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

topdecko

So what happens now i wonder. Probably have to weight and see how things turn out in this category in the Olympics. Assume this is being used as a test case given that it just involves lifting heavy stuff. will be interesting to see the public debate over this in the aftermath. So far discussion has been at the margins and activists/ twitter spats/TERFS etc but this will cut to the core of the issue.

A transgender male competing in female sport however is manifestly unfair and destructive to the very nature of sport and cannot be viewed as acceptable. Biological men cannot compete with women - i don't care what their story is, how they are as person, how difficult their journey has been, if they call themselves Mary, Kate or Jenny... they have an advantage by virtue of their biology and development regardless of which sex/non sex binary they now declare for. To argue otherwise is disingenuous.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You speak in tongues and riddles.

Everything is manipulated and torn apart, re-worded, misleadingly phrased, and packaged in deliberately awkward language -- almost as if you are debating yourself and trying to weasel together a justification to believe what you want to believe, rather than what is the actual case.

Eskimo you’re looking for something that just isn’t there tbh. It’s true that I’m not normally so concerned with minding my p’s and q’s outside of Boards, but I don’t think I can be accused of trying to weasel together a justification to believe what I want to believe, rather than what is the actual case. Just by way of example, it has been long rumoured that Hitler had his own anatomical anomaly, which is an easy narrative to perpetuate as it builds on the narrative that Hitler was a cnut of the highest order and a story like that is used to attack his character.

It would also lend credence to the idea that he had his own personal reasons for forcing Heinrich Ratjen to represent Germany at the Olympics (he would have known of Ratjens condition), but I don’t believe a word of it myself tbh, as plausible and all as it sounds.

BattleCorp

You do seem to be a little all over the place with your argument.

For example, see the part in bold below.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Regarding any decision to transition, it’s an individual’s choice and IMO they should never be compelled to undergo any unnecessary medical interventions or be forced to take synthetic hormones, no matter how they identify themselves as whatever their gender identity (some countries such as Germany, Samoa and India recognise a third gender), and it’s true that males retain the advantages of puberty if they choose to continue to participate in sports, or choose to take up a new sport where they may have what are considered advantages.

and from the same post:

It also appears to be true that males retain what appears to be those same significant advantages in their chosen sports regardless of their testosterone levels.

Yet you say in another post:

Generally speaking, I’d agree that it does appear that men do have advantages over women in most sports activities, but in my experience, that truism just… isn’t true.

You are contradicting yourself there.

To be honest, I'm viewing you as an ostrich with their head stuck in the sand. It's clear as day that men have an advantage over women in physical sports.

Doctors agree that men, in general, are bigger, stronger and faster than women.
Scientists agree that men, in general, are bigger, stronger and faster than women.
World records also show that men, in general, are bigger stronger and faster than women.

I get why you want to stick to your point. You consider transwomen to be women and to have every single right that women have. I believe there should be limitations on those rights.

My view is that while I want to be fair to transwomen, in most cases they were born with a male anatomy, have gone through male puberty and therefore have the physical advantages that those factors bestow upon them. This, in my opinion, is an unfair advantage against biological women and I think they shouldn't be allowed to compete against women.

You view the banning of transwomen from women's events to be a denial of transwomen's human rights.

I'd view the inclusion of transwomen in women's events to be the denial of biological women's human rights.

I know these are terms you don't like and I don't use them to try upset you but it's the simplest language I can use.

One eyed Jack

BattleCorp wrote: »

You do seem to be a little all over the place with your argument.

For example…

You are contradicting yourself there.

I’m not though, you even quoted where I said that in my experience that truism just isn’t true, and it’s not, but I don’t rely on my personal experience, I’m objective in that I can see too that males do generally speaking excel performance-wise above females in sports.

BattleCorp wrote: »

I get why you want to stick to your point. You consider transwomen to be women and to have every single right that women have. I believe there should be limitations on those rights.

I don’t, but you’re on the right track, and I understand that there are limitations on all rights which apply to everyone as equals in society, and there are obligations which apply to everyone as equals in society, and balancing those rights is a matter for the Courts to interpret laws written, discussed and debated by politicians.

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'd view the inclusion of transwomen in women's events to be the denial of biological women's human rights.

I know these are terms you don't like and I don't use them to try upset you but it's the simplest language I can use.

I get where you’re coming from, but nobody is being denied human or civil rights as a consequence of anyone else’s human rights or civil rights being recognised in law, or in sports or any other arena. That’s a fundamental misunderstanding which is being perpetuated by people who purposely want to mislead people. I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are being misled by someone else rather than they’re being purposely misleading, but I do appreciate that you’re not trying to upset me. Rest assured you won’t, but I can’t speak for anyone but myself, and in threads like this I know anyone who isn’t on-board with the group-think is held to a much higher standard as the ‘report post’ button is weaponised, nature of the beast and all that.

Capt'n Midnight

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Any gender is free to try and win a place on the PDC darts tour but they still have to have designated women’s places for their World Championship because none are ever going to qualify on merit. That’s a sport where fitness, strength and size is irrelevant.

Shooting may be similar. For air rifle and .22 anyway. For holding larger weapons there's a slight gender advantage. For this Olympics women now have the same number of shots as men. So the results should be directly comparable.


It would be interesting to measure medal winners across all sports in terms of height, weight, body fat, muscle mass, aerobic capacity, and anaerobic threshold and hormone levels to see how much of the advantage is from each for any given sport.


At this stage some of the less commercial sports are more entertaining to watch because there may be less money so less financial incentive for cheating. But even in the Paralympics and Special Olympics there are allegations of people sailing close to the wind with regard to their degree of disability so there's no guarantee.

Mellor

topdecko wrote: »

Assume this is being used as a test case given that it just involves lifting heavy stuff.

Being used as a test by who? The NewZealand weight lifting team?
This is the actions of a individual athlete/team/country. Not the “system”.

Mellor

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Reading my posts in the context in which they were written might help, but I couldn’t guarantee it will.

It might help if you stuck to a coherent idea. Instead of rambling between disjoint points and false claims.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m not though, you even quoted where I said that in my experience that truism just isn’t true, and it’s not, but I don’t rely on my personal experience, I’m objective in that I can see too that males do generally speaking excel performance-wise above females in sports.

Adding imo or in my experience is permission to make baseless claims.
What’s this experience you refer to. What was your experience where men didn’t have an advantage over women, I’m curious.


But the other posters contradiction description seems accurate.
The above post admits (kinda) that men have an physical advantage. But only yesterday, to the same poster, on the same concept, you said;

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s not that I fail to admit anything. It’s that I won’t express what I don’t know is actually true as if it is actually true. You’re expressing an opinion which I find questionable on a number of fronts ...

As I said, not really sticking to an idea.

Mellor

Mellor wrote: »

As I said, not really sticking to an idea.

At this stage, I'm convinced he is engaging in deliberate, linguistic obfuscation.

Hoboo

topdecko wrote: »

So what happens now i wonder. Probably have to weight and see how things turn out in this category in the Olympics. Assume this is being used as a test case given that it just involves lifting heavy stuff. will be interesting to see the public debate over this in the aftermath. So far discussion has been at the margins and activists/ twitter spats/TERFS etc but this will cut to the core of the issue.

A transgender male competing in female sport however is manifestly unfair and destructive to the very nature of sport and cannot be viewed as acceptable. Biological men cannot compete with women - i don't care what their story is, how they are as person, how difficult their journey has been, if they call themselves Mary, Kate or Jenny... they have an advantage by virtue of their biology and development regardless of which sex/non sex binary they now declare for. To argue otherwise is disingenuous.

Test case has been long done with Fallon Fox in MMA of all things. Result? A cracked skull. YouTube some of the fights, ridiculous.

https://www.attacktheback.com/transgender-mma-fighter-fallon-fox-breaks-opponents-skull/

One eyed Jack

Mellor wrote: »

It might help if you stuck to a coherent idea. Instead of rambling between disjoint points and false claims.

Adding imo or in my experience is permission to make baseless claims.

As I said, not really sticking to an idea.

Instead of trying to take pot shots at me, have you been able to come up with any evidence to support your claim that Hubbard is cheating or has cheated even? That requirement should be broad enough for you to offer something objective that isn’t just based upon your own personal opinion.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Instead of trying to take pot shots at me, have you been able to come up with any evidence to support your claim that Hubbard is cheating or has cheated even? That requirement should be broad enough for you to offer something objective that isn’t just based upon your own personal opinion.

But it's perfectly acceptable to you for a biological male to subjectively claim they are a woman and so should participate in women's sport. :rolleyes:

The irony is more than just palpable.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But it's perfectly acceptable to you for a biological male to subjectively claim they are a woman and so should participate in women's sport. :rolleyes:

The irony is more than just palpable.

I can understand why you might think it’s ironic had I ever made such a claim, but seeing as I didn’t, and that’s just another claim you made up on my behalf, well, I’d say you were tilting at windmills tbh.

Podge_irl

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I can understand why you might think it’s ironic had I ever made such a claim, but seeing as I didn’t, and that’s just another claim you made up on my behalf, well, I’d say you were tilting at windmills tbh.

So what is your position? Please explain it simply and straightforwardly.

Mellor

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Instead of trying to take pot shots at me,

I have not taken any pot shots at you. I’ve taken shot at the contents of you post.
That’s entirely normal. “Attack the post, not the poster”.

Your posts are rambling, lack a clear point, contradict previous posts, fail to answer the points put to you. None of that it a shot at you, it’s a commentary on your posts.

have you been able to come up with any evidence to support your claim that Hubbard is cheating or has cheated even? That requirement should be broad enough for you to offer something objective that isn’t just based upon your own personal opinion.

I’ve already explained this multiple times. It’s based the rules of sports, and doping control. That is all objective. I didn’t make up the rules for WADA - although I did think it odd that you claimed I did.
It was also clear you you were not aware of these fulls given the repeated mistakes you make in relation to them.

I really don’t know what part you aren’t understanding.
transgender women need and way to reduces make characteristics, like da oak hair. This can’t be done naturally obviously, so requires a drug based therapy. Usually Spironolactone. Which is a banned substances under wada rules.

One eyed Jack

Mellor wrote: »

I really don’t know what part you aren’t understanding.

The part I’m not understanding is the part where you’re claiming Hubbard is cheating, and when challenged to provide evidence for your claim, you haven’t yet done so. Instead you’ve tried to claim that a lack of evidence doesn’t mean Hubbard is not cheating, but that’s neither here nor there, your claim is that they are cheating, or they have cheated, and without evidence, your claim can be dismissed.

One eyed Jack

Podge_irl wrote: »

So what is your position? Please explain it simply and straightforwardly.

My position is very simple. People should be eligible to participate in the sport of their preferred gender without discrimination as to their sex. Being fair to everyone means presuming that they too are as interested in fair play as everyone else, and presuming innocence rather than the default position being suspicion that anyone is entering the sport with the intention of cheating. All athletes must be held to the same standard and entitled to have their rights to dignity and privacy respected and upheld.

Any athlete making unfounded allegations against another athlete or harassment of another athlete should face disciplinary action. It’s not just the duty of sporting organisations to promote the values of sportsmanship and fairness of the sport, it is also their obligation to protect athletes and to have regard for participants physical and mental health, their welfare and safety, not just in competition, but also outside of competition.

quinneerr

Transgenders are now better women than natural born women, 2021 shaping up to be their year, a few medals at the olympics are on the cards, will be interesting to say the least, how will the woke mob react?

ceadaoin.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

My position is very simple. People should be eligible to participate in the sport of their preferred gender without discrimination as to their sex. .

Why? Sports are segregated by sex, not gender identity. If Usain bolt would "prefer" to compete against females he should be allowed to? Or does he need to say the magic words that he identifies as the female gender first?

Will I Am Not

If Cristiano Ronaldo retires, identifies as a female and comes back out of retirement at the ripe old age of 45, he will dominate women’s football. And it will be fair :pac:

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

My position is very simple. People should be eligible to participate in the sport of their preferred gender without discrimination as to their sex. Being fair to everyone means presuming that they too are as interested in fair play as everyone else, and presuming innocence rather than the default position being suspicion that anyone is entering the sport with the intention of cheating. All athletes must be held to the same standard and entitled to have their rights to dignity and privacy respected and upheld.

Any athlete making unfounded allegations against another athlete or harassment of another athlete should face disciplinary action. It’s not just the duty of sporting organisations to promote the values of sportsmanship and fairness of the sport, it is also their obligation to protect athletes and to have regard for participants physical and mental health, their welfare and safety, not just in competition, but also outside of competition.

In the same breath advocating for a biological man competing against women in the Olympics, you speak of Corinthian values of sportsmanship and fairness, fair play and cheats...

It really is a case of Bob can identify as Brenda and batter the competition, but its Brenda's mental health we must have regard to, f**k the rest.

I've no problem with Hubbard lifting weights in her local gym, being referred to by her preferred pronouns.

But that's it.
Shes a trans woman, and has no business in an Olympics as a woman.

One eyed Jack

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Why? Sports are segregated by sex, not gender identity.

Some sports are, some sports aren’t. Sports activities themselves are meant to be open to anyone, and segregation by sex at it’s core is unfair to everyone, and participation according to their preferred gender identity, while not ideal, seems a fairer means of achieving the legitimate aim of allowing people to participate in sports regardless of their sex. The argument that it threatens women’s participation in sports or that it threatens either women’s or men’s sports for that matter, is simply unfounded IMO. The same arguments were made against granting people equal status in other areas in society and there was no merit in them then either.

I don’t see any reason to entertain your hypothetical argument when I was clear in my post about presuming everyone is innocent and so on rather than assuming everyone is cheating, and that all participants be held to the same standard.

Of course the alternative to your cherry-picked hypothetical in the context of an event comprising of 11,500 athletes, 79,000 overseas officials, journalists and support staff (not including a global audience), is to string the next Usain Bolt hopeful up by their shorts in the gender neutral bathrooms and post the pictures up on social media as a warning to anyone else who might get notions.

=One eyed Jack;117573431Sports activities themselves are meant to be open to anyone, and segregation by sex at it’s core is unfair to everyone, .

That's simply not true. Everything you say after that can be discounted

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Some sports are, some sports aren’t. Sports activities themselves are meant to be open to anyone, and segregation by sex at it’s core is unfair to everyone.

Can you succinctly explain your reasoning behind that?

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's simply not true. Everything you say after that can be discounted

I’m not sure which part you’re claiming isn’t true, but for the first part, that sports are supposed to be open to anyone - every sporting organisation tries to appeal to and encourage young people to participate in their sport, extolling the virtues of their particular sport and their particular organisation. Segregation by sex has historically meant that the female sex were regarded as inferior to males.

They were regarded as property and so on. They were denied the same opportunities as men and that has had the knock-on effect of shaping our society as it is today - depending upon your point of view, it’s either fair, or unfair. I’ve never been a fan of the bigotry of low expectations and viewing people from the perspective of what they couldn’t do, but rather what they could do if they were treated fairly and given as much support as was needed for them to achieve their potential.

If you’re concerned about the perceived “threat to women’s sports”, the logical thing to do would be to support women’s sports, rather than arguing that it’s inferior status to men’s sports should be maintained, or crippling men’s sports in the interests of fairness, etc. I don’t see handicapping anyone as being the same as promoting people who don’t have the same opportunities as everyone as being fair to everyone either.

If anyone is not interested in the same goals or what other people consider legitimate aims, then rest assured nobody is forcing them to participate, and going by the numbers alone, there are surely many more people will join an organisation which promotes segregation based upon sex, and then that organisation will be more popular, as opposed to currently dying on their arse from lack of interest among young people who are interested in participating in different sports and joining different sporting organisations which are more in line with their values and their hopes and dreams for their futures.

Podge_irl

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Some sports are, some sports aren’t. Sports activities themselves are meant to be open to anyone, and segregation by sex at it’s core is unfair to everyone

What sports are not? At the very least it is the vast, vast majority that are.

I have no reason to suspect any trans person has ulterior motivation and I have not gone down that road of argument. Their intentions or purity of spirit are utterly irrelevant to me. Sports are segregated by sex for a reason - whether or not they are "trying" to cheat is irrelevant, they inherently have a massive, massive advantage. That you speak of fairness is quite galling to be honest. There is nothing fair about those who have not had the benefit of being flooded by androgens during puberty competing against those who have not.

You seem to think that women should be happy to just participate in sports with a massively impacted playing field that reduces their chances of winning i.e. they should be happy just to be there. Sports quite literally is a zero sum game when it comes to achievements.

Will I Am Not

The reason women’s sports exist is because if they didn’t they would never feature at the business end of sports tournaments. It’s the total opposite of unfair.

Podge_irl

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m not sure which part you’re claiming isn’t true, but for the first part, that sports are supposed to be open to anyone - every sporting organisation tries to appeal to and encourage young people to participate in their sport, extolling the virtues of their particular sport and their particular organisation. Segregation by sex has historically meant that the female sex were regarded as inferior to males.

Had they removed the segregation by sex, elite women's sport would have fared no better as no women would have been involved in it. The solution to this is promoting women's sport equally, not removing the segregation.

Historically women have indeed been treating terrible and regarded as inferior with no valid reasoning. However, nothing will ever make elite women sports be on the same purely athletic level as elite men's. It doesn't matter what "society" does.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Segregation by sex has historically meant that the female sex were regarded as inferior to males.

If men and women competed in all sport, men would win 99.9% of the time.

And you have the audacity to extoll the virtues of fairness?

One eyed Jack

Podge_irl wrote: »

Had they removed the segregation by sex, elite women's sport would have fared no better as no women would have been involved in it. The solution to this is promoting women's sport equally, not removing the segregation.

I don’t imagine there needs to be any one single solution tbh, I think there are numerous innovative ways to modify the rules and sports competitions with the aim of maintaining a sports relevance in society and introducing sports to new audiences and increasing youth participation and so on. The society that we grew up in is not the same society our parents, or grandparents or however far back you want to go, grew up in, right back to when sports were an activity only for males to test their mettle. The society our children are growing up in now is not the same, and to extrapolate that out to a global perspective, the idea of “but it’s been this way for millennia” just isn’t much of an argument. I’ve already addressed the false belief that had they not segregated sports no women would have been involved in it, because that’s just historically inaccurate - women wanted to be involved in sports, not just “men’s sports”, but sports! And they weren’t permitted, so they began to organise their own organisations and events and then the organisations which excluded women realised they might be in a spot of bother as women’s sports were becoming more and more popular.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If men and women competed in all sport, men would win 99.9% of the time.

You’re making stuff up again.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And you have the audacity to extoll the virtues of fairness?

Audacity is not required when I at least can present evidence to support the arguments I actually do make -


Olympics Shift: IOC Doubles Number Of Mixed-Gender Events, Adds 5 Sports

Podge_irl

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’ve already addressed the false belief that had they not segregated sports no women would have been involved in it, because that’s just historically inaccurate - women wanted to be involved in sports, not just “men’s sports”, but sports! And they weren’t permitted, so they began to organise their own organisations and events and then the organisations which excluded women realised they might be in a spot of bother as women’s sports were becoming more and more popular.

No women would have been involved in elite sport. Likely almost no women would be involved in certain sports at all such as combat sports.

The latter bit is fantasy history. No sporting organisations ever thought they might be in a "spot of bother" due to the popularity of women's sport. Bringing women's sports under their umbrella was not exactly an entirely altruistic exercise but they were not remotely threatened by them either.

Are you willing to acknowledge the reality that if you remove sex segregation women will never win, and more than likely never quality for top level events, in atheletic sports?



Also mixed gender relays are absolutely not the same as removing sex segregation. They enforce it - you are required to have certain proportion of female participants as otherwise it would just be men.