hormones and muscle mass. That's not fair or unfair, we just all have different bodies. Men with more testosterone than others aren't punished for it. There have actually been conversations about excluding ciswomen with high levels of testosterone. It seems arbitrary to me to say "at X point, this person is no longer considered a woman and cannot compete."
"Are people allowed to form a sport and setup rules that define the sport, with some of those being testosterone, estrogen, steroids, biological sex being some of those?"
I hear you. But as of now, in most cases, the distinction is dividing men and women. If someone wants to talk about dividing based on hormone levels or whether someone has a penis or vagina (which is also somewhat of a spectrum) then that's a totally different conversation. But transwomen *are* women, so they fit the set criteria. At this point, yes, organizations are allowed to make distinctions on who classifies as a woman and can participate, but my hope is that they will feel pressured by the public to allow transwomen to compete with other women. A group of badass powerlifters in Minnesota just protested the exclusion of transwomen from their competition by standing still and not even attempting their lifts. *That* is women standing up for women. Check it out here: https://barbend.com/usapl-transgender-ban-protest/
I'm concerned if sport starts defining who women are in terms of their size, hormones, genitals, etc., those parameters could become culturally accepted views that affect the way trans women are treated (and mistreated) in daily life. Though that's not necessarily an argument against an organization choosing it's own rules, it's definitely a personal concern.
@Stone Jade
Solid point. As I said I was playing a bit of devil's advocate to create more conversation, as this is a debate/conversation I am fairly passionate about (I consider my self an lgbtq ally with multiple lgbtq friends and acquaintances.)
Me personally I would put that "line" pretty high for estrogen/testosterone etc measurements, for large highly organized and lucrative sports. Like taking the average of the highest 100 levels measured for females, then comparing that to average of 100 lowest for men in say testosterone levels.
Basically something that would be in place only to prevent blatant abuse, like an extreme scenario of a highly trained and skilled male athlete claiming to identify as a woman without true transgender feelings, to pick up a few easier gold medals in say the olympics. Or to swap it, a female claiming to be a male in something like gymnastics taking their biological advantage to win more medals w/o actually really identifying as a male.
That is awesome, thanks for sharing that link.
I fully agree and think it is a very valid concern based on the track record of how somewhat similar scenarios have been handled in the past. I think if done right it could empower and help transgenders, giving a very clear path for them do fully and honestly and fairly participate in sports and help prevent abuses. Done wrong and it could make things worse for transgenders.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Sure, trans women are women when considered under the scope of how we self identify... but not biologically, this is self evident in biology and science unless I've missed some massive development and concensus amongst biologists
As I said, and I believe it holds... if we had a utopia in which 1m healthy trans (men to women) were paired with the most healthy and fertile biological born men, the generation would die out in its first stage.
But if there is pier review to the contrary then I humbly apologise and retract this.
I'm also not sure the analogies stand up in regards to weight or height stand... you mentioned height in the WNBA and someone short wouldn't make it.
That's not accurate, if we look at the NBA if you have the skill you can make it! Not everyone is 7ft Shaquelle O'Neil-esque.
The greatest of all time in Michael Jordan was relatively short comparatively to the big players like Shaq.
Anyways, it's a tough subject to broach, I guess I feel some empathy to women who have only just broken in the sporting sphere and gaining notoriety... if any biological born sex could compete in any female sport we may never have heard of greats like Serena Williams.
The idea of separating via different parameter could be tricky, which do we choose?
- testosterone
- estrogen
- specific biomarkers-
- hormone levels
- muscle mass
- genetics
- bone density
Very tough.
@Randomhero1982
I don't think anyone would argue with that inevitable result. Unless medical science got to the point where the female sex organs were no longer required to reproduce. I don't think even most transgender people would argue that inevitable conclusion. Not sure why you brought it up twice in this thread though.
This is true, but you also never see people under 5 foot making it to the NBA level either. Ever play basketball with a little kid? Even if the kid practices a lot, and it is the first time you ever played basketball, and you are 6 foot and in reasonable shape, if you as a 6 foot person played to win, it is likely the kid under 4 foot would stand zero chance. This becomes especially true in the extremely competitive NBA level.
Yeah he might have been short compared to Shaq, but Jordan was still 6'6" and only 10% shorter than Shaq. If Jordan was 5'4" none of us would ever heard of him.
Why not all of them, and perhaps more? Any that could help make the sport more fair. Just like we split up sports by age. Or boxing/wrestling etc by weight?
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Apologies if my repeating it came across in an enforcing tone, I was just reiterating the point.
As I said I'm 100% behind people self identifying and would call anyone by whatever they wish, it was just when its mooted as a biological claim that I have a disagreement.
And simply it's just from a scientific point of view, if they scientific community came out tomorrow and said to the contrary I would 100% back it providing the research and pier review has taken place.
Ok fair point, Jordan was still tall! I just meant comparatively to Shaq! 10% is still quite some disadvantage..
But perhaps I should have said someone like Tyrone Bogues who was 5ft 3in I believe and managed to make it in the NBA.
Even managing to block Patrick Ewing who is 7ft!
I believe it was mostly down to his incredibly leaping ability where he could reportedly clear 40 inches.
You have others like Isaiah Thomas, Nate Robinson and obviously Allen Iverson who just reached 6ft and was amazing in the NBA.
I think skill is more the necessary component, Mike Tyson was short (comparatively)but I would claim at his peak he was arguably one of the greatest boxers of all time(my personal favourite).
Lionel Messi is incredibly short in footballing terms, due to a genetic defect and is yet often touted as the greatest of all time.
Laura Kenny(Nee Trott) wasn't the most powerfully built female cyclist and yet is a multiple gold medalist and one of the greats of all time...
I'm sure this reaches across all sports.
I think your last paragraph is the most realistic event, but will be incredibly difficult to enforce..
Boxing especially where the sheer amount of physiological difference would come to bare... muscles mass, bone density, testosterone and so on.
But here hoping some logic and reason can conspire to help all parties.
@Randomhero1982
I'm a little confused about why you've focused both here and in your response above on arguing that it's more about merit than bodies. That sounds to me like an argument to allow transwomen to compete with ciswomen, since ciswomen, even though they might be smaller or muscled differently, could still make it into the big leagues with their skill and finesse. Or am I just confused and that *is* what you are arguing?
@Randomhero1982
I wondered if you would mention him. The shortest NBA player on record. But he did have a succesful career. Certainly the exception to the rule rather then the norm. But awesome nonetheless. After him you have to go all the way up to 5'7" to find another player that actually had a succesful NBA career. And the NBA is a rather extreme example of "physical" requirement. In U.S. football for instance, there are so many highly specialized roles that allows for a lot of leeway. (If you are a frontline linebacker or something, if you only weigh 140 pounds you are going to get completely crushed every time. But you could be a succesful kicker.)
I am hoping for the same. So much politics and drama tied up in sports. What happened with Colin Kaepernick for example...
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Indeed muggsy was epic! I'd also have to add Allen Iversen to the debate, who at 6ft (relatively small in comparison to your KDs, Lebron's etc... was absolutely amazing in his prime.
But I do wonder if there is some sort of bias going on at least in the past in regards to physiology within the NBA?!
Totally agree with physiology within sports for certain areas like you said with kickers in NFL...
I doubt a 5"7 player in the NBA will play centre?! Lol
I think this is why I love baseball, it's purely on skill and athleticism.
And I completely agree in regards to Kaepernick, he was treated woefully and the NFL are just sweeping it under the rug.
Granted he wasn't particularly good... certainly no Aaron Rodgers, but still it was a shitty move by those in charge.
I wonder what would have been the reaction if it was an Beckham Jr or Antonio Brown?
In sports there should be no gender/sex debate. It’s either male or female and you should compete in the gender/sex to which you are biologically born in to for obvious reasons. If you are start letting men compete vs women well, we already know the outcome. Born male = compete vs men. Born female = compete vs females. In addition to OP’s article look up the transgender high school wrestler in Texas. Of course there are a plethora of other articles and stories as well.
Edit to add
If anyone competitor is going through any kind of hormone therapy then, they should not be allowed to compete in either division (male or female) as that could also give them a competitive edge.
@Searching for truth
I would say there should be no biological sex debate, (outside of a few rare birth anomalies.)
And I think there should be no gender debate either.
But that only works if you separate biological sex identification from self gender identity.
To me, people should be allowed to be whatever gender they identify with, even if it that identity is in flux. Just like what biological sex a person is when they are born is not really up for question eithir. Outside of a few rare cases, if you have the male sex organs and the presence of the "Y" chromosome. Your biological sex is clearly male at birth. All of us start off as female embryos, and only the presence of a Y chromosome (along with a few other things) turns us into males while in the womb.
Competitive edge is a tough one, like others have said, a basketball player that is 7'2" will have a competitive advantage over a 5'3" player. Yet no one would stop a 7'2" player from playing just because that person ended up being taller due to genetics/environment. But certainly people stop a 25 year old basketball player playing in say: the middle school organized basketball tournaments.
I did competitive skiing when I was younger and after that competitive starcraft/starcraft 2. I consider starcraft 2 to be one of the "hardest" intellectual sports in the world, exponentially more difficult to play and master then chess. (Maybe not timed/speed chess though.) Anyways, in both skiing and starcraft 2, I had access to tools, resources and time that many others did not. My parents could for instance afford to take my to ski camps, and rent a hotel right at the mountain for competition days, giving me an edge over my competitors. Or in Starcraft, I had access to a more reliable internet connection and the latest computer equipment that gave me an edge over those that did not have access. I did not break any of the "set" rules. But having say a 8 button mouse and a keyboard that I could remap keys definitely gave me a powerful competitive edge over players that did not have access to that.
My final point with the above paragraph is, the sport gets to set the rules and how they want to make it fair. There should be room to allow transgenders to play the sport with the gender they identify with, but perhaps with a few well thought out, fair rules to make sure it is not abused.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
That's fairly true and I agree to a certain level but we do need to consider also that the 5ft 3 Male would also have advantages of the taller opponent of the same sex.
I.e. He would likely be faster, quicker reflexes, better athleticism, more agile, have better stamina and be less prone to fatigue and injury.
Hed also likely have a longer career.
Whereas a female 5ft3 player compared to the Male 7 footer, would not only struggle with the height, but also the aggression, physicality, strength etc..
They wouldn't have the skeletal structure of their opponents, nor would they have the muscle mass and various other physiological advantages.
Pages