Rachel McKinnon wins Worlds gold at UCI masters track cycling

magicbastarder

lifted from stickybottle:

A biological male who identifies as female has won a major women’s race in the US in what is believed to be a first for cycling.

Jillian Bearden was born a male but identifies as a transgender woman and has not had sex reassignment surgery.

However, while still a biological man she was able to take part in the event under new rules ushered in by an International Olympic Council decision.

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/biological-male-dominates-womens-cycling-event-in-historic-first/

Lumen

More here:
https://303cycling.com/transgender-cyclist-story-jillian-bearden/

It's amazing that she is (presumably) taking performance-reducing drugs (PRDs?) to control hormone levels. That has to be a first in cycling :pac:

robyntmorton

Fair play to her. It takes a lot of physical and mental power and stamina to go through something like that and maintain her ability.

(That said, I don't like the headline - but that's not your fault MB)

fat bloke

It's very very hard to know what to to think about these sporting developments. Fair play to her, brilliant, well done, go equality etc. But I also can't imagine what it's like for the other female competitors. Especially that word "dominates" in the headline. Hyperbole or no, that's not what you want to be seeing or hearing.

loyatemu

Lumen wrote: »

More here:
https://303cycling.com/transgender-cyclist-story-jillian-bearden/

It's amazing that she is (presumably) taking performance-reducing drugs (PRDs?) to control hormone levels. That has to be a first in cycling :pac:

Interesting the IOC rules for transgender athletes appear to be similar to those recently thrown out by CAS for inter-gender athletes.

magicbastarder

robyntmorton wrote: »

(That said, I don't like the headline - but that's not your fault MB)

i deliberately did not interfere with it lest it be seen as a comment on it.
there's an interesting discussion here on related issues, obviously does not cover all points:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/caster-semenya-and-the-logic-of-olympic-competition

Arrow in the Knee

Sticken my neck out here but he shouldn't be allowed to enter any female sporting event.

robyntmorton

magicbastarder wrote: »

i deliberately did not interfere with it lest it be seen as a comment on it.
there's an interesting discussion here on related issues, obviously does not cover all points:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/caster-semenya-and-the-logic-of-olympic-competition

It's an interesting read, but possibly a little harsh on Semanya. Her natural high testosterone level is in no way her fault.

I also appreciate that you took the headline verbatim from Sticky Bottle. It can be an emotive subject, and changing it or not can be seen as favouritism one way or another.

robyntmorton

Arrow in the Knee wrote: »

Sticken my neck out here but he shouldn't be allowed to enter any female sporting event.

2 hours, 23 minutes. I thought it would take less time for the first of these comments.

eeguy

robyntmorton wrote: »

2 hours, 23 minutes. I thought it would take less time for the first of these comments.

In fairness, men have much better times than women in nearly every physical sport.
We're biologically stronger and faster.

So it's no surprise that she won.
It's really not a level playing field, if a person who is biologically still a man is allowed to compete in female sports.

This is a great moment for transgender people in sport, but is it a great moment for women in sport?

robyntmorton

eeguy wrote: »

In fairness, men have much better times than women in nearly every physical sport.
We're biologically stronger and faster.

So it's no surprise that she won.
It's really not a level playing field, if a person who is biologically still a man is allowed to compete in female sports.

This is a great moment for transgender people in sport, but is it a great moment for women in sport?

In all fairness, she was 25 minutes behind the men's winner, and 1 second ahead of women's second place, Anna Sparks, with both 22 minutes ahead of third. If it's not a level playing field, what does that say about Anna?

Provided she played by the rules, I can only say fair play to her.

magicbastarder

robyntmorton wrote: »

In all fairness, she was 25 minutes behind the men's winner, and 1 second ahead of women's second place, Anna Sparks, with both 22 minutes ahead of third. If it's not a level playing field, what does that say about Anna??

another way of looking at it is that (assumption alert) the only person undergoing gender reassignment who entered the race managed to win it.
that's only a single datum point, but it's a telling one re the argument on a level playing field.

NoviGlitzko

This is so ridiculous. How is this transgender woman allowed to race? The other female competitors are at a huge disadvantage before they even begin. And Robyn, if you were one of those women racing after dedicating so much of your time, pain, money, & effort, only to be beaten by someone who has testosterone levels as a man? You might as well go head to head against a woman doped to the nines for instance, why should this be any different. Sucks on the person but it's better than dragging the whole sport down with it.

Inquitus

I am not an expert on the effects of hormone therapy etc. on people who identify as transgender, but given Males are biologically stronger and faster than women it does seem somewhat unfair this lady to be allowed to compete on a level playing field with women.

robyntmorton

magicbastarder wrote: »

another way of looking at it is that (assumption alert) the only person undergoing gender reassignment who entered the race managed to win it.
that's only a single datum point, but it's a telling one re the argument on a level playing field.

Unfortunately this argument was always going to come up the moment a transgender individual won something in the category of their gender. Someone was always going to have to test the waters, and it so happens to be Jillian.

As I said earlier, as long as she was in compliance with the required rules, I can't see a problem with it. These rules may later be changed as more data becomes available, but until then, she can only work with the ruleset as it is at the time.

Enduro

robyntmorton wrote: »

Unfortunately this argument was always going to come up the moment a transgender individual won something in the category of their gender. Someone was always going to have to test the waters, and it so happens to be Jillian.

As I said earlier, as long as she was in compliance with the required rules, I can't see a problem with it. These rules may later be changed as more data becomes available, but until then, she can only work with the ruleset as it is at the time.

I agree with your point on this specific instance... she broke no rules.

However, I think this is the single biggest threat to women's sport, particularly proffessional sports (Even more than PEDs, IMO). The rules need to be tightened up considerably on who is allowed compete in the "Female" category (possibly combine this with renaming the "Male" category to "Open" and allowing everyone to compete in that category).

Lumen

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

if you were one of those women racing after dedicating so much of your time, pain, money, & effort, only to be beaten by someone who has testosterone levels as a man?

Read the link I posted.

Male to female: Those making this transition will take testosterone blockers (anti-androgens) to lower their testosterone levels. They also take estrogen and progesterone, which decreases muscle mass and changes fat distribution (1).

Normal Testosterone levels (2):
Men: 9–38 nmol/L
Women: 0.52–2.4 nmol/L

magicbastarder

robyntmorton wrote: »

It's an interesting read, but possibly a little harsh on Semanya. Her natural high testosterone level is in no way her fault.

i don't think the author or gladwell were trying to attribute 'fault' to semenya, to be fair.

velo.2010

Providing her testosterone levels are within the normal female range then there is no real issue given her gender identification. However, if they are in any way elevated then she has an unfair advantage over the other athletes. How can that be continuously measured? I don't know.

In athletics, the IAAF have dropped the rule that hyperandrongenism must be treated with suppressive drugs. This ruling resulted in three athletes with HA dominating the 800m at the Rio Olympics and the 800m races this season.

If those rules banning suppression drugs apply to intersex/hyperandrongenism athletes, then what is to stop a non-op transgender person looking for the same standards applying to them? In theory, ordering someone to take suppressive medication to conform might be seen as a human rights violation just as the old rule of having to have the realignment surgery. That opens up a huge problematic area. Essentially, you could have those who identify as female, running/competing with all the male androgenic advantages against women with no legal obstacle.

Trojan

Had to happen eventually. I'm not sure where I am on this yet. Strikes me as similar to the blade prosthetics situation.

stecleary

My issue with this is it wont be long before the ringers come into play, Remember this is sport and some people will do what ever it takes to be world famous.
I nearly think there should be a trans cat rather than mixing.

magicbastarder

velo.2010 wrote: »

Providing her testosterone levels are within the normal female range then there is no real issue given her gender identification. However, if they are in any way elevated then she has an unfair advantage over the other athletes. How can that be continuously measured? I don't know.

the question is possibly also whether testosterone levels (and some of the other markers currently measured) are the be-all and end-all of the parameters which should be measured. i suspect as regards impact on sporting prowess, we're not looking at a mature field of research, are we (genuine question)?

also, as she grew up as a biological male (and assuming she went through male puberty - not sure if this is the case) - her body was granted with male characteristics before she transitioned. which would be an advantage someone born as biologically female would not have enjoyed.

putting psychological matters to one side, this can be seen/will be portrayed (depending on your viewpoint) as someone who is physiologically a man who is taking some drugs to reduce testosterone levels to allow her to compete in female sports. and there's a superficially easy argument to make that identity and psychology should be left at the door when it comes to measures of physical prowess.

FWIW, i'm still trying to figure out where i stand on this.

ford2600

stecleary wrote: »

My issue with this is it wont be long before the ringers come into play, Remember this is sport and some people will do what ever it takes to be world famous.
I nearly think there should be a trans cat rather than mixing.

0.6 percent of adults (approximately) are trans gender, going to be a pretty small category.

Really hard to be fair to everybody here, I'd hate to be the one making the decision.

On transgender individuals, there has to be empathy for people who struggle with a part of their identity the vast majority take for granted. It seems to take a significant toll on mental health; quote below taken from a recent William Reville article on a US study on sexual identity (pretty controversial study but this quote is interesting).

"Non-heterosexuals are at increased risk for various adverse health and mental-health outcomes. For example, such people are at twice the risk of depression and 2½ times the risk of suicide compared with heterosexuals. Lifetime suicide attempts by transgender individuals is estimated to be 41 per cent of the US transgender population compared with 5 per cent of the overall population."

I have nothing but sympathy for a clean elite lady finishing second to someone with a huge biological advantage over her and the rest of field.

fat bloke

I think maybe it's easy for people to welcome it at first as a victory for equality and a recognition of transgender people and athletes, but I suppose if transgender athletes went on to consistently dominate the sports and the winners'/medal rostrums, I dunno if people (fans and competitors alike) would be so welcoming.

Interesting times ahead for sure.

quozl

There's an excellent article on this issue, but in atheltics rather than cycling, on the Science of Sport blog http://sportsscientists.com/2016/05/hyperandrogenism-women-vs-women-vs-men-sport-qa-joanna-harper/

Harper is unique in the sense that she speaks on this incredibly complex topic from all three aspects – science/physiology, performance and as a transgender person herself. She has been, and is, part of the various panels and groups that are exploring the issue, and so offers insights with authority and experience on what is likely to be one of Rio’s, if not sport’s, greatest ever controversies.

This has been a bigger issue for discussion in athletics as all 3 of the 800m medalists from the Rio Olympics are believed to be transgender. 2 are a matter of public record and Francine Niyonsaba is widely believed to be ,but correctly (IMO) she does not need to reveal this. Additionally, Caster Semenya's form has exactly mirrored the changing restrictions applied to testosterone levels. World beater, distant also-ran and then back to world beater as the testosterone supression requirements change.

There have also been elite female runners (Jenny Simpson, Brenda Martinez, a british athlete I can't currently recall, for example) commenting on the issue, on both sides, though there seems to be agreement that under the current system transgender women have a huge advantage in certain events.

I don't want to see many womens' events become only winnable by transgender atheletes. I also don't want to see transgender women denied access to compete under their gender.

I think it is an extremely difficult situation. I figure that we'll figure it out over the next decade or so, but for the moment certain events are going to be very very predicatable. Like the Rio 800m was.

05eaftqbrs9jlh

Enduro wrote:

However, I think this is the single biggest threat to women's sport, particularly proffessional sports (Even more than PEDs, IMO). The rules need to be tightened up considerably on who is allowed compete in the "Female" category (possibly combine this with renaming the "Male" category to "Open" and allowing everyone to compete in that category).

That's the most sense I've ever heard about the issue. Instead of it being "men" vs "women and others" they should have to compete against the more challenging category because transgender people have a "best of both worlds" situation. I don't think we'll ever see a headline "Transgender Woman Smashes in the Pathetic Bloodied Corpses of Male Competitors" or whatever the opposite headline would be. It's hard to know how they'd phrase it, because the only history of oppression women really have is of being the oppressed. Looks like business as usual there.

cruizer101

It really is very complicated, gender used to be black and white but now is getting blurred to the point of can we define females as a distinct separate category. They were separated because men had a clearly defined physical advantage however now that is getting blurred what about other physical advantages.

Michael Phelps for example has a body shape advantageous to swimming so should all people with that similar body type be in one category and others in their own category.

magicbastarder

cruizer101 wrote: »

Michael Phelps for example has a body shape advantageous to swimming so should all people with that similar body type be in one category and others in their own category.

that's not something you can definitively quantify; i suppose one measure which is used to distinguish competitors is weight, for disciplines such as boxing.

maybe we should do the same for other physical characteristics - basketball for people under 6 foot tall.

terrydel

velo.2010 wrote: »

Providing her testosterone levels are within the normal female range then there is no real issue given her gender identification. However, if they are in any way elevated then she has an unfair advantage over the other athletes. How can that be continuously measured? I don't know.

In athletics, the IAAF have dropped the rule that hyperandrongenism must be treated with suppressive drugs. This ruling resulted in three athletes with HA dominating the 800m at the Rio Olympics and the 800m races this season.

If those rules banning suppression drugs apply to intersex/hyperandrongenism athletes, then what is to stop a non-op transgender person looking for the same standards applying to them? In theory, ordering someone to take suppressive medication to conform might be seen as a human rights violation just as the old rule of having to have the realignment surgery. That opens up a huge problematic area. Essentially, you could have those who identify as female, running/competing with all the male androgenic advantages against women with no legal obstacle.

But why should identification trump everything else in this instance. At this present time, 'she' is by the only criteria available to go on, a man. I can identify as 6'3'' but it doesnt make it so. Until she has successfully undergone whatever is necessary to be biologically be classified as a woman, she should not be competing in women's events. No different to any individual sport where one person or more is cheating and the rest arent, imho.

velo.2010

cruizer101 wrote: »

Michael Phelps for example has a body shape advantageous to swimming so should all people with that similar body type be in one category and others in their own category.

No. That's the straw man argument Ross Tucker was dismissing over the course of the Olympics. Many commentators ( like RTE's Joanne Cantwell) were comparing him with Semenya and why we weren't asking questions of him. The difference is... Phelps has genetic advantages regardless of his testosterone levels. You could also find a female swimmer with double-jointed ankles, lower centre of gravity etc. Phelps just happens to have the whole package (I'm sure there's an unintended pun there). Testosterone gives someone the male characteristics such as extra strength/muscle mass etc.

My earlier point was why should one group with high Test levels be made to take hormone suppressing drugs (the cyclist) and another not have to take anything (Semenya). The semantic argument is that the cyclist is fully male and has to take something, while Semenya is 'intersex' and might not have had all the athletic benefits of being 'fully male'.

Regardless, Semenya is superior to her fellow athletes while she is not taking suppressive drugs. When she did, her times fell away and she was not competitive. Ross Tucker believes that suppression, while not natural, is the most reasonable and fairest response. But how do you manage that? Just enough suppression to make someone top three or pack filler in races?

It's so complicated at the moment. I'd expect lots of legal/moral wrangles in the future. We haven't really heard the voices of fellow female competitors apart from what they feel they can only say in moderation to the media. I wouldn't mind seeing a forum and hearing the views of more female competitors on the issue - of course with due regard to the women who are transitioning/intersex.

magicbastarder

one question which i'm curious about - how come this hasn't happened before now? surely there would have been other women with the same physical characteristics before now who would have completely dominated their sport?