First olympic transgender athlete to compete at Tokyo 2020 **MOD NOTE IN OP**

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Heaven forfend people be permitted to post things that an extreme and extremist minority don’t like to read.

I'm assuming they used hateful, hurtful language about trans people rather than simply saying sex is immutable?

McGinniesta

Vestiapx wrote: »

Yer wan Jenner was an Olympic athlete iirc?

A man at the time that competed against men

joe40

I think this just plays into the hands of the actual transphobes. I have no problem with transgender people living life how they please.
However in the field of competitive physical sports I just think it is wrong to discount the benefit of male puberty that transwomen have.

I have no intention of ridiculing trans people but sport should be as fair as possible. That is why doping is so reprehensible.

Top female athletes will be physically better than the vast majority of Men but they won't be better than the top male athletes.

Shield

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Not sure why the same posters who are thread banned from similar topics are allowed to post.

At a guess, their thread ban has shown them the error of their ways and they have now altered their posting style so they can have their voice heard.

I think it’s important we hear as many voices as possible on this topic which is why I think topic bans are a bad idea.

If you disagree with experts giving their opinion on the issue of unfairness, I’d love to hear why. What I would NOT like is for you to be silenced because your opinion is different to mine.

...Ghost...

Lurleen wrote: »

I'm assuming they used hateful, hurtful language about trans people rather than simply saying sex is immutable?

No. Some are just threadbanned for being off topic even if answering a question. Some mods are pretty cool and let threads carry on as long as there is a reasonable level of respect and on topic discussion. Others have a different way/view and throw out cards and warnings like rice at a wedding.

It's a bit sad to assume people were threadbanned for the worst reasons.

notobtuse

Personally I don't like it one bit where a male who went through puberty where bone, muscle and body mass is developed should be allowed to compete in women's sports. And if this nonsense continues I'd say just do away with men's and women's sports and have only neutral sports, where the athletes compete strictly on their abilities.

...Ghost...

...Ghost... wrote: »

No. Some are just threadbanned for being off topic even if answering a question. Some mods are pretty cool and let threads carry on as long as there is a reasonable level of respect and on topic discussion. Others have a different way/view and throw out cards and warnings like rice at a wedding.

Oh I know. Was being iro-castic.

Reading this, I'll feel a lot better the next time I put my niece or nephew in goal in the back garden and blast 5 goals past them.

BloodBath

meeeeh wrote: »

Yes let's make them stand on this while ignore this:

https://sportsmedicine-open.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40798-020-00293-4

As I said it's good that fairness in weight lifting is suddenly so important to some. Spare me the babble about fairness, sportsmanship and conscience.

What kind of deflection is this? Doping is illegal. It still happens sure but that has nothing to do with this thread topic.

meeeeh wrote: »

There is a very simple thing you don't understand. Lauren Hubbard is not cheating. She is not breaking any rules unless she is doping like so many other weight lifters. So if you about cheating there is nothing to worry about in this regard.

It's not whataboutery it's about logic. Playing inside the rules = not cheating, playing outside the rules = cheating. I really don't know how much simpler I could make it but I'm pretty sure that my dog would understand it by now.

The rules are bollocks, that's the argument.

Basing eligibility on a basic testosterone level test makes 0 sense and it's completely unfair to legitimate female athletes akin to cheating.

Tilden Katz

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Not sure why the same posters who are thread banned from similar topics are allowed to post.

The same posters who say ohhh she's had male puberty so she has an advantage, were arguing against trans youth from getting healthcare.

So what are trans people meant to do? Reminds me of some oldies saying "oh I support gay rights... But.."

Do you think people should be banned from a topic entirely? And what’s the story with playing the man and not the ball?

As for minors getting potent life-changing treatment, the link you seem to be making here is “Well if minors are given these (untested) drugs young enough, then they won’t go through the male puberty that bestows all these great physical advantages. Et voila, they can compete with females!”. I’m not seeing why you would think it strange or contradictory that people would oppose both of these things. The treatments that prevent these minors from going through male (or female) puberty are fraught with ethical issues. Naturally, many people oppose them.

Yes, having to go through the puberty of their birth sex could mean exclusion from the sport of their choice. But then we’re back to “Is sport important?”. An athlete has missed on an Olympic spot due to Hubbard qualifying. Does it matter or not that sport would be very important to her or she wouldn’t have devoted her life to training in that event? Is sport important or isn’t it? Some people only seem to think so when the transgender athlete is missing out. When people like this women are, the attitude seems to be “Sure, it’s just sport!”.

Tilden Katz

meeeeh wrote: »

There is a very simple thing you don't understand. Lauren Hubbard is not cheating. She is not breaking any rules unless she is doping like so many other weight lifters. So if you about cheating there is nothing to worry about in this regard.

It's not whataboutery it's about logic. Playing inside the rules = not cheating, playing outside the rules = cheating. I really don't know how much simpler I could make it but I'm pretty sure that my dog would understand it by now.

The whataboutery about which I speak is you bringing up doping and people’s apparent lack of interest in it, as you well know. And if you don’t know then I wouldn’t be pontificating to others about their lack of comprehension. And you’re attacking the poster, not the post there, by the way. If you need to resort to insults...

Anyway, sure let Laurel have her entirely without honour and meaningless placing, whatever it may be. She has agency and could have stepped aside. If she doesn’t, many people will judge her for it as they are free to do. There’s no requirement to think her admirable.

Tilden Katz

notobtuse wrote: »

Personally I don't like it one bit where a male who went through puberty where bone, muscle and body mass is developed should be allowed to compete in women's sports. And if this nonsense continues I'd say just do away with men's and women's sports and have only neutral sports, where the athletes compete strictly on their abilities.

Bye bye, women’s sports for the most part then.

notobtuse

Tilden Katz wrote: »

Bye bye, women’s sports for the most part then.

Absolutely. Sacrifices must be made in the name of inclusiveness. Unless you think there are physical diferences between a biological female and biological male... but then you'd be on the wrong side of wokeness.

RIP Women's Sports 1900 - 2021.

ThunbergsAreGo

notobtuse wrote: »

Absolutely. Sacrifices must be made in the name of inclusiveness. Unless you think there are physical diferences between a biological female and biological male... but then you'd be on the wrong side of wokeness.

RIP Women's Sports 1900 - 2021.

Sacrifices seem to be one way. If I want to live as a women then I can do that (or anyone can) but maybe I need to give up my ambitions of being a top level sports person.

I would think that would be worth it to live in the gender I feel

Within the rules, but extremely unsporting. Shame on you, Laurel 'Hollow Victory' Hubbard.

McFly85

Sport at an elite level should have nothing to do with inclusiveness. Men and women who succeed at that level have to work insanely hard to do so, so they should be guaranteed a level playing field when they make it.

Allowing someone to compete against biological women when they have transitioned after fully developing as a man seems incredibly unfair. I know there is articles and rules about how much testosterone they are currently producing but the question needs to be asked: Had Laurel transitioned at an earlier point in life would she be in a position at 43 to compete in the olympics? It's highly doubtful. And if that's the case, then her development as a male has categorically helped her to this position.

I would say it's unfortunate for them, because there may be loads of reasons they weren't able to transition early in life, but elite sport is harsh. Hearing you'll never be able to compete at a top level is something a lot of sportspeople go through. How many women have been told they have great gymnastic ability, but because of their body type they'll never be good enough to compete? How many men have been great goalkeepers but simply too short to be good enough to make it professionally? Also, practically every transman athlete would have had to ask themselves the same question - do I transition and lose the ability to partake in elite sport?

I would consider myself pro-trans, everyone should be able to live in whatever way makes them comfortable, but there are some instances where the seemingly pro-trans position is actually moreso anti-cis women, and I think this is definitely one of those times.

FileNotFound

McFly85 wrote: »

Sport at an elite level should have nothing to do with inclusiveness. Men and women who succeed at that level have to work insanely hard to do so, so they should be guaranteed a level playing field when they make it.

Allowing someone to compete against biological women when they have transitioned after fully developing as a man seems incredibly unfair. I know there is articles and rules about how much testosterone they are currently producing but the question needs to be asked: Had Laurel transitioned at an earlier point in life would she be in a position at 43 to compete in the olympics? It's highly doubtful. And if that's the case, then her development as a male has categorically helped her to this position.

I would say it's unfortunate for them, because there may be loads of reasons they weren't able to transition early in life, but elite sport is harsh. Hearing you'll never be able to compete at a top level is something a lot of sportspeople go through. How many women have been told they have great gymnastic ability, but because of their body type they'll never be good enough to compete? How many men have been great goalkeepers but simply too short to be good enough to make it professionally? Also, practically every transman athlete would have had to ask themselves the same question - do I transition and lose the ability to partake in elite sport?

I would consider myself pro-trans, everyone should be able to live in whatever way makes them comfortable, but there are some instances where the seemingly pro-trans position is actually moreso anti-cis women, and I think this is definitely one of those times.

Good way to sum it up actually.

One eyed Jack

McFly85 wrote: »

Also, practically every transman athlete would have had to ask themselves the same question - do I transition and lose the ability to partake in elite sport?

Chris Mosier probably did ask themselves that question alright, and answered it too when they went about campaigning to have the IOC change their rules around athletes who are transgender and their eligibility to compete in competitions -


While he qualified, Mosier was uncertain about his eligibility to compete in the Duathlon Age Group World Championship Race in Spain in June 2016 due to the International Olympic Committee policy around the participation of transgender athletes, with specific provisions from the Stockholm Consensus in 2004. In 2015, Mosier challenged the policy, resulting in the creation and adoption of new IOC guidelines for the participation of transgender athletes. Mosier was considered the catalyst for change in the policy in January 2016, after he successfully advocated for change in the policy to allow his participation in the World Championship and future races. Following the policy change, in 2016 Mosier raced in the International Triathlon Union Sprint Duathlon World Championship race in Aviles, Spain, becoming the first known transgender athlete to compete in the World Championship race.


They didn’t try and hide behind excuses about “biological advantages” when it was the eligibility criteria, were limiting their ability to partake in elite sport.

Mad_maxx

joe40 wrote: »

I think this just plays into the hands of the actual transphobes. I have no problem with transgender people living life how they please.
However in the field of competitive physical sports I just think it is wrong to discount the benefit of male puberty that transwomen have.

I have no intention of ridiculing trans people but sport should be as fair as possible. That is why doping is so reprehensible.

Top female athletes will be physically better than the vast majority of Men but they won't be better than the top male athletes.

There are a lot of gay people so 'homophoebe " is a credible term

There are a miniscule number of people who get sex changes ,it doesn't warrant a term like ' transpphoebe "

Most people will never meet someone who had a sex change ,it doesn't warrant a social movement

McFly85

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Chris Mosier probably did ask themselves that question alright, and answered it too when they went about campaigning to have the IOC change their rules around athletes who are transgender and their eligibility to compete in competitions -


While he qualified, Mosier was uncertain about his eligibility to compete in the Duathlon Age Group World Championship Race in Spain in June 2016 due to the International Olympic Committee policy around the participation of transgender athletes, with specific provisions from the Stockholm Consensus in 2004. In 2015, Mosier challenged the policy, resulting in the creation and adoption of new IOC guidelines for the participation of transgender athletes. Mosier was considered the catalyst for change in the policy in January 2016, after he successfully advocated for change in the policy to allow his participation in the World Championship and future races. Following the policy change, in 2016 Mosier raced in the International Triathlon Union Sprint Duathlon World Championship race in Aviles, Spain, becoming the first known transgender athlete to compete in the World Championship race.


They didn’t try and hide behind excuses about “biological advantages” when it was the eligibility criteria, were limiting their ability to partake in elite sport.

My point was not around transmen being denied the option to compete, it’s was around the idea that if they decide to transition, they will have to accept that the level they practice their sport at as a man could be lower than they do as a woman.

That same article states that Chris had to give up his top ranking as a woman to compete as a man, and clearly he’s happier for it even though he has a lower ranking - its that most other transmen athletes must decide if they’d be happy with it also.

You’ll won’t hear many complaints for Female to Male trans people in sport anyway, as starting out as female would have little if any perceived benefits for most sports.

Gentlemanne

Mad_maxx wrote: »

There are a lot of gay people so 'homophoebe " is a credible term

There are a miniscule number of people who get sex changes ,it doesn't warrant a term like ' transpphoebe "

Most people will never meet someone who had a sex change ,it doesn't warrant a social movement

What is the exact threshold for a minority to be allowed to talk about bigotry towards them - is there a formula?

NoLuckLarry

Gentlemanne wrote: »

What is the exact threshold for a minority to be allowed to talk about bigotry towards them - is there a formula?

Just putting this out there but you claim there is bigotry towards them - I feel a lot of this is self inflicted. Aggressive bullying tactics seem to be a favorite for that community - a very poor and misguided choice of attitude if you are striving for people to accept you. All it does is alienate people who could maybe come to accept it at some point. If your first reaction every single time to genuine questioning of that which you claim to be is to come out violently swinging, don't act like the victim when punches get thrown back.

Gentlemanne

NoLuckLarry wrote: »

Just putting this out there but you claim there is bigotry towards them - I feel a lot of this is self inflicted. Aggressive bullying tactics seem to be a favorite for that community - a very poor and misguided choice of attitude if you are striving for people to accept you. All it does is alienate people who could maybe come to accept it at some point. If your first reaction every single time to genuine questioning of that which you claim to be is to come out violently swinging, don't act like the victim when punches get thrown back.

Exact same sort of victim blaming, word for word, that people used about civil rights, LGBT rights. Same sh*t different decade.

NoLuckLarry

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Exact same sort of victim blaming, word for word, that people used about civil rights, LGBT rights. Same sh*t different decade.

Not in the slightest, in fact it's disingenious to even try and compare Trans to the civil rights movements or LGB rights. Nothing alike.

Mad_maxx

Mad_maxx wrote: »

There are a lot of gay people so 'homophoebe " is a credible term

There are a miniscule number of people who get sex changes ,it doesn't warrant a term like ' transpphoebe "

Most people will never meet someone who had a sex change ,it doesn't warrant a social movement

I disagree with that. Minorities—all people, in fact—have a right to organise and create movements if they want to, regardless of the size of the group. It is absolutely the case that trans people face discrimination and hate because they are trans and for no other reason, and that is disgusting and unacceptable. As we've seen with the LGB movement, women's movements and so on, raising awareness and tackling prejudice can increase tolerance, in turn making it easier for people to live their lives in relative peace. I think those movements are laudable.

I don't lack empathy for trans people who suffer or have suffered with gender dysphoria, but I do see conflicts arise when the rights of other groups or people are potentially impacted by the wants of trans people.

I don't think there's anything wrong with (eg.) Laurel Hubbard continuing on with a sport she obviously loved and had success in prior to transition, after transition. But she has an unavoidable physical advantage that causes a conflict with the rights of the competing women to play elite sport on a level playing field.

I don't think there's anything wrong with any adult changing their appearance in any way they wish in order to look however they want to look, and using whatever surgeries, medications and enhancements they need to in order to feel comfortable, or for any reason, but I don't think we have anywhere near enough information to know if early intervention and a wholesale adoption of "affirmation" strategies is the right way to go, and I think the institutions that should be investigating that have been captured by activists who make the investigation more difficult, and who are walking a path that may set trans acceptance back by a considerable amount.

The circumstances I can think of in which I would purposely avoid using a person's "preferred" pronoun are limited to maybe one, and the only time I would purposely mis-gender someone (call a trans woman "he" in her presence, for example) is by mistake. But I am also pretty close to being a free speech absolutist, with very rare exceptions, and the idea that someone should be held criminally liable for refusing to use compelled speech is one of the most ignorant, dystopian ideas I've heard.

The accusation "transphobe" tends to come up when these points are made, and it's an accusation that's often being made by someone who wants to shut down the conversation because those conflicts are, understandably, uncomfortable. But the willingness of TRAs to sling "transphobe" about like sprinkles on a summer Sunday doesn't negate that real transphobia exists, and is awful.

yourdeadwright

Look just scrap sport based on category of gender,

So no men or women's or trans sections just SPORT all inclusive for everyone and if your good enough you play and make it on teams or make it to tournaments if your not good enough you don't

Simple...............it'll take about a month for everyone to realise how fu*king stupid it is & we can get back to normal,

randd1

- The athlete in quations still has male genitals, yes?
- The athlete is question is partaking in the weight-lifting.
- Weightlifters put serious pressure into their muscles when they lift.
- Weightlifters wear tight clothing that ahs been known to tear on occasion.

Now given all that, what are the chances that, while lifting, the material gives way, and the auld hurl and two sliothars pops out in full view of the watching world? Will the IOC then be able to continue to call it a women's sport, given that most people will regard it as a man competing in a women's competition?

Highly unlikely I know, but the question remains, have the IOC opened a can of worms here.

How Soon Is Now

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Look just scrap sport based on category of gender,

So no men or women's or trans sections just SPORT all inclusive for everyone and if your good enough you play and make it on teams or make it to tournaments if your not good enough you don't

Simple...............it'll take about a month for everyone to realise how fu*king stupid it is & we can get back to normal,

Or we could just keep women in women's sports and men in men's sports like how it was intended ha!! There should be no in-between unless its clearly a mixed gender event.

volchitsa

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Or we could just keep women in women's sports and men in men's sports like how it was intended ha!! There should be no in-between unless its clearly a mixed gender event.

I think there’s a sort of euphemistic approach that has caused confusion: people didn’t want to say the word sex so they used gender when they really meant sex.

So we got past our embarrassment and said single sex and mixed sex, rather than mixed gender, we would be halfway to the solution.

Let trans people live their lives the way they want, we don’t have to “misgender” them, we can call them she or they or whatever they like, but that doesn’t have to affect competitions, school toilets etc because they can be single sex, not single gender.

Job done, everyone should should be happy.

One eyed Jack

McFly85 wrote: »

My point was not around transmen being denied the option to compete, it’s was around the idea that if they decide to transition, they will have to accept that the level they practice their sport at as a man could be lower than they do as a woman.

That same article states that Chris had to give up his top ranking as a woman to compete as a man, and clearly he’s happier for it even though he has a lower ranking - its that most other transmen athletes must decide if they’d be happy with it also.

I got the point you were making, that they would have to face the question of losing their ability to partake in elite sports. My point was that it wasn’t because of their decision to transition would mean they lose their ability to partake in elite sports, it was because they wouldn’t meet the eligibility criteria to be able to partake in competitions.

It’s a popular narrative that this one weightlifter is being portrayed in the usual tabloid rags as being possibly responsible for any fall-off in women’s sports, and it’s being portrayed as unfair and all the rest of it on the pretext that they’re a man, but in all the furore, it seems to have been ignored that it wasn’t any male to female transgender athletes who campaigned for the IOC to change their rules regarding eligibility criteria for transgender athletes, it was a female to male transgender athlete who led a campaign to have the IOC change their eligibility criteria for transgender athletes in elite sports competitions.

McFly85 wrote: »

You’ll won’t hear many complaints for Female to Male trans people in sport anyway, as starting out as female would have little if any perceived benefits for most sports.

I don’t hear many complaining about transgender athletes competing in sport full stop, whether they’re male to female or female to male, so far all I’ve been hearing about is male to female athletes, and the complaints are coming from the usual people who only complain about unfairness when they perceive anything as being unfair to them in some way. Don’t hear a peep out of the same people when it comes to how unfair a policy is on people they don’t claim to share any affinity with. As I said, the “biological advantages” argument is a weak one, and takes no account of the numerous other factors which influence a person’s decision to participate in any sport, at any level. You’ll always hear losers complain and make allegations of cheating against their competition when they lose, and their being transgender is just another excuse to claim that’s why they didn’t win, or they’re not going to compete, or women’s sports are doomed, doomed I tells ya!

The evidence so far would suggest that simply isn’t the case, when transgender athletes aren’t exactly setting the world of sports alight with their achievements. The tabloid media are doing a hell of a job sensationalising something previously not too many people gave a shìt about when they thought there were no transgender athletes competing in sports. Suddenly they’re up in arms about it and claiming they need to protect women’s sports even though they haven’t before given a fiddlers fcuk about women’s sports?

One could be forgiven for being cynical about their motives for coming down with what appears to be a ferocious bout of feminism :pac: