Jump to content

Transgender athletes


Curious layman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Ok, 

In general sports as pastimes - "fun and games" then any differences, advantages, weaknesses... are less important since as the good PC brigade keep ramming down our throats "its the taking part that counts". Fine this works just dandy.

But at the elite level where "professional" sports people are competing at the highest level and are earning their living from this then the distinction between differences, advantages, weaknesses become majorly important, to keep things as "fair" or rather, as equally opportunistic for those people.

   

Ha ha,

Nobody said they are, we are discussing why they should/shouldn't be allowed the opportunity to do so in the first place.

How many times in history people have suffered the consequences out of ignorance? 

Me personally I couldn't give a shite since it doesn't really affect me if Mr Joe decides to become Miss Jo and kick everyone's ass. It just amazes me that people are so afraid to speak of such, even to ignore the very evolution of humankind just because it doesn't fit in within modern western society.  

Crack on if it fits in with PC, and makes everybody feel better about themselves. 

My point being that, in my humble and perhaps archaic opinion, this world is a bit fucked up and we have bigger problems to worry about other than all this over bearing PC.  

Great post and I gave you a like also. 😉

Yes, sadly extreme nonsensical PC does exist. I gave one example earlier. And just as sadly maybe the cause of the rise of the extreme looney right brigade and the Trumpists. 

The other rather notable situation that has developed is the facetiousness and sarcasm directed at anyone that dare stray from this extreme PC, under the guise of humour. That of course is evident with the uses of the positive and neg rep situations also. Stands out like dog balls sadly. A sadness reflected more as this being a science forum, is supposed to be populated with the highly educated with degrees and such, although I think that misuse and facetiousness only applies to probably a few, not all.

Anyway I'm off! Election day and I am handing out "how to vote" cards.!!

3 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Neither. Merely brief.

In an effort to minimize misconstruction. Evidently futile. 

And I don't believe you. Although you may get a like for your usual facetiousness. 

Edited by beecee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Neither. Merely brief.

In an effort to minimize misconstruction. Evidently futile. 

Brevity leads to more potential interpretations, potentially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, beecee said:

And I don't believe you. 

 

12 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

When have I ever given the impression that I disapprove of equal pay for women?

And now in your efforts of one-upmanship, you chose to be dishonest. I never said anything about you disproving equal pay.

I said.....

21 minutes ago, beecee said:

And I don't believe you. Although you may get a like for your usual facetiousness. 

NOTE: Facetiousness.

16 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Neither. Merely brief.

In an effort to minimize misconstruction. Evidently futile.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, iNow said:

Unless, of course, you're the transgendered person, or parent or loved one of a transgendered person, who's being needlessly discriminated against as a result of some not so humble yet extremely archaic opinions and assumptions. 

 

Okay INow. Let's say you have a son that transgenders to female and is capable of dominating female sports. They are going to let her play if she reaches arbitrary testosterone targets that are not the best for her. She's dedicated, wants to play and wants to win. She's willing to sacrifice her long term health (or not) to reach the arbitrary target.  How would you feel about that? 

You have another daughter equally dedicated that also wants to play. She's also willing to alter her testosterone level, and sacrifice her long term health, to make herself competitive enough to win. She's even willing to stay within the limits of the same target forced on transgenders (or arguably said incentivizing transgenders with possible eligibility they won't otherwise have). How do you feel about that?

8 hours ago, iNow said:

Categorize based on skill and ability and merit. Ignore gender, and sex, and how they identify or how they sit or stand when they pee.

Who is going to judge skill and ability prior to the game, never mind judge "merit". (French and Russian figure skating judges notwithstanding) for high level sport.

 

8 hours ago, iNow said:

Why is this such an appalling and unacceptable idea to so very many? Why is it so hard to agree here that sports qualification criteria shouldn't care how you were classified at birth and how it should instead be focused on qualifications based on sport-specific thresholds?

It really isn't at recreational level. But at top level it's "Citius, Altius, Fortius" not "Arbitrarius Mediocus"

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

No one ever has their mind changed by what other people post on the Internet.  I doubted the truth of that until I read a very persuasive proof on a message board.

I never thought I'd agree about that, but you've made such a compelling argument I have to admit you're right.

Edited by J.C.MacSwell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, beecee said:

all else aside, I'm saying that if your proposal was the status quo, then not much would actually change.

And that’s a feature, not a bug. No unfair advantages. No more exclusions based on arbitrary historical reasons. Competitors don’t get displaced. It’s win-win.

This is a problem… how, exactly?

3 hours ago, beecee said:

I'm pretty sure that the status quo and men and women sports segregations, will remain as is. Why? because it is the morally correct thing to do.

Your morals are clearly shit, and I thought you were better than this. 

30 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

How would you feel about that? 

I feel that my actual position and actual proposal solves for it, renders your concerns moot, and if enough people could simply extract their heads from their bungholes they might agree it’s the simplest, most logical, amd most fair approach and it could have a chance of becoming a reality. 

But alas… people often seem to get rather mad when you try to assist them in removing their craniums from their colons. 

34 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Who is going to judge skill and ability prior to the game, never mind judge "merit"

Are you unfamiliar with try-outs in sports or physical skills testing? It’s no wonder you’re so confused. 

35 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

It really isn't at recreational level. But at top level it's

Last I checked, it was middle school and high school kids having laws written to prevent them from playing.

And frankly, if a trans person can make it to the very pinnacle of their sport, then good for them… but I’m talking about legislation being directed at already marginalized kids in schools who simply want to play sports… laws that make it explicitly illegal for them to do so. 

This isn’t hypothetical. It’s happening. Where I live. Real children are getting hurt. And for what? Because we’re too lazy to update divisional thresholds to be based on skill and not how someone urinates?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, iNow said:

 

I feel that my actual position and actual proposal solves for it, renders your concerns moot, and if enough people could simply extract their heads from their bungholes they might agree it’s the simplest, most logical, amd most fair approach and it could have a chance of becoming a reality. 

But alas… people often seem to get rather mad when you try to assist them in removing their craniums from their colons. 

I don't follow. Which daughter has your proposal solved for? Are they both taking drugs to either; over suppress testosterone beyond a healthy limit, or enhance it in an unhealthy manner? Have you explained that their health is paramount and they should avoid the sport at that level? Have you supported one and not the other? Please explain.

Help me remove my head from my bunghole.

Because if you're right it's firmly in there. I don't see any solution vaguely remote, never mind obvious, in what you are proposing for anything beyond recreational sport.

Edited by J.C.MacSwell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

Brevity leads to more potential interpretations, potentially.

Damned either way. I tried explaining fully. I tried being brief and direct. Failed at both. Sucks to be me. 

1 hour ago, beecee said:

And now in your efforts of one-upmanship, you chose to be dishonest. I never said anything about you disproving equal pay.

I said.....

1 hour ago, beecee said:

And I don't believe you. Although you may get a like for your usual facetiousness. 

NOTE: Facetiousness.

You said you support equal pay. I said "commendable". You didn't like that. I took it back, even though I approve. You don't believe that. Or you don't believe I meant it. Or something.

What, precisely, do you want?

18 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Which daughter has your proposal solved for?

Both.

18 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Are they both taking drugs to either; over suppress testosterone beyond a healthy limit, or enhance it in an unhealthy manner?

Neither. The stupid law that forced them to choose has been struck down.

 

19 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I don't follow.

Evidently.

Edited by Peterkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Proposal: Allow transgender males steroids to increase their testosterone well beyond normal male range so that they can be competitive in top level sports.

Not that it would actually be enough (because though significant it's not all about testosterone), but if it was...how would this be different from many of the current proposals for transgender females inclusion in female sports?

42 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Both.

Neither. The stupid law that forced them to choose has been struck down.

Nope. (brevity attempted)

Edit: Even intersex athletes have been forced to choose...drugs or ineligibility...

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/tokyo-olympics-live-updates/2021/07/28/1021503989/women-runners-testosterone-olympics

"That's because of new rules from track's governing body, World Athletics. Under the rules, Semenya and other female athletes who refuse to lower their naturally high testosterone levels are barred from competing in races from 400 meters to 1 mile."

I'm torn on this one, but I'm leaning toward letting them compete as females...but I'm 100% against incentivizing them to suppress their natural testosterone to do so. My solution would be to allow them to compete, and if they win give two gold medals, if second 2 silvers etc...I posted with regard to this earlier

Edited by J.C.MacSwell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, iNow said:

And that’s a feature, not a bug. No unfair advantages. No more exclusions based on arbitrary historical reasons. Competitors don’t get displaced. It’s win-win.

This is a problem… how, exactly?

It's superfluous, not needed and is only to please the extremes of the PC brigade. If it would automatically work out the same as currently is, why do you find that necessary then to implement? Men and women are different. *shrug* (Ooops, I said that before! 🤣)

56 minutes ago, iNow said:

Your morals are clearly shit, and I thought you were better than this. 

I suggest if I replied in such a churlish manner, I would be bombarded with neg votes. But that's more a reflection on some here.

And since your supposed PC proposal would work out the same as the present status quo  with women sports segregations, as is, I find your reply even more weird.

32 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

You said you support equal pay. I said "commendable". You didn't like that. I took it back, even though I approve. You don't believe that. Or you don't believe I meant it. Or something.

What, precisely, do you want?

For you to be more honest, stop pretending playing dumb, and less supposedly smart arse one word answers.

 

 

Edited by beecee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Even intersex athletes have been forced to choose...drugs or ineligibility...

Have been. That will no longer be the case under the scheme iNow proposed and which seems eminently sensible to me.

21 minutes ago, beecee said:

For you to be more honest, stop pretending playing dumb, and less supposedly smart arse one word answers.

 

....

Edited by Peterkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Neither. The stupid law that forced them to choose has been struck down.

 

29 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 Even intersex athletes have been forced to choose...drugs or ineligibility...

 

4 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Have been. That will no longer be the case under the scheme iNow proposed and which seems eminently sensible to me.

Hadn't realized INow's well thought through and very workable proposal had been accepted into Law...

He must be one exceptional cranium from anus remover.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Proposal: Allow transgender males steroids to increase their testosterone well beyond normal male range so that they can be competitive in top level sports.

Not that it would actually be enough (because though significant it's not all about testosterone), but if it was...how would this be different from many of the current proposals for transgender females inclusion in female sports?

Here is what I said:

 

 

10 hours ago, iNow said:

Categorize based on skill and ability and merit. Ignore gender, and sex, and how they identify or how they sit or stand when they pee.

Why is this such an appalling and unacceptable idea to so very many? Why is it so hard to agree here that sports qualification criteria shouldn't care how you were classified at birth and how it should instead be focused on qualifications based on sport-specific thresholds?

4 hours ago, iNow said:

advantages wouldn’t matter if divisions were setup based on skill and competence instead of assigned sex at birth

 

Edited by iNow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 

Help me remove my head from my bunghole.

 

I wait loooong decades for someone to ask for this on the web, and it turns out they're using humorous irony.  Damn.  Another dream deferred.

Am still dubious on the position that all this stuff is amenable to a simple solution.  Or that (and please don't attack or assist with my bunghole for saying this) teenagers can always be the best judges of their needs and best interests. And judgment circuits in the superior frontal gyrus aren't fully wired until around age 25.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iNow said:

 

Are you unfamiliar with try-outs in sports or physical skills testing? It’s no wonder you’re so confused. 

 

 

I do admit to a bit of confusion....in the thousand plus times I've watched try-outs and physical testing...the incentive seemed to be toward trying your best...so I'm less familiar with trying to match some arbitrary lesser standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, J.C.MacSwell said:

 

I do admit to a bit of confusion....in the thousand plus times I've watched try-outs and physical testing...the incentive seemed to be toward trying your best...so I'm less familiar with trying to match some arbitrary lesser standard.

If you’re not intentionally misrepresenting me, then you’re badly misreading me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Hadn't realized INow's well thought through and very workable proposal had been accepted into Law...

I was answering the question:

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I don't follow. Which daughter has your proposal solved for? Are they both taking drugs to either; over suppress testosterone beyond a healthy limit, or enhance it in an unhealthy manner?

under the assumption that the hypothetical solution will have come to pass at the time the hypothetical problem will have needed to be solved.

Indeed, the concept is not unknown to enlightened school districts, even at the present.

https://www.independentschoolparent.com/school/mixed-team-sports/

https://www.parents.com/fun/sports/untapped-potential-of-mixed-gender-youth-sports/

It may not be the ultimate solution, but it seems to work for some people.

Edited by Peterkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, iNow said:

If you’re not intentionally misrepresenting me, then you’re badly misreading me. 

I honestly don't see how you can possibly think you have a workable solution beyond recreational level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, beecee said:

The other rather notable situation that has developed is the facetiousness and sarcasm directed at anyone that dare stray from this extreme PC, under the guise of humour. That of course is evident with the uses of the positive and neg rep situations also.

It must be difficult living in constant fear that you could melt at any time. 

 

3 hours ago, beecee said:

That of course is evident with the uses of the positive and neg rep situations also. Stands out like dog balls sadly. A sadness...

3 hours ago, beecee said:

Great post and I gave you a like also.

LOL! Stop it Smalls, you're killing me! 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Am still dubious on the position that all this stuff is amenable to a simple solution.  Or that (and please don't attack or assist with my bunghole for saying this) teenagers can always be the best judges of their needs and best interests. And judgment circuits in the superior frontal gyrus aren't fully wired until around age 25.   

But we can't keep them all in bubble-wrap that long; they'd spoil. Options for activity must be made available while they're still unformed, preferably without making too many of them any more miserable than necessary. So we just have to keep thinking about it, listening to them and experimenting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

I was answering the question:

under the assumption that the hypothetical solution will have come to pass at the time fro which you queried the result.

Indeed, the concept is not unknown to enlightened school districts, even at the present.

https://www.independentschoolparent.com/school/mixed-team-sports/

https://www.parents.com/fun/sports/untapped-potential-of-mixed-gender-youth-sports/

It may not be the ultimate solution, but it seems to work for some people.

Absolutely. Recreational sports, taken as a whole, are healthy, rewarding, and ultimately more important than elite sports.

But that doesn't answer the question I put forward with regard to top level sports.

 

100 years ago girls and women competed and enjoyed recreational sports. Some felt they deserved the opportunity to do more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I honestly don't see how you can possibly think you have a workable solution beyond recreational level.

Once more… Here’s what I said:

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Last I checked, it was middle school and high school kids having laws written to prevent them from playing.

… I’m talking about legislation being directed at already marginalized kids in schools who simply want to play sports… laws that make it explicitly illegal for them to do so. 

This isn’t hypothetical. It’s happening. Where I live. Real children are getting hurt. And for what? Because we’re too lazy to update divisional thresholds to be based on skill and not how someone urinates?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

But that doesn't answer the question I put forward with regard to top level sports.

We're okay with starting change at the bottom and working our way up, one challenge at a time, and we'll eventually get to the top. If you start at the top, you'll eventually arrive at the status quo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, TheVat said:

@koti Given how incomplete our information is on all these people, I think it would be impossible to say who to believe.  Family fights are often ugly and loaded with manipulation.  There is a reason that some things end up in a courtroom - just accepting a bunch of "he said" and "she said" statements as a full account in hardly enough to make a rational decision.

Also, as someone who has done counseling, I know that people may be "manipulative" because they have very little power over their own lives and can find no other leverage to make their needs known.  It's entirely possible that the parents, if they had listened more and been more receptive to Ariel's feelings, would not have triggered quite so much manipulation.  

 

Absolutely, I agree. But the fact that the parents failed at being receptive enough to their childs feelings and it all resulting in a spectacular sht storm has nothing to do with the fact that in this case, the child not transgender and is not going to transition because shes just playing a game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CharonY featured and unfeatured this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.