Transgender athletes

[MigL]

5 hours ago, dimreepr said:

How does their inclusion hurt anyone?

Before segregation into male and female categories, there was no women's sports, was there ?
I guarantee that if male/female competitive sports were combined so as to be 'inclusive', female participation would be nowhere close to 50 %..
Probably wouldn't even break the 10 % mark.
How is that representative of 50 % of the Earth's population ?

 

3 hours ago, StringJunky said:

It's amusing, human development.

Indeed it is.
Funny how the same group of people ( not you Stringy ) can argue that we should celebrate superficial differences, like skin color, and use that superficial descriptor for discrimination  between groups of people.
( see the whiteboards thread )

And yet that same group will argue that gender is to be ignored, and all should be included, even though the difference is NOT superficial, but quantifiable and performance based.
( yes, I'm looking at you, Dim )

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

And yet that same group will argue that gender is to be ignored, and all should be included, even though the difference is NOT superficial, but quantifiable and performance based.

Most folks are not saying that though. Rather if there are quantifiable differences, one should use those as much as possible. That also goes for race, but it has to be actionable. In other words, one needs to find better rules for sports to find the right balance to maximize inclusion. Likewise, rather than just saying we end racism and all is well, we have to look at the quantifiable harm and use measures to address them. Targeted, if possible, untargeted if it provides a net benefit.

Also, I could turn this argument around. You say that skin color is superficial, whereas the sex differences are clearly impactful. However, at the same time we have got much, much, much more data on skin color, in practice, affects folks to huge degree in terms of all kind of life outcomes.

Conversely, the studies on transgender athletes is only now starting and folks only recently have a handful of data points in terms of these quantifiable differences. While I do think that for some sports there is likely going to be disparities that need to be addressed somehow (I have speculated earlier in what form it could be), but ultimately we need more research.

I think, to some degree your argument is guided by how you think the world should be (in terms of racial equality) and how you perhaps sense race, yet the reality of it it is very different. And policies need to address that.

[J.C.MacSwell]

12 hours ago, swansont said:

Any evidence of this hidden horde of trans athletes that choose not to compete at elite levels?

You want me to provide evidence that the remaining trans athletes have, for various reasons , chosen not to compete at elite levels? Perhaps my wording was a little loose. Do you think I'm trying to say all trans athletes could compete at elite levels if they wanted to? I don't think you are suggesting that but that's my best guess.

Not how I would have phrased it, but I certainly would expect and hope, that there would be a horde of trans athletes below elite level, many of whom might like to become elite, improve, or simply enjoy healthy recreation. The problem is that they want to compete against XX chromosome humans that generally can only compete fairly against other XX humans.

 

12 hours ago, swansont said:

Until last year trans athletes in the US could compete in NCAA sports with no restrictions, AFAICT (testosterone testing was then implemented) Exactly one has won a championship, and that was last year. That’s the extent of college competition that could ascend to the elite level. That’s out of 32 trans athletes competing in college in the US. 15 in high school (2 girls)

NCAA sports, for women especially, already include many athletes at World elite level.

12 hours ago, swansont said:

What does this have to do with trans athletes? i.e. people who are not using performance-enhancing drugs?

Performance enhancing drugs aren't banned simply because they are performance enhancing, they are banned because they are unhealthy, so they are banned to protect athletes from themselves, and to protect clean athletes that would be put at a disadvantage if they did not use them themselves. There's no "let them do it if they want..it's their bodies".

Why allow or encourage trans athletes to use unhealthy levels of drug treatments in order to qualify? Do they not deserve the same consideration against unhealthy drug treatments as other athletes? Do the clean athletes with natural testosterone levels well below the testosterone targets for transgenders not deserve the same competitive considerations?

2.5 nmol/L for testosterone is not a healthy target for most transgender females to obtain and maintain, and cis gender females aren't allowed to use performance enhancing drugs to get there. Very few would be there naturally.

And as I said from the beginning and it's becoming more and more clear...it's not just about testosterone levels.

And handicapping individuals by suppressing it is no more conducive to clean sport than allowing the augmentation of it for others.

Edited July 7, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell

[dimreepr]

15 hours ago, MigL said:

Before segregation into male and female categories, there was no women's sports, was there ?

Great, just as I said a rule adjustment, I'm not advocating a utopia, where everyone can compete, win lose or draw.

No, I'm just suggesting that if someone is so convinced that they should be a wo/man, that they're willing to sufure through "mistermack's" to get a nip and a tuck and no end of pills, let them play with their peers; it's hardly setting us back to the time before women had the vote, is it?

10 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Performance enhancing drugs aren't banned simply because they are performance enhancing, they are banned because they are unhealthy, so they are banned to protect athletes from themselves,

Hmmm 🤔, that's an interesting turn of phrase, are you suggesting that transexuals should be protected from themselves? Because that's kinda your vibe in this thread... 🧐

Besides you haven't answered my question, did you think about it?

On 7/4/2023 at 12:31 PM, dimreepr said:

58 pages and counting, of a discussion about 'them' competing; "I'm Dr Who, I'm sorry I've lost my place, are we past racism yet?"

Page 60 now Dr, "I don't think so...🤔"

[J.C.MacSwell]

50 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Hmmm 🤔, that's an interesting turn of phrase, are you suggesting that transexuals should be protected from themselves? Because that's kinda your vibe in this thread... 🧐

Yes. Just like cis-gender athletes, they need to be protected from incentivized unhealthy drug use.

Are you suggesting they are not like other people in this regard?

On 7/5/2023 at 8:07 AM, dimreepr said:

A question I think you should ask yourself @J.C.MacSwell.

Sport is an arbitory measure of a specific quality, and like Cruft's the tighter the measure, the more likely it's going to spit out an aboration of some sort (cough, incest ect.).

Open Cruft's to every dog and see the benefits for every dog.

 

Is that a question? If so can someone translate it for me?

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Yes. Just like cis-gender athletes, they need to be protected from incentivized unhealthy drug use.

Are you suggesting they are not like other people in this regard?

I'm just suggesting that YOU think about it, I like to choose my own drug...

Jesus, I can't believe you're still arguing that your drug is better than everyone else's; it's clearly off topic, grow a pair... 😉

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

I'm just suggesting that YOU think about it, I like to choose my own drug...

Jesus, I can't believe you're still arguing that your drug is better than everyone else's; it's clearly off topic, grow a pair... 😉

Sorry Dim, but I'm going to report this post.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Sorry Dim, but I'm going to report this post.

I hope I get the appropriate treatment... 🙄 

[swansont]

13 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You want me to provide evidence that the remaining trans athletes have, for various reasons , chosen not to compete at elite levels? Perhaps my wording was a little loose. Do you think I'm trying to say all trans athletes could compete at elite levels if they wanted to? I don't think you are suggesting that but that's my best guess.

I think you said all but a handful of trans athletes choose not to compete at an elite level, and I want to know where they went. 

Since it’s a choice, they must have the ability to do so. They must have done so at some point. Winning, if they are to compete at an elite level.

 

13 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Not how I would have phrased it, but I certainly would expect and hope, that there would be a horde of trans athletes below elite level, many of whom might like to become elite, improve, or simply enjoy healthy recreation. The problem is that they want to compete against XX chromosome humans that generally can only compete fairly against other XX humans.

OK, where are they?

13 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

NCAA sports, for women especially, already include many athletes at World elite level.

And they’d be winning championships, if they are going to be competing at a world elite level. If they can’t win at the college level, how can they be be competing against the champions of the NCAA from that and earlier years, and the elite competitors from other countries?

And there are many such athletes, but they aren’t trans.

 

13 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Performance enhancing drugs aren't banned simply because they are performance enhancing, they are banned because they are unhealthy, so they are banned to protect athletes from themselves, and to protect clean athletes that would be put at a disadvantage if they did not use them themselves. There's no "let them do it if they want..it's their bodies".

There are athletes who have complained about the damage that drugs they are allowed to (and expected to) take do to them. Shaquille O’Neal has been quite open about taking anti-inflammatory drugs and painkillers in order to play basketball. It’s common among gridiron football players (Toradol, for one). Aaron Rodgers admitted to taking ayahuasca, a schedule 1 drug. Not prohibited by the NFL.

It seems that protecting the players happens when not doing so impacts the bottom line. The NFL covered up concussion issues for years until it was too obvious that it was an issue. They don’t want PEDs because of the notion that it’s cheating, and that’s an image problem. 

 

 

[Phi for All]

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

I'm just suggesting that YOU think about it, I like to choose my own drug...

Jesus, I can't believe you're still arguing that your drug is better than everyone else's; it's clearly off topic, grow a pair... 😉

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

I hope I get the appropriate treatment... 🙄 

!

Moderator Note

You need to STOP attacking people if you can't discuss a topic civilly. I'm more than happy to give you a short vacation from posting if you think personal abuse is appropriate. 

 

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

I think you said all but a handful of trans athletes choose not to compete at an elite level, and I want to know where they went. 

Since it’s a choice, they must have the ability to do so. They must have done so at some point. Winning, if they are to compete at an elite level.

 

 

 

On 7/5/2023 at 9:11 PM, swansont said:

So this is to protect the transgender community? Couldn’t they just choose not to compete

I have to admit my wording isn't always the greatest, but I think in this instance I thought I was simply going along with what I thought was your implied context.

16 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 

Not how I would have phrased it, but I certainly would expect and hope, that there would be a horde of trans athletes below elite level, many of whom might like to become elite, improve, or simply enjoy healthy recreation. The problem is that they want to compete against XX chromosome humans that generally can only compete fairly against other XX humans.

 

 

This is certainly bad wording on my part. It should read if they want to compete against XX humans....

To clarify further, if it's true that the potential trans population is a high as claimed, I would hope their would be a very high number of them in sports, just not in any way that threatens Women's elite sports.

I don't know how many there are, but I suspect there would be many that could in fact potentially compete  at elite female level. XY chromosomes are known to be a distinct advantage in many sports.

Where are they? I suspect most of them have not yet come out.

3 hours ago, swansont said:

There are athletes who have complained about the damage that drugs they are allowed to (and expected to) take do to them. Shaquille O’Neal has been quite open about taking anti-inflammatory drugs and painkillers in order to play basketball. It’s common among gridiron football players (Toradol, for one). Aaron Rodgers admitted to taking ayahuasca, a schedule 1 drug. Not prohibited by the NFL.

It seems that protecting the players happens when not doing so impacts the bottom line. The NFL covered up concussion issues for years until it was too obvious that it was an issue. They don’t want PEDs because of the notion that it’s cheating, and that’s an image problem. 

 

 

So we agree that drugs are an issue in elite sport, and the unhealthy use of them should not be incentivised or encouraged?

[mistermack]

There are two sex classes for sporting competition. Mens sport and women's sport. 

It doesn't matter to what extent a man has been castrated, surgically or chemically, or what other nips and tucks have been applied. I've got nothing against any of that, if that's what the individual wants. 

The only justification for allowing people to compete against women, is if they are women. Self identifying doesn't make you a woman. There are an absolutely tiny number of people who are born of very rare conditions that truly make their sex indeterminate. And very few of them will be athletic enough to compete at elite level. They can be asessed medically and genetically on an individual level, with the onus on not allowing anyone who has had a clear hormonal or genetic advantage to compete against women. The question should be, is this person a female by birth?

But the vast majority of trans women, are men who want to present as women. They don't have rare physical conditions, it's just that they don't 'feel' male. It's fair enough to live as a woman, if that's what makes them happy. But not to play sport against women. 

I wonder what people feel about how a man who has had sex change treatment should handle sexual encounters with men ? Should they be obliged to inform a prospective sexual partner that they were born male ? I have no idea if there are laws governing that in this country, but I can imagine some pretty extreme reactions if someone finds out that the 'woman' they've been having sex with was previously a man.

[swansont]

7 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Self identifying doesn't make you a woman

…

They can be asessed medically and genetically on an individual level, with the onus on not allowing anyone who has had a clear hormonal or genetic advantage to compete against women. The question should be, is this person a female by birth?

What does make one a woman? Is it genetics? Is it genitalia? Is there a definition that covers everyone?

12 minutes ago, mistermack said:

But the vast majority of trans women, are men who want to present as women.

I don’t suppose you have evidence to back this up. 

[mistermack]

16 minutes ago, swansont said:

I don’t suppose you have evidence to back this up. 

The clue is in the name.

[zapatos]

35 minutes ago, mistermack said:

The only justification for allowing people to compete against women, is if they are women.

 

 

 

 

 

[TheVat]

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

But the vast majority of trans women, are men who want to present as women.

This sentence is either a dull tautology, or you are asserting that a gender transition is merely donning the appearance of the transitioned-to gender.  If the latter, you would need some evidence because it sounds a lot like barstool blather.

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

I wonder what people feel about how a man who has had sex change treatment should handle sexual encounters with men ? Should they be obliged to inform a prospective sexual partner that they were born male ? I have no idea if there are laws governing that in this country, but I can imagine some pretty extreme reactions if someone finds out that the 'woman' they've been having sex with was previously a man.

To the first questions, what does it matter?  Are other adult's sexual encounters or how they handle them any of our business?  Do we have a lot of rules for what prospective sexual partners are supposed to inform us about?   Criminal records?  Checkered pasts? Previous boyfriends?  Bisexuality ? Political affiliation?  I think adults are supposed to work these things out.  

Stephen Rea got upset and threw up in The Crying Game when he discovered his girlfriend's penis, but was okay after a couple days and having a good think on it, and was able to accept her as she was.  I would think most good relationships end up there.  

ETA:  Have spent several minutes trying to determine why all the text came out underlined and trying to get rid of it.  Finally figured how to eliminate it in my text, but can't make that work inside Mac's quote boxes.  Sorry, Mac.

Edited July 7, 2023 by TheVat
arghhh

[mistermack]

13 minutes ago, TheVat said:

you are asserting that a gender transition is merely donning the appearance of the transitioned-to gender.  If the latter, you would need some evidence because it sounds a lot like barstool blather. 

What do you think it is? 

20 minutes ago, TheVat said:

To the first questions, what does it matter?

Most straight people would view it as sexual assault by deception, or rape by deception, depending on how far it went.

[zapatos]

17 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Most straight people would view it as sexual assault by deception, or rape by deception, depending on how far it went.

I think we need to add a new emoji just for "Citation?" so we don't have to type it so many times.

Edited July 7, 2023 by zapatos

[swansont]

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

The clue is in the name.

I’ll take that as a “no”

As usual.

[StringJunky]

Women are just weak, spindly things...

 

[mistermack]

The law in the UK says I'm right. I don't know about the US, but I think our courts have it right. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trans-people-could-face-rape-charges-if-they-don-t-declare-sexual-history-warns-trans-activist-a7076546.html  

2 hours ago, zapatos said:

I think we need to add a new emoji just for "Citation?" so we don't have to type it so many times.

By we, I think you are talking about yourself. Parroting "Citation" is your usual substitute for any kind of thought-out comment. 

[StringJunky]

59 minutes ago, mistermack said:

By we, I think you are talking about yourself. Parroting "Citation" is your usual substitute for any kind of thought-out comment. 

It's just a request for more evidence. It's what we do. Is it not?

[iNow]

Some of us, anyway.

[dimreepr]

20 hours ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

You need to STOP attacking people if you can't discuss a topic civilly. I'm more than happy to give you a short vacation from posting if you think personal abuse is appropriate. 

 

 

My apologies, it was intended as an ironic joke ("grow a pair" tits or bollocks, "The song/joke remains the same"), which I assumed JC got, given his reply.

16 hours ago, mistermack said:

There are two sex classes for sporting competition. Mens sport and women's sport. 

It doesn't matter to what extent a man has been castrated, surgically or chemically, or what other nips and tucks have been applied. I've got nothing against any of that, if that's what the individual wants. 

The only justification for allowing people to compete against women, is if they are women. Self identifying doesn't make you a woman. There are an absolutely tiny number of people who are born of very rare conditions that truly make their sex indeterminate. And very few of them will be athletic enough to compete at elite level. They can be asessed medically and genetically on an individual level, with the onus on not allowing anyone who has had a clear hormonal or genetic advantage to compete against women. The question should be, is this person a female by birth?

But the vast majority of trans women, are men who want to present as women. They don't have rare physical conditions, it's just that they don't 'feel' male. It's fair enough to live as a woman, if that's what makes them happy. But not to play sport against women. 

I wonder what people feel about how a man who has had sex change treatment should handle sexual encounters with men ? Should they be obliged to inform a prospective sexual partner that they were born male ? I have no idea if there are laws governing that in this country, but I can imagine some pretty extreme reactions if someone finds out that the 'woman' they've been having sex with was previously a man.

I had a friend like you, a real man's man (no homo😣), then karma gifted him a gay son, that taught him; would it teach you?

Edited July 8, 2023 by dimreepr

[mistermack]

58 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I had a friend like you, a real man's man (no homo😣), then karma gifted him a gay son, that taught him; would it teach you?

On this thread, I'm debating if trans people should be competing against biological women, in elite sports. I'm well aware that children can turn out straight or gay, and have been for the last sixty years, so your wonderful insight is wasted. If you can point to ANY post of mine that shows hate or prejudice against gay people, I invite you to quote it. Otherwise, the above post is just a nasty insinuation.