Transgender athletes back on the agenda

[think positive]

cis = not trans.

So .... normal? Ie a woman?

Whatthe ****! Seriouslythatsdemented!

[stui magpie]

I haven't changed my view on this, but while we push to ban women who used to be male athletes from competing against women athletes, we'll get kickback.

So let them compete. See if the results show an unfair advantage or not. If it does, roll it back because there'll be data to support that decision.

If that means a generation of people are disadvantaged, so be it. Truth will find it's own level.

[David]

[think positive]

yeah nah, ill stick with woman, dad, mum, or even mom, and Stui, i totally disagree, a generation of women, WOMEN, not PEOPLE, just WOMEN, who have had to fight long enough for equality.

She can live, work, go to the loo, etc etc etc as a female, but she should never be allowed to compete with natural born women.

and quite frankly any transgender who wins this way, breaks a record, should be ashamed of themselves and how they could possibly believe its fair is beyond me!

[Lord Maximus Farquaad]

RIP woman’s sport and the Olympics, what a $$%^%%$ joke. And no I’m not phobic at all, I feel disgusted for all the woman who worked so $$%^%%$ hard for all the years to get there, to be beaten by a male body. She may be a She now but for at least 18 years she was a he, with male hormones, male muscles and bones, which are totally different from the female version.

The solution? Compete before you go through the change, ordont compete, or have their own section.

This is an absolute farce.

Have a look at the video of the final of the women's 800 metres track at the 2016 Olympics. The first 3 women embraced each other after the race. They had just seen their lifetimes dreams and ambitions crushed. They finished 4th, 5th and 6th.

[David]

[David]

By the way, here's an article about another "genetic freak" (the article's wording, not mine) whose unusual physical characteristics also seem to make him impossible to defeat, yet whom nobody seems to have a problem with. You might call him the Caster Semenya of men's sprinting:

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34089451

even among top sprinters, Bolt stands out, and this is partly because of his height.

"Bolt is a genetic freak because being 6ft 5ins tall means he shouldn't be able to accelerate at the speed he does given the length of his legs," says former Great Britain sprinter Craig Pickering.

"At the beginning of a race you want to take short steps in order to accelerate, but because he's so tall he can't do that. But then when he reaches top speed he has a massive advantage over everyone else because he's taking far fewer steps."

When it comes to athletes, biological advantages extend way beyond chromosomes, hormones and sex difference. You're never going to get an even playing field in which only the most dedicated and hardest-training runner wins, and we need to get rid of any notion that these elite competitions are purely about effort being rewarded. Accepting that may not change your mind on whether transgender or intersex people should be able to participate in women's sport, but it should at least allow us to get rid of some of the background noise about deserving and undeserving winners.

[Lord Maximus Farquaad]

[Lord Maximus Farquaad]

By the way, here's an article about another "genetic freak" (the article's wording, not mine) whose unusual physical characteristics also seem to make him impossible to defeat, yet whom nobody seems to have a problem with. You might call him the Caster Semenya of men's sprinting:

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34089451

even among top sprinters, Bolt stands out, and this is partly because of his height.

"Bolt is a genetic freak because being 6ft 5ins tall means he shouldn't be able to accelerate at the speed he does given the length of his legs," says former Great Britain sprinter Craig Pickering.

"At the beginning of a race you want to take short steps in order to accelerate, but because he's so tall he can't do that. But then when he reaches top speed he has a massive advantage over everyone else because he's taking far fewer steps."

When it comes to athletes, biological advantages extend way beyond chromosomes, hormones and sex difference. You're never going to get an even playing field in which only the most dedicated and hardest-training runner wins, and we need to get rid of any notion that these elite competitions are purely about effort being rewarded. Accepting that may not change your mind on whether transgender or intersex people should be able to participate in women's sport, but it should at least allow us to get rid of some of the background noise about deserving and undeserving winners.

Everyone that has ever played sport at any level at all, or watched any sport, knows that effort being rewarded is just one factor that determines who wins. I think that covers everyone. Ever hear of Ablett Snr? And in women's sport, Liz Cambage. They are two examples of reaching the top without putting in the effort that others do.

[stui magpie]

yeah nah, ill stick with woman, dad, mum, or even mom, and Stui, i totally disagree, a generation of women, WOMEN, not PEOPLE, just WOMEN, who have had to fight long enough for equality. !

I am on the same side on this argument, particularly when someone has trained as an athlete with the advantages male physiology provides and then transitions to females and wants to compete.

The problem as I see it is that just pushing back against an ever increasing tide won't work. The only way to prove the point is to allow competition and see what happens.

I don't buy into either the arguments about the people who were born intersex, and David's argument about Bolt is a red-herring. Firstly he still had to train to realise his potential and second comparing a slow and fast male to physiological male and females just doesn't equate.

The argument comes down to rights vs fairness and in the current day, rights win.

[David]

[Lord Maximus Farquaad]

You're changing your argument again. First you talk about an entitlement to a gold medal, now you have watered it down to a podium finish.

Where does this end? No male or female competition, or for those a bit of each, just one competition for everyone?

This is an inane discussion. On one hand we have to have three women on our board, but on the other there don't have to be any women in a women's event in the Olympics.

It will be funny though if in the weightlifting Kiwi <snip> wins a gold medal for the best snatch.

[David]

The argument is that those legally considered women (whatever your opinion of their legitimacy) be permitted to compete in women’s sporting events. I’m not aware of a more radical proposal than that; while you can infer whatever slippery slope you please, just as same-sex marriage hasn’t led to people marrying golden retrievers, I think it’s fair to consider this question under the terms presented.

[stui magpie]

^

You're talking about the difference between ideology and physiology/biology, between gender and sex.

Sports base their rules on sex, not gender.

Yes some people have genetic or skill based advantages over others. How many white men have won the Olympic 100m sprint in the past 30 years?

That's not the same as having biological men competing against biological women.

[think positive]