Biological males in women's sport

Wibbs

Zorya wrote: »

Yes, and it works across the sexes too, women have better visual perception up close, which would have evolved from hunter gatherer style stuff I imagine. Guessing though.

Better colour perception and better peripheral vision too.

PlaneSpeeking

Wibbs wrote: »

Better colour perception and better peripheral vision too.

And - so I'm told - even in the depths of REM 4 sleep, can hear a baby cry.

All evolutionary.

blackwhite

seamus wrote: »

It's a mistake to assume that a trans woman is just a man in a dress.

Fun fact; the first crash test dummies were all based on an average man. It was assumed that the physics which occurred in a crash to this dummy, would just scale up or down for women and children, that safety equipment which was safe for the "average" man would therefore be equally safe for the "average" human.

When someone decided to actually create representative dummies of the latter, they realised their assumptions were completely wrong, and these groups were affected quite differently than intended when using the equipment. It also became clear that the "average" man dummy was woefully inadequate for the male population and larger and smaller male dummies were required to refine the quality of safety equipment.

This is the same thing. Assuming that whatever data has been gathered for male athletes just translates directly over to transwomen, is a mistake. You can't even assume it's "quite good" or "pretty close".

Come back when we have 10 or 20 years worth of data on the physiological effects of transitioning and things might be clearer.

It may be the case that trans competitors will only be permitted on "open" events if they have transitioned before the age of 18. Or we may find that trans competitors in general are fine provided that strict rules are maintained. Or we may find that trans competitors have a natural advantage and should be segregated.

But until we have this information & given the general lack of trans competitors winning competitions, there is nothing to be gained in excluding trans competitors.

Except of course, for the generation of biologically female competitors who are denied a level playing field.
But, f*ck them, because someone's feelings might be hurt :rolleyes:

iguana

Here's the thing. I 100% believe that there are people born male who feel a need to live as women and people born female who feel a need to live as men. And I believe that people who feel this need should 100% be helped through that. Either helped to feel ok in their birth gender. Or helped to transition to the opposite. Whichever it is they want and need. I believe that for the most part, transpeople are quite vulnerable. There are people who take such gross offence to how they want/need to live that they will physically harm them. And I think that as a society, we should do what we can to protect and welcome transpeople. To allow them to live their lives in a way that makes them be content in their own bodies and do what we can to keep them safe and protected.

However some people are f'ing assholes who will take whatever advantage they can to satisfy their own selfishness or perversions. There are a growing number of people who were born male, competing in female sport and using their clear advantage to win. There are people born male who are accessing women's shelters and assaulting the vulnerable women within. There are people, like Karen White, who was born a man, who while living as a man, carried out horrific sexual assaults on women and then transitioned to woman, was sent to a women's prison and assaulted the vulnerable women within. To deny that among the majority of absolutely genuine transpeople, there are people who will take advantage of their situation to further their own f'd up goals is ludicrous.

And it's a denial that puts quite a large number of women at a disadvantage. Women in non contact sport are losing the ability to compete. Numerous girls have already lost out on scholarships that could have made a huge difference to their lives. Women in contact sport are put in real physical danger. Women in prison and shelters have been put at terrible risk. That's not ok. Not even a little bit. And what it's also doing is stirring up anger and resentment of transpeople in people who normally wouldn't care and giving transphobes the justification they wanted to be absolutely vile to transpeople who just want to get on with their lives. Denying that there are people who will take advantage of laws to protect transpeople is harmful not just to certain, often vulnerable, women but also to the majority of transpeople. The problems need to be talked about, admitted to exist and the best solutions found, not denied in spite of the absolute obviousness of them with anyone willing to point them out shouted down as transphobic.

PlaneSpeeking

iguana wrote: »

Here's the thing. I 100% believe that there are people born male who feel a need to live as women and people born female who feel a need to live as men. And I believe that people who feel this need should 100% be helped through that. Either helped to feel ok in their birth gender. Or helped to transition to the opposite. Whichever it is they want and need. I believe that for the most part, transpeople are quite vulnerable. There are people who take such gross offence to how they want/need to live that they will physically harm them. And I think that as a society, we should do what we can to protect and welcome transpeople. To allow them to live their lives in a way that makes them be content in their own bodies and do what we can to keep them safe and protected.

However some people are f'ing assholes who will take whatever advantage they can to satisfy their own selfishness or perversions. There are a growing number of people who were born male, competing in female sport and using their clear advantage to win. There are people born male who are accessing women's shelters and assaulting the vulnerable women within. There are people, like Karen White, who was born a man, who while living as a man, carried out horrific sexual assaults on women and then transitioned to woman, was sent to a women's prison and assaulted the vulnerable women within. To deny that among the majority of absolutely genuine transpeople, there are people who will take advantage of their situation to further their own f'd up goals is ludicrous.

And it's a denial that puts quite a large number of women at a disadvantage. Women in non contact sport are losing the ability to compete. Numerous girls have already lost out on scholarships that could have made a huge difference to their lives. Women in contact sport are put in real physical danger. Women in prison and shelters have been put at terrible risk. That's not ok. Not even a little bit. And what it's also doing is stirring up anger and resentment of transpeople in people who normally wouldn't care and giving transphobes the justification they wanted to be absolutely vile to transpeople who just want to get on with their lives. Denying that there are people who will take advantage of laws to protect transpeople is harmful not just to certain, often vulnerable, women but also to the majority of transpeople. The problems need to be talked about, admitted to exist and the best solutions found, not denied in spite of the absolute obviousness of them with anyone willing to point them out shouted down as transphobic.

I've been called transphobic in the past.

Once for pointing out that merely saying "I'm a laydeee" and expecting to be treated as a woman (especially given the advantaged like physicality in sport, gender specific promotions etc) is wrong. This given that I have a former student who went through gender confirmation surgery to become a woman and the process took many years of pain, struggle and mental anguish including her family disowning her.

Another time was for refusing to call myself a cis-woman (a la Alison Moyet but I'm not as talented or famous!) and saying that I thought as an LGBT ally that the Trans Pride Day was divisive given the huge success of Pride weekend just a couple of weeks before and the massive steps the community has made since.

Apparently I'm transphobic. Insane.

piplip87

If I woke up in the morning identifying as a Amputee and went to the doctor to request I want to have my leg remomoved, I would be referred to a mental health professional. I'm am of the opinion that the trans movement is based on mental illness. Now I don't have a problem with anybody who chooses to go down that route but what I have a problem with is

1) "Trans" kids ....... Hormone and puberty blockers administered to children and the sections of society cheering them on...

2) Gender nonscence 37 different genders...... There's two male and female..... If your born a man and want to be female then once you have your bits cut off you are then female.... Non Binary etc is just attention seeking.There are thousands of biological differences between the sexes.

3) The impact this is having on children. They have to choose a gender (37of them) and a sexuality by the age of 13. My job deals with a lot of social media accounts and it's no mistake those who identify as a non Binary demi sexual are much more likely to have pictures of cuts on Instagram. Can we just not let kids be kids.

4) We have trans athletes winning, trans prisoners raping, can we just not have separate competitions for trans people. If they are certain that trans in itself is a gender then surely havinging gender specific competitions is the way to go

DEFTLEFTHAND

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I've been called transphobic in the past.

Once for pointing out that merely saying "I'm a laydeee" and expecting to be treated as a woman (especially given the advantaged like physicality in sport, gender specific promotions etc) is wrong. This given that I have a former student who went through gender confirmation surgery to become a woman and the process took many years of pain, struggle and mental anguish including her family disowning her.

Another time was for refusing to call myself a cis-woman (a la Alison Moyet but I'm not as talented or famous!) and saying that I thought as an LGBT ally that the Trans Pride Day was divisive given the huge success of Pride weekend just a couple of weeks before and the massive steps the community has made since.

Apparently I'm transphobic. Insane.

I refuse to go along with the cis thing also.

I'm a male human being.

Pyr0

piplip87 wrote: »

If I woke up in the morning identifying as a Amputee and went to the doctor to request I want to have my leg remomoved, I would be referred to a mental health professional.

That's actually a recognised psychological disorder! There's something out there for everyone! :pac:

astrofool

Zorya wrote: »

Somebody explained in an earlier post how evolutionary adaptations in male and female have given males advantage when it comes to sports that do not depend on bodily strength like snooker, darts or golf etc. To do with aim and spacial stuff...I dunno, look back, it's there somewhere.

I think the reply was in the chivalrous "a man shall nought hit a woman" way, when clearly, Katie Taylor would wipe the floor with a large majority of men.

We're at the point where technology has allowed many Paralympians to compete in any competition, and are artificially limiting what they can do, e.g. an amputee is only allowed prosthetics that approximate the length of what their original limbs would be, and of course, some athletes push those measurements to the limit to gain advantage, a large amount of athletes are also asthmatic compared to the general population (when you'd expect the opposite given how funnelling of the sporty kids happens at early ages), Lionel Messi received HGH during his early years to "correct" his size, but who's to know what his correct size was in the first place, TUE are also rife in sports, to the extent that athletes not using them when they can are losing ground.

PlaneSpeeking

astrofool wrote: »

I think the reply was in the chivalrous "a man shall nought hit a woman" way, when clearly, Katie Taylor would wipe the floor with a large majority of men.

We're at the point where technology has allowed many Paralympians to compete in any competition, and are artificially limiting what they can do, e.g. an amputee is only allowed prosthetics that approximate the length of what their original limbs would be, and of course, some athletes push those measurements to the limit to gain advantage, a large amount of athletes are also asthmatic compared to the general population (when you'd expect the opposite given how funnelling of the sporty kids happens at early ages), Lionel Messi received HGH during his early years to "correct" his size, but who's to know what his correct size was in the first place, TUE are also rife in sports, to the extent that athletes not using them when they can are losing ground.

Not sporting hitting - but in my youth (well 32, but still!) I was in a heated argument that got physical (there was the drink on board and it was during the whole Saipan thing).

No idea who raised their hands first but I had a small red mark on my cheek and he a bloody nose. Yet even now 16 years later, I told that story and the reaction was "no one should hit a woman" - why the f**k not, if we hit first and it's a fight ????

It's crap like that which makes male domestic violence victims afraid to speak up.

ohnonotgmail

astrofool wrote: »

I think the reply was in the chivalrous "a man shall nought hit a woman" way, when clearly, Katie Taylor would wipe the floor with a large majority of men.

We're at the point where technology has allowed many Paralympians to compete in any competition, and are artificially limiting what they can do, e.g. an amputee is only allowed prosthetics that approximate the length of what their original limbs would be, and of course, some athletes push those measurements to the limit to gain advantage, a large amount of athletes are also asthmatic compared to the general population (when you'd expect the opposite given how funnelling of the sporty kids happens at early ages), Lionel Messi received HGH during his early years to "correct" his size, but who's to know what his correct size was in the first place, TUE are also rife in sports, to the extent that athletes not using them when they can are losing ground.

Messi had a recognised medical condition for which he received treatment. It wasn't a fake illness like you are implying. Even with the HGH treatment messi is still only 5'7". Without the treatment he would be only 5' with reduced muscle mass.

astrofool

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Messi had a recognised medical condition for which he received treatment. It wasn't a fake illness like you are implying. Even with the HGH treatment messi is still only 5'7". Without the treatment he would be only 5' with reduced muscle mass.

I wasn't implying it was a fake illness, he was 4'2" when the treatment started, way below normal, and needed the treatment, that doesn't mean that he didn't gain an advantage from it. The average Argentinian male is 5'7", so he's definitely not short compared to his peers, as you imply, he's also taller than Xavi and Iniesta.

jmayo

astrofool wrote: »

You already have cases like Caster Semenya that doesn't really fit anywhere within those.

Ultimately we have competition to allow people to compete against other people who have the capability of being competitive against each other, we don't race people against cars because it's not competitive, and pointless, while male/female isn't quite so extreme, it's not really that close at the top levels of any sport between the genders. Danica Patrick is probably one of the greatest ever sportspeople due to being able to compete effectively at the highest level of her sport, regardless of gender
...

If you want to talk about women drivers ...

Michelle Mouton has an even better record in a male dominated sport.

Patrick has one won indy series race with a few pole positions and a few podium finishes.

She has won nothing in NASCAR.

Now on the other hand Michelle Mouton drove the animal Group B Quattros which even guys would say was hard to drive.
She won 4 World Rally Championship events and finished second in the World Rally Championship in 1982 to two time champion Walter Rohrl.
She helped Audi win the manufacturers world championship.

She was part of an Audi Rally team that included two world champions.
In her last year she had 3 World champions as team mates.

And when you look through the list of blokes she beat, it is a whos who of the elite of World Rallying from the glory years of the 1970s and 1980s.

In 1986 she won the German Rally Championship in a Peugeot by winning 6 of the 8 rallies.

So she leaves that yank in the halfpenny place IMHO.

Oh and she wasn't bad lookin either.

ohnonotgmail

astrofool wrote: »

I wasn't implying it was a fake illness, he was 4'2" when the treatment started, way below normal, and needed the treatment, that doesn't mean that he didn't gain an advantage from it. The average Argentinian male is 5'7", so he's definitely not short compared to his peers, as you imply, he's also taller than Xavi and Iniesta.

So the treatment only brought him up to average height for his country. He didnt gain an advantage. he had the negative effects of his medical condition negated. I've no idea why you mentioned him in the same breath as the many top athletes who magically require an asthma inhaler.

astrofool

jmayo wrote: »

If you want to talk about women drivers ...

Michelle Mouton has an even better record in a male dominated sport.

Patrick has one won indy series race with a few pole positions and a few podium finishes.

She has won nothing in NASCAR.

Now on the other hand Michelle Mouton drove the animal Group B Quattros which even guys would say was hard to drive.
She won 4 World Rally Championship events and finished second in the World Rally Championship in 1982 to two time champion Walter Rohrl.
She helped Audi win the manufacturers world championship.

She was part of an Audi Rally team that included two world champions.
In her last year she had 3 World champions as team mates.

And when you look through the list of blokes she beat, it is a whos who of the elite of World Rallying from the glory years of the 1970s and 1980s.

In 1986 she won the German Rally Championship in a Peugeot by winning 6 of the 8 rallies.

So she leaves that yank in the halfpenny place IMHO.

Oh and she wasn't bad lookin either.

Good example, ruined by your last line

astrofool

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

So the treatment only brought him up to average height for his country. He didnt gain an advantage. he had the negative effects of his medical condition negated. I've no idea why you mentioned him in the same breath as the many top athletes who magically require an asthma inhaler.

Right, so we should allow everyone to be brought up to the average.... I think you're missing the point.

I've no qualms with Messi, but it's an example where medical intervention allowed the world's top footballer to compete at all, his medical condition wasn't negated (it still existed), it just used HGH to do it artificially rather than naturally. Because he had the medical condition, we'll never know what his true height and size was, but had it been 1" shorter or taller, or had his muscles, that were also enhanced by HGH, been larger or smaller, he likely wouldn't be where he was today.

But I get that there is a bit of a cult around him, which sets off sparks if anyone questions these areas (even though Ronaldo is/was the better of the two :P)

ohnonotgmail

astrofool wrote: »

Right, so we should allow everyone to be brought up to the average.... I think you're missing the point.

I've no qualms with Messi, but it's an example where medical intervention allowed the world's top footballer to compete at all, his medical condition wasn't negated (it still existed), it just used HGH to do it artificially rather than naturally. Because he had the medical condition, we'll never know what his true height and size was, but had it been 1" shorter or taller, or had his muscles, that were also enhanced by HGH, been larger or smaller, he likely wouldn't be where he was today.

But I get that there is a bit of a cult around him, which sets off sparks if anyone questions these areas (even though Ronaldo is/was the better of the two :P)

And i think you have decided to ignore my post and make up one one of your own. The emoji at the end really does you not credit. *looks at username*

GreeBo

Wibbs wrote: »

The sexes come out pretty equal when everything is considered. Men might be on average physically stronger etc, but they've got weaker immune systems, fewer men used to make it to adulthood before modern medicine and men die younger too.

Equal if you put a count on every trait and sum them, but unequal by pretty much every other definition of the word "equal".

jmayo

astrofool wrote: »

Good example, ruined by your last line

Why ?
As a teenager I had a picture of her and her Quattro on my bedroom wall.
Both quite beautiful in their own way.

Would you rather I had a picture of some Page 3 wan who had achieved little bar getting her boobs out ?

I am tired of this shyte that one can't say they find someone attractive.

There are probably countless girls (and nowadays one has to clarify that by also adding guys) who would see someone like Ronaldo, Tom Brady, Beckham, etc as attractive as well as a great sportsman.

Zorya

iguana wrote: »

Here's the thing. I 100% believe that there are people born male who feel a need to live as women and people born female who feel a need to live as men. And I believe that people who feel this need should 100% be helped through that. Either helped to feel ok in their birth gender. Or helped to transition to the opposite. Whichever it is they want and need. I believe that for the most part, transpeople are quite vulnerable. There are people who take such gross offence to how they want/need to live that they will physically harm them. And I think that as a society, we should do what we can to protect and welcome transpeople. To allow them to live their lives in a way that makes them be content in their own bodies and do what we can to keep them safe and protected.

.

Most normal humane people feel the same. Personally I could not give a damn about what any other adult human being is doing, so long as they are not harming anyone else. And with the chemical and hormonal adulteration of the environment, and with less evolutionary need for straight up reproductive sexual expression, and with the fads and fashions that accompany civilisations throughout history on their downturn manifesting in our inevitably declining civilisation, it is to be expect ed that there is greater gender and sexual variance and experimentation. (And celebrity cooks, apparently!)

But what happened recently to accompany evolving trans ideology is that somewhere along the line a Rubicon was crossed in feminist, queer and gender theory, whereby we moved away from fact-based and empirical science to the (deconstructivist, ironically) position that gender is a social ''construct''. This is now a scriptural tenet, among others. In order for it to hold up, science has to be torn down. And holding that tenet means that we now have to do lots of things including telling children from their earliest years that they may conceivably be born in the wrong body, and we have to tell society that transwomen ARE in fact actual women and that they can compete in female sporting and so on and so forth etc..

bloodless_coup

He's on Newstalk right now

PlaneSpeeking

jmayo wrote: »

Why ?
As a teenager I had a picture of her and her Quattro on my bedroom wall.
Both quite beautiful in their own way.

Would you rather I had a picture of some Page 3 wan who had achieved little bar getting her boobs out ?

I am tired of this shyte that one can't say they find someone attractive.

There are probably countless girls (and nowadays one has to clarify that by also adding guys) who would see someone like Ronaldo, Tom Brady, Beckham, etc as attractive as well as a great sportsman.

Well said - I admire the ****e out of Roger Federer as an athlete and a human being. What's wrong with saying he's an utter ride bucket of a man also ?

Pyr0

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Well said - I admire the ****e out of Roger Federer as an athlete and a human being. What's wrong with saying he's an utter ride bucket of a man also ?

You can heap praise on women but the second you say they're also attractive then you're objectifying them and implying that they're only successful because of their looks.

PlaneSpeeking

Pyr0 wrote: »

You can heap praise on women but the second you say they're also attractive then you're objectifying them and implying that they're only successful because of their looks.

Madness!!!!!!

DEFTLEFTHAND

doylefe wrote: »

He's on Newstalk right now

Was this the Moncrieff show?

How did it go?

OscarMIlde

seamus wrote: »

Wibbs wrote: »

The sports governing body the UCI recognise this as a world championship event. Maybe you have some cutoff in mind before questions are asked?

Cut your losses here Wibbs. You've tried to argue that this isn't a niche event. Nobody on this thread would even know that a cycling championship had occurred, or that a Master's category existed in women's track cycling, had they not tried to jump on the outrage bandwagon.

This is not an event with widespread appeal. It is a niche event.

I did not say that, so you can g'way outa that for a start. I did say I recognise trans individuals as the gender they identify with. Basic manners and feelings on the matter. I also said that physiologically no matter how much me or anyone else feels on the matter, the basic biological facts remain.

Some of the basic biological facts remain. Lots of other ones are way up in the air. To claim that trans women are biologically indistinguishable from a men, especially in the area of athletic performance, is to make claims for which you have no data. It's not even an assumption you can reasonably make, given what we know about the impact of hormones on said performance.

Would it be "transphobic" of me to state that male to female trans can't get pregnant and carry a foetus to term, or that a female to male trans is incapable of becoming a biological father?

It's beneath you to play the victim card and pretend you're being attacked. We can note right now that you're the person who introduced this term to the thread and applied it to yourself.

If someone transitions from male to female at 18 most of those differences remain and more differences remain the older they transition.

Citation needed. Especially in regards to the impact of these "remaining differences" on athletic performance between transitioned and non-transitioned persons.

The point isn't whether they are biologically indistinguishable from men; it's very possible, indees probable, that they have diminished strength and fitness relative to their pre transition state. The problem is that they are highly distinct from biological women, the class they are now competing in. It quite simply shouldn't be allowed. It's grossly unfair and unsporting, and will ruin the careers and prospects of countless women athletes. If they want to participate in sport do it at a hobby and amateur level, there is no human right to be an elite athlete.

Franz Von Peppercorn

There’s a consultation going on at the moment in Britain regarding updating the GRA to allow self identification. Ireland seems to have been ahead of them.

Franz Von Peppercorn

seamus wrote: »

I think the most beautiful part of this whole thread is the repeated mantra about how some social media brigade is going to go crazy and shout down and criticise anyone who disagrees with this win...while in fact the only ones making any noise about this and shouting down people...are the ones who disagree with it.

This woman herself is pretty deeply embedded in transgender activism (naturally), so she's been pushing her win quite heavily.

But from what I can tell, very few "right-on" type of publications are picking it up and applauding. It's mostly the "grr, liberal snowflakes" types who are going mad about it.

It’s hard to tell how representative boards is, but the good feminists at mumsnet (as in mumsnet/feminism) are almost universally hostile.

the modern ideology of grievance and identity politics trumps what could have been an acceptable (to most) libertarian response. That response would have simply this - if people have gender dysmorphia then treat them as a 3rd sex after transition.

Political correctness demands that a trans woman is just a woman. That there’s a privilege to being a biological woman. The horrible word cis. All that nonsense.

If you start like that then you get to where we are. Lots of shouting about terfs. Self identification. People being accused of being bigots if they are lesbian and not into penises. And the effect on safe spaces, wards, women only swimming pools, , changing room, and sports.

klaaaz

There needs to be a distinction on what a trans woman represents in this general debate. The vast majority of the public rightly see a trans woman as a person who has medically transitioned from male to female which is perfectly fine regarding the safe spaces issue. A trans woman was always defined as a transexual in old skool terms which it should be and remain be. Women have not been consulted in Ireland or the UK on this issue on safe spaces regarding self ID, women have always understood(including the terfs) that transition always included a medical transition, not self ID.

However, extreme trans activists have hijacked this definition to include an umbrella of people who are not trans including those who "dress up" as women for a fetish(transvestites), they are men and always will remain as men as their choice(that recent Karen White monster is not a trans woman). Then you have the non-binary people who are not trans but claim to be trans, they are not transexual people, they have played the identity politics card with their 70 odd gender stuff.
Again, in my view a transwoman is a woman who has medically transtioned from male to female, not one who is male and throws on makeup and a dress to identify as a female, that is not transphobic to say that. There must be a distinction between a transexual(medical transition) who deserve respect and sympathy than those who do not medically transition.

ceadaoin.

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

It’s hard to tell how representative boards is, but the good feminists at mumsnet (as in mumsnet/feminism) are almost universally hostile.

the modern ideology of grievance and identity politics trumps what could have been an acceptable (to most) libertarian response. That response would have simply this - if people have gender dysmorphia then treat them as a 3rd sex after transition.

Political correctness demands that a trans woman is just a woman. That there’s a privilege to being a biological woman. The horrible word cis. All that nonsense.

If you start like that then you get to where we are. Lots of shouting about terfs. Self identification. People being accused of being bigots if they are lesbian and not into penises. And the effect on safe spaces, wards, women only swimming oools abd changing room, and sports.

Mumsnet is a "radicalization portal" according to trans rights activists