Biological males in women's sport

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yes, they do. But testosterone is a huge part of it. Which was why East German athletes in the ‘70s and ‘80s were fed them. The male East German athletes were given testosterone too but the advantage it conferred on them was tiny whereas the women... well, we all know what happened there.

Correct but we're seeing multiple examples of biological men transition into transwomen, bring their testosterone down below a defined limit for x months, and then still dominate female athletes. Set world records.

Bringing testosterone down to a defined limit for x months does not create a level playing field. I don't believe there can ever be a level playing field between women and transwomen. There are far too many factors at play. You could try to incorporate more factors in the rules - eg they must have transitioned at a certain age etc - but getting it right is nigh-on impossible.

The only fair and workable solution is to not allow them compete against women. Which would have been common sense a few years ago but that seems to have gone out the window.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

"Just because you chop off your penis, doesn't make you a woman. Biology is biology"

"Oh, except for Caster. That's complicated, you know, a weird fluke of birth, she's only kind of half a woman or something. Biology is complex"

Hypocrites.

Which would be grand if you weren't talking utter scutter as far as actual biology goes. Caster is apparently intersex, a medical disorder where someone can present with both traits of biological males and females, or a variance of that. So you could have XXXY for example. Transgender is a different kettle of swimming things. Now it could well be on the intersex spectrum specifically in the brain(which I'd tend to believe myself), but so far there's no test or definition for that.

In any event I'd ban both Intersex and Transgenders from competing with fully biological women. I'd be dubious about FtM Transgenders too as they can take testosterone and who is to say what amount is on a level with men? The range of testosterone in men is wide. Apparently healthy ranges go from 200 odd to 1000. If I was transitioning I'd be asking for the higher "average" dose myself. Which would make quite the difference depending on one's physiology.

riffmongous

Wibbs wrote: »

On that basis being male is "natural" and "genetically gifted" if competing in women's sports so hey why not let men and women compete in the same events? Pretty soon the vast majority would be almost exclusively male events.

That's a bizarre interpretation of things. She's still 'natural' on the basis of her being female, a poster above gave limits of a range of testosterone for women, but why doesn't this include people with hyper levels of it? Why should they be excluded due to a quirk, when if it was some other 1 in a million genetic advantage they wouldn't?

ceadaoin.

riffmongous wrote: »

Hm I'm not convinced, if it's natural it's natural.. should every physical and biological trait be subject to a range and anyone outside it stopped from competing? What about the freakishly tall or with incredibly long legs who would gain massive advantages in certain sports? Elite sports are usually dominated by the genetically gifted, why is that any different?

Then why segregate by sex or have any sort of division by weight or age? It's all natural, let it just be a free for all?

riffmongous

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Then why segregate by sex or have any sort of division by weight or age? It's all natural, let it just be a free for all?

Who said that? I'm saying if we want to segregate then we don't introduce additional arbitrary constraints that exclude those on the extremes, after all most elite athletes are extreme in some way or another

Candamir

riffmongous wrote: »

Who said that? I'm saying if we want to segregate then we don't introduce additional arbitrary constraints that exclude those on the extremes, after all most elite athletes are extreme in some way or another

How about having a Y chromosome? And being sensitive to testosterone. That should do it.

Zorya

riffmongous wrote: »

Who said that? I'm saying if we want to segregate then we don't introduce additional arbitrary constraints that exclude those on the extremes, after all most elite athletes are extreme in some way or another

Hormones are not ''additional arbitrary constraints''. They are absolutely fundamental to, among many other things, athletic DIFFERENCE.

Do you support doping in sports?

riffmongous

Zorya wrote: »

Hormones are not ''additional arbitrary constraints''. They are absolutely fundamental to, among many other things, athletic DIFFERENCE.

Do you support doping in sports?

I said natural quite a few times.

What about if you have a man who through some quirk has hyper levels of testosterone for a male and all he advantages it gives, would you approve him taking part in male competitions?

Zorya

riffmongous wrote: »

I said natural quite a few times.

What about if you have a man who through some quirk has hyper levels of testosterone for a male and all he advantages it gives, would you approve him taking part in male competitions?

I don't know fully the answer to that.

But preliminary thought is that extreme high testosterone is disadvantageous health wise - affects heart muscle, shrinks balls, weakens a body in fact. An endocrine problem that would cause soaring testosterone problem would likely not support sustained athletic ability.

ceadaoin.

riffmongous wrote: »

I said natural quite a few times.

What about if you have a man who through some quirk has hyper levels of testosterone for a male and all he advantages it gives, would you approve him taking part in male competitions?

Well if his testosterone level was giving him a huge advantage, eventually the sport would become dominated by men with super high testosterone with everyone else either having to cheat to keep up or be forced out . That would go against everything that competitive sport is supposed to be about so no, I don't think he should be allowed to have a level vastly higher than the normal range if it gave an unfair advantage, natural or not.

The Rape of Lucretia

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Then why segregate by sex or have any sort of division by weight or age? It's all natural, let it just be a free for all?

Segregation in sport is good for all. Age, country, sex, weights. It allows more people to compete, even though being restricted categories, it is a limited triumph.

'Mens' sports are really the true open test. Everything else, even women categories, are closed, or handicapped. As such, the rules are arbitrary. These rules can be made to be anything we like. There should be womens events. They simply arent as good as men, so would not be in the field or competitive at elite level without a category restriction of some form. Where one draw the line to determine who can compete is open to debate. There is no objective natural discriminant. So excluding the occasional outlier, like hyperandrogenism or transexuals is fair game. The fallback, available to all, is the mens, or open event.

The Rape of Lucretia

riffmongous wrote: »

I said natural quite a few times.

What about if you have a man who through some quirk has hyper levels of testosterone for a male and all he advantages it gives, would you approve him taking part in male competitions?

I certainly would. I see it as the unrestricted event. The best 'human' wins.

Zorya

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I certainly would. I see it as the unrestricted event. The best 'human' wins.

That's an interesting point. I think I would veer towards that.

Faugheen

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I certainly would. I see it as the unrestricted event. The best 'human' wins.

So if someone has a trait which they can’t control then they’re not ‘human’?

The Rape of Lucretia

Faugheen wrote: »

So if someone has a trait which they can’t control then they’re not ‘human’?

No, they are human.

Faugheen

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

No, they are human.

Sorry, completely misread your post.

I personally think the Semenya decision is a disgrace. Look at the absolute freak of nature that Michael Phelps was and he was allowed to compete and break all records.

Like Phelps, it’s not Semenya’s fault.

The Rape of Lucretia

Faugheen wrote: »

Sorry, completely misread your post.

I personally think the Semenya decision is a disgrace. Look at the absolute freak of nature that Michael Phelps was and he was allowed to compete and break all records.

Like Phelps, it’s not Semenya’s fault.

What was wrong with Phelps (assuming he wasnt using PEDs) ? The greatest are by definition freaks. He is the greatest swimmer ever, and dont see how he is linked.

Faugheen

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

What was wrong with Phelps (assuming he wasnt using PEDs) ? The greatest are by definition freaks. He is the greatest swimmer ever, and dont see how he is linked.

Phelps’ body size and shape wasn’t all over the place, but everything about it was perfect for swimming.

A larger wing span than his body height by about 4 inches, size 14 feet on small legs (that’s akin to you or I swimming with flippers), freakishly big hands for padding, very flexible joints which really helped, especially at his ankles and an extremely fast metabolism.

All of that was natural, but completely freakish. That’s the comparison to Semenya. Her body and it’s functions allow her to compete at a higher level than anyone else, just like Phelps.

The Rape of Lucretia

Faugheen wrote: »

All of that was natural, but completely freakish. That’s the comparison to Semenya. Her body and it’s functions allow her to compete at a higher level than anyone else, just like Phelps.

Thats not strictly true. No 'anyone else'. Other women yes - restricted category, with a grey boundary that has to be defined somehow. And there is a strong case, debatable though, that she should not be allowed into it. And the balance came down today on the side that she cannot compete in that category. It didnt see it explicitly stated, but presumably she can compete in the mens category. Which as I say above, is better though of as the unrestricted category.

Elmer Jones

Faugheen wrote: »

Sorry, completely misread your post.

I personally think the Semenya decision is a disgrace. Look at the absolute freak of nature that Michael Phelps was and he was allowed to compete and break all records.

Like Phelps, it’s not Semenya’s fault.

Phelps is 100% male. Semenya is not 100% female and not being 100% female has given her an advantage over her 100% female competitors as being female is a massive disadvantage in sport.

BTWI feel sorry for Semenya and anyone in her situation and the way it has been handled in such a public fashion is very unfortunate.

Faugheen

Elmer Jones wrote: »

Phelps is 100% male. Semenya is not 100% female and not being 100% female has given her an advantage over her 100% female competitors as being female is a massive disadvantage in sport.

BTWI feel sorry for Semenya and anyone in her situation and the way it has been handled in such a public fashion is very unfortunate.

It's not her fault though, that's my point.

If it was something she was doing to give herself an advantage I'd be completely on board with it, but the fact is that it isn't.

Also, hormone treatments could potentially have side effects for her health, which is also something that CAS pointed out.

I'd argue based on the evidence that Phelps is on his way to being a shark though :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Faugheen wrote: »

Sorry, completely misread your post.

I personally think the Semenya decision is a disgrace. Look at the absolute freak of nature that Michael Phelps was and he was allowed to compete and break all records.

Like Phelps, it’s not Semenya’s fault.

You can’t compare the two. Phelps has traits that many gifted swimmers have, both male and female. Big feet like flippers, for example. Missy Franklin has those too. But there’s no doubting she’s a woman. And there’s no doubting that Phelps is male. Swimmers are usually tall. Again, not a gender trait. There’s nothing all that unusual about Phelps’s physique compared to other elite swimmers.

I’m a bit confused about Semenya. People say the tests she has had to undergo are demeaning but athletes have had to provide DNA to prove their gender for decades now. And because of these mandatory tests, Semenya’s karyotype must be known. Is she XY or something between that and XX?

ceadaoin.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

You can’t compare the two. Phelps has traits that many gifted swimmers have, both male and female. Big feet like flippers, for example. Missy Franklin has those too. But there’s no doubting she’s a woman. And there’s no doubting that Phelps is male. Swimmers are usually tall. Again, not a gender trait. There’s nothing all that unusual about Phelps’s physique compared to other elite swimmers.

I’m a bit confused about Semenya. People say the tests she has had to undergo are demeaning but athletes have had to provide DNA to prove their gender for decades now. And because of these mandatory tests, Semenya’s karyotype must be known. Is she XY or something between that and XX?

Semenya is XY, It says it in the ruling. Some people who are XY dsd are androgen insensitive and would not develop as a male. Clearly this does not apply to semenya.

""the DSD covered by the Regulations arelimited to“46 XY DSD”

Hoboo

Caster Semenya has expressed her anger and disappointment at the IAAF’s decision to limit naturally occurring testosterone levels in female athletes.

“This is a real kick in the bollocks ” said Semenya.

kildare lad

He/she broke 4 world records in one day. Whoever thinks transgender should compete in women's competitions needs to get their head examined.


https://fitnessvolt.com/transgender-athletes-world-record/

alan partridge aha

kildare lad wrote: »

He/she broke 4 world records in one day. Whoever thinks transgender should compete in women's competitions needs to get their head examined.


https://fitnessvolt.com/transgender-athletes-world-record/

They need a swift kick in the balls

Atoms for Peace

Women's sport will become male (b) sport in all but name if this continues.

Annasopra

Zorya wrote: »

POsters who believe that people can actually transition sex - as in actually become the other sex - better be careful when it comes to things like blood transfusions. You know, where actual facts might mean that a male receiving blood from a transman, even if they believe that person is ACTUALLY a man, will be putting themselves in danger of higher mortality because the blood from a woman who has ever given birth - even if they magically one day become a man - is linked to an increased risk of death among male recipients. This risk will be aggravated as birth certs and medical records are changed retroactively to align with ideology.

What is this? I cant find anything about trans peoples blood endangering others. Have you a link?

Zorya

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What is this? I cant find anything about trans peoples blood endangering others. Have you a link?

I hope you actually read what I wrote before enquiring. An earlier poster said that trans people BECAME the biological sex to which they transitioned. As in the new mantra ''Transwomen are women'' /''Transmen are men''.
They are not. It is untrue. For many reasons. But one implication of the new ideology could prove dangerous medically.
If the ideology is followed then a biological male receiving blood from a transman, who is supposedly now an actual man, is at higher risk of dying if that transman has ever in their life been pregnant. The biological male is 13% more likely to die in that case.

https://www.livescience.com/60702-blood-transfusions-women-men.html

Charles Ingles

We are at peak madness now.
We should protect our women this insanity had set back women's sports 50 years, it's not a level playing field Trans athletes should have their own category.
I'd love to know the motivation behind this pushing trans agenda