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

How Soon Is Now

Deleted User wrote: »

Not right this moment. But if you filled in a form for a gender recognition certificate, then yes, you would be able to join a women's football team, exactly as you are right now.

Which is part of the problem isn't it.

One eyed Jack

suicide_circus wrote: »

A rhetorical question yes and not one that was ever specifically aimed at you. Not my fault you cant stop yourself being exhaustingly verbose in outlining your frankly wacky takes on this issue.

The only thing you were responsible for was the stupid question, I didn’t claim you were responsible for my response at all. I said you could have at least given a warning before you ask what turns out to be a stupid question. I responded in good faith to a question asked in bad faith.

BluePlanet

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Me personally I don't believe anyone who decides there something different to what they where born in this case a male or female should be considered that.


So if they decide to change something that cant and shouldnt be changed then there situation shouldn't be as simple as I'm a girl now I'm gonna go play with the girls!

Did you ever consider how a doctor and nurse determine the baby's sex?
Just by looking at the anatomy.
Now, did you ever take an online quiz boy or girl, that showed images of questionable and indeterminate anatomy?

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not right this moment. But if you filled in a form for a gender recognition certificate, then yes, you would be able to join a women's football team, exactly as you are right now.

It’s certainly not as simple as that. He could join a women’s football team right now if he was permitted, without requiring a GRC. He could also be denied being permitted to join a woman’s football team even if he were in possession of a GRC. ‘Twould be up to him then if he feels he decides he wants to fight it or not for a place on the women’s team of his choice, and even then he would still have to fight to be permitted to participate in competitions. He could still coach or manage women’s sports if he wanted, there are no sex-based restrictions on coaching or management.

How Soon Is Now

BluePlanet wrote: »

Did you ever consider how a doctor and nurse determine the baby's sex?
Just by looking at the anatomy.
Now, did you ever take an online quiz boy or girl, that showed images of questionable and indeterminate anatomy?

Whatever there doing to determine the sex of a child it seems to work fine for the vast vast majority of people. Its usually fairly black and white what you are. Now if your brain is telling you otherwise well that could be many things couldn't it... Anyway according to the boards mods I'm not allowed to get into the finer details of that so.

BluePlanet

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Whatever there doing to determine the sex of a child it seems to work fine for the vast vast majority of people. Its usually fairly black and white what you are. Now if your brain is telling you otherwise well that could be many things couldn't it... Anyway according to the boards mods I'm not allowed to get into the finer details of that so.

No it's not always black and white and sometimes the anatomy isn't clear and what looks like a boy, and whose parents were told 'it's boy', turns out to be a girl and vis versa. Certainly those people should not be burdened by a forever mis-categorization of their sex, for life.

How Soon Is Now

BluePlanet wrote: »

No it's not always black and white and sometimes the anatomy isn't clear and what looks like a boy, and whose parents were told 'it's boy', turns out to be a girl and vis versa. Certainly those people should not be burdened by a forever mis-categorization of their sex, for life.

So if a boy is born with a dick is that not clear enough no? If there's something missing down there or extra! then we you can start asking questions.

BluePlanet

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

So if a boy is born with a dick is that not clear enough no? If there's something missing down there or extra! then we you can start asking questions.

yes you are missing the point about the indeterminate anatomy, which to be fair is pretty central to a debate about gender identification.

Gentlemanne

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

Are all transsexual people gay?

complete non sequitur

NoLuckLarry

Gentlemanne wrote: »

complete non sequitur

It’s not though, you are the one arguing that T belongs with them. L G & B are sexual preferences last time I checked so what has trans got to do with that umbrella??

mohawk

BluePlanet wrote: »

No it's not always black and white and sometimes the anatomy isn't clear and what looks like a boy, and whose parents were told 'it's boy', turns out to be a girl and vis versa. Certainly those people should not be burdened by a forever mis-categorization of their sex, for life.

Being born intersex is what your referring to and is completely separate to being transgender. Your right that if your intersex then there should be rules/laws in place to ensure they don’t have to live with consequences of being mis-categorised at birth (although this would be rare).
Intersex is a very tricky one to legislate for in sports look back to the podium of the 2016 Olympics 800m final. I am not aware of any instances where it has been controversial in men’s sports.

How Soon Is Now

BluePlanet wrote: »

yes you are missing the point about the indeterminate anatomy, which to be fair is pretty central to a debate about gender identification.

I don't know what your point is so?


Like someone has just mentioned are you talking about intersex?

How Soon Is Now

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

So if a boy is born with a dick is that not clear enough no?

Intersex people can be born with ambiguous genitals, or with genitals that don't match their chromosomal sex, or with chromosomes that don't fit into the normal XX/XY categories. So in some, rare cases, it can be more complex than "has a penis and is therefore unambiguously male".

Many intersex people object to trans rights activists' attempts to conflate or associate their conditions with transgenderism.

One eyed Jack

BluePlanet wrote: »

No it's not always black and white and sometimes the anatomy isn't clear and what looks like a boy, and whose parents were told 'it's boy', turns out to be a girl and vis versa. Certainly those people should not be burdened by a forever mis-categorization of their sex, for life.

In patients who are transgender, it’s not necessarily a miscategorisation of their sex, but rather a disconnect between their sex and their gender identity, but otherwise I agree that nobody should be burdened by a miscategorisation of their gender identity for life, and should have the right to have their preferred gender recognised in law, a right which all people have now in Ireland under the provisions of the Gender Recognition Act. I don’t support the extension of the provisions to children under the age of 18, but there are exceptions made for children between the ages of 16 - 18 by Court Order.

More and more organisations are recognising children’s right to partake in sports and sporting competitions according to their preferred gender which means that children don’t have to undergo any medical treatment or procedures to be able to partake in sports. I think that’s the fairest approach to allow everyone who wants to partake in sports and it’s good for the development of the sport overall. Sporting organisations are all too aware of the dropout rates in sports among children and they’re trying all sorts of initiatives to encourage participation among children in sports.

How Soon Is Now

Gentlemanne wrote: »

complete non sequitur

LGB rights have nothing to do with transsexual rights unless a transsexual person just happens to be gay or bi.


Basically trans people have just been thrown into the whole LGB thing and I'm sure there's plenty of gay people out there who wonder why!

Tilden Katz

BluePlanet wrote: »

I'm pretty sure there are not enough trans athletes to create a competition like this.

Well, then, they might just have to not compete. You might say that's unfair but is it any more unfair than a woman getting bumped to make room for them? Both are unfair so who gets precedence and why?

Gentlemanne

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

LGB rights have nothing to do with transsexual rights unless a transsexual person just happens to be gay or bi.


Basically trans people have just been thrown into the who LGB thing and I'm sure there's plenty of gay people out there who wonder why!

Again, completely ahistorical. Its more like transphobic people want to drop the T after decades of LGBT activism.

How Soon Is Now

Deleted User wrote: »

Intersex people can be born with ambiguous genitals, or with genitals that don't match their chromosomal sex, or with chromosomes that don't fit into the normal XX/XY categories. So in some, rare cases, it can be more complex than "has a penis and is therefore unambiguously male".

Many intersex people object to trans rights activists' attempts to conflate or associate their conditions with transgenderism.

I wasn't aware we where talking about intersex people I assume we where talking about trans..


Intersex is totally different and id agree that would be looked at differently.

How Soon Is Now

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Again, completely ahistorical. Its more like transphobic people want to drop the T after decades of LGBT activism.

So a straight transsexual person (Whatever that even is) should be part of a gay rights movement?


If that's the case should straight people not be added to LGB than as well?

chopperbyrne

Tilden Katz wrote: »

Well, then, they might just have to not compete. You might say that's unfair but is it any more unfair than a woman getting bumped to make room for them? Both are unfair so who gets precedence and why?

Is it really unfair to tell someone who was born male, went through male puberty, and transitioned well into adulthood, that they are not allowed to compete with people born female?

I don't think so.

It might be unfair to tell someone who was born male, went on puberty blockers at 11, and cross sex hormones from 16 (medical practices I believe to be unethical, but that's a different story), that they can't compete in female sports, as they would not have had the benefit of male puberty.

BloodBath

One eyed Jack wrote: »

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.

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:

TL/DR Everyone in here who is against this is a transphobe who doesn't give a **** about women.

You always do the same ****. You can try and make it as subtle as you want but that's what you're saying.

BloodBath

BluePlanet wrote: »

Like 12.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2835184&page=1

A frankly criminal act that shouldn't be legal. We don't let 12 year olds vote, drink or drive but you're going to let them make the most important decision of their life before they even hit puberty. One that they can't come back from.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The societal circumstances which led to transgender athletes competing in women’s sports competitions being portrayed as a threat to women’s sports are a direct consequence of women being regarded as inferior to men in every respect in many societies across the world, and thereby justifying all sorts of rules and social norms which were meant to limit their equal participation in society as a consequence of being portrayed as the fairer sex.

Bull****. They are portrayed as a threat to womens sports because they are a threat to womens sports. It's really that simple.

One eyed Jack

BloodBath wrote: »

TL/DR Everyone in here who is against this is a transphobe who doesn't give a **** about women.

You always do the same ****. You can try and make it as subtle as you want but that's what you're saying.

No, that’s what you’re saying I’m saying, which I’ve never said nor even implied.

I wouldn’t normally justify something I’ve never said, but you’re more than welcome to post an example of where I ever labelled anyone a transphobe or implied they didn’t care about women on the basis that I didn’t share their opinions.

It’s an accusation that’s been levelled a few times in my direction alright when I question people’s opinions, or when I express an opinion they disagreed with my opinion, but name-calling shìte serves no productive purpose IMO, it’s pointless, pretty much like the idea that anyone who doesn’t agree with someone else doesn’t care about women in this instance, or men, or children, or boys or girls or whoever - pointless.

You want to portray yourself as a victim, you go right ahead, I’m absolutely not going to stop you, I just don’t feel a need to take your opinions seriously.

BloodBath

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No, that’s what you’re saying I’m saying, which I’ve never said nor even implied.

I wouldn’t normally justify something I’ve never said, but you’re more than welcome to post an example of where I ever labelled anyone a transphobe or implied they didn’t care about women on the basis that I didn’t share their opinions.

It’s an accusation that’s been levelled a few times in my direction alright when I question people’s opinions, or when I express an opinion they disagreed with my opinion, but name-calling shìte serves no productive purpose IMO, it’s pointless, pretty much like the idea that anyone who doesn’t agree with someone else doesn’t care about women in this instance, or men, or children, or boys or girls or whoever - pointless.

You want to portray yourself as a victim, you go right ahead, I’m absolutely not going to stop you, I just don’t feel a need to take your opinions seriously.

I'm just going to ignore you instead as you never add anything constructive to the conversation.

Now playing innocent when it's quite obvious what you were implying with that post.

One eyed Jack

BloodBath wrote: »

Bull****. They are portrayed as a threat to womens sports because they are a threat to womens sports. It's really that simple.

That’s the same thing!

One eyed Jack

BloodBath wrote: »

I'm just going to ignore you instead as you never add anything constructive to the conversation.

Now playing innocent when it's quite obvious what you were implying with that post.

It’s obvious what you thought I was implying alright, but apart from thinking of the word fcukwit, transphobe and labels like are just not labels I would use to describe anyone, much less would I be inclined to express them in a discussion where I’m compelled to be civil.

Tilden Katz

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Is it really unfair to tell someone who was born male, went through male puberty, and transitioned well into adulthood, that they are not allowed to compete with people born female?

I don't think so.

It might be unfair to tell someone who was born male, went on puberty blockers at 11, and cross sex hormones from 16 (medical practices I believe to be unethical, but that's a different story), that they can't compete in female sports, as they would not have had the benefit of male puberty.

But then that scenario comes with a whole other lot of ethical issues. Not gonna bring the thread off-topic with that though.

Quantum Erasure

One eyed Jack wrote: »

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

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s obvious what you thought I was implying alright, but apart from thinking of the word fcukwit, transphobe and labels like are just not labels I would use to describe anyone, much less would I be inclined to express them in a discussion where I’m compelled to be civil.

Nicely done

One eyed Jack

Tilden Katz wrote: »

But then that scenario comes with a whole other lot of ethical issues. Not gonna bring the thread off-topic with that though.

It’s exactly those sorts of ethical issues though are the reason why it was argued that athletes shouldn’t have to undergo any medically unnecessary procedures in order to be permitted to compete in competitions, whether they are transgender, intersex or otherwise.

While some people may argue that the eligibility criteria aren’t applicable to anyone who is intersex or otherwise, they are, and they’re affecting more athletes than just transgender athletes, primarily athletes who are indeed born female and socialised as female, whom it is discovered during sex testing that according to the results they are chromosomally males.

That’s why sex testing too carried a whole load of ethical issues of its own and why it is no longer used by the IOC to test athletes in women’s sports. It was never used to test athletes in men’s sports, and there has never been a case of a male athlete being forced to undergo sex testing which the results were that they were chromosomally female. It has been argued since it’s inception that sex testing unfairly targets women and puts women off competing in sports, much like the arguments that permitting transgender athletes to compete in women’s sports would put women off competing in women’s sports.

Changing the rules for competitions to allow for more open competitions in any sport has never ended the sport, but only contributed to it’s popularity and development and enabled people to have more opportunities that previously were unavailable to them, no matter at what level they chose to participate in any sport, including some of the new sports being recognised by the IOC and hosted by Tokyo in an attempt to showcase the Olympics and attract a younger audience -


Tokyo Olympics: from surfing and skateboarding, here are the new sports to watch out for


There’s even a Refugee Olympic Team which supports refugees from various countries to participate in the Olympics -


IOC Refugee Olympic Team Tokyo 2020


The idea that permitting transgender athletes to compete in the Olympics signals the demise of women’s sports is ludicrous, frankly. Women’s sports were always an afterthought up to now when society is changing and women’s participation in sports is growing, precisely because of developments in the sports and the governing bodies which govern the sports and set the eligibility and qualifying criteria for competitions. The IOC are well aware that they need to change the rules or face their demise, while other people will set up organisations and continue to participate in any given sport on their terms, just like women did when they weren’t permitted to compete in the Olympics -


Participation of women in the Olympics


I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that if the people who wish to exclude transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports actually supported women’s sports, then women’s sports would by now be regarded on an equal basis as men’s sports. It’s also not unreasonable to suggest on that basis that it’s not because they care about women’s sports that they wish to exclude transgender athletes from competing, it’s simply because they wish to be a dog in a manger about it - they don’t want women’s sports to be equal to men’s sports, and they don’t want transgender athletes to be permitted to compete in women’s sports… it’s like they imagine there’s a hierarchy, with themselves at the top.

Sue de Nimes

I think the idea of segregating sports into male and female is discriminatory and something we should have moved on from in 2021.

We should really be looking at men and women (and anyone else) competing against each other in the same competitions. It seems the only way to have true equality in sports.