First olympic transgender athlete to compete at Tokyo 2020 **MOD NOTE IN OP**
Comments
-
Those examples are irrelevant. Have you an example of someone campaigning for the abolition of an open category (As per the OP's suggestion of how to accommodate all genders/sex). Those examples have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with that. So I'm still calling your reasons for dismissing the OP's idea out as being bullshit.
Also, it should only take the time to type a maximum of 3 keys to answer my second post.
4 -
The examples I gave are the consequences of sports being regarded as an exclusively male pursuit, to the exclusion of women, because those men did not want what would have been any categories open to women in the first place, they never did, and they still don’t, but they have to begrudgingly put up with it because biological females fought for their inclusion in what were traditionally regarded as biological male pursuits.
They were supported by an even smaller number of biological males, in the same way as biological males participating in what were traditionally regarded as women’s pursuits are being supported by biological females, but there just aren’t that many biological males wish to pursue or participate in what are traditionally regarded as female pursuits, primarily because of their own perception and beliefs about males participating in women’s sports, even though there are males involved at every level in all sorts of women’s sports, so your point about anyone needing protection simply doesn’t arise in any case.
0 -
So you are unable to post any examples of anyone campagining to have an open category abolished, which is the specific reaon YOU dismissed the OP's suggestion of having an open category available to all. So I still call your response out as bullshit.
Still waiting for you yes/no answer to this question :
Are you guaranteeing us that not one male athlete will ever declare themselves to be female in order to achieve better results in the female category than they could ever achieve in the female category? You're sure this could never ever happen. That no man on the planet could ever possibly do such a thing?
A simple yes or no will do, rather than a multi-paragraph essay.
2 -
You’ve got your argument arseways - the poster was suggesting an open category, but throughout history men have resisted the idea of opening categories for women to participate in sports with them, and so as a consequence of that we are where we’re at now where women are still campaigning to be allowed to participate in sports with men. That is obviously not the same as people who argue against an open category on the basis that women would never win against men and it would kill women’s sports and all the rest of it, and even people who are transgender aren’t campaigning for open categories, they’re campaigning to be allowed to compete in categories which are consistent with their gender identity without discrimination on the basis of their gender identity, whether that be male or female.
As for your question - I don’t have to guarantee you shìt! Who do you imagine you are? Bizarre that you imagine anyone owes you anything, let alone imagining you have any authority to demand answers to your questions from anyone. I’ve asked plenty of questions in this thread and gotten no answers, I don’t go hounding people for answers as if I think I have any authority to demand answers from anyone!
1 -
I know exactly why you will not answer my simple question. The fact that you are unable to guarantee that no man will ever declare themselves female in order to achieve a level of sporting success they would be unable achieve as a male would illustrate that it would not just be wise, but the correct thing to do, for sports governing bodies to put in place rules to try to prevent this from happening. It would be grossly unfair to female athletes not to have such rules in place and enforced when necessary. And it's those very rules that this whole thread is fundamentally discussing.
You're obviously too much of a moral coward to face this.
Again. The poster suggested an open category. You dismissed it on the grounds that it would be campaigned against. Yet you are completely unable to provide any examples of anyone campaigning against existing open categories in sports. It's a very SPECIFIC point. Your argument against open categories as a potential solution is clearly bullshit.
3 -
Advertisement
-
And the gold medal for obfuscation goes to....
10 -
The reason I see no reason to entertain your question has nothing to do with moral cowardice on my part, it’s simply because it’s a stupid question that has nothing to do with transgender athletes participation in sports, it has to do with cheating, and no, I can’t guarantee that anyone won’t cheat, and I’m aware that there are rules against cheating, and rules to prevent cheating, and athletes still cheat, so when you ask me can I guarantee that someone who isn’t transgender couldn’t cheat, I’m given to wondering what the question has to do with athletes who are transgender? They are not responsible, nor can they be held responsible or punished or prohibited from participating in any given sport on the basis that it is reasonable to assume that someone who isn’t transgender could cheat. It would be like suggesting that any group in society should be deprived of their liberty and freedom on the basis of the behaviour of a tiny minority of members of that social class or category, or the behaviour of a minority of members of a different social class or category entirely! It’s a stupid argument founded upon the fallacious idea of “guilt by association”.
The poster didn’t just suggest an open category btw, they suggested two categories - one category restricted to biological females only, and a category open to both biological males and biological females. The point I made is that there are biological males who don’t want biological females to participate in their sports, and that’s why I said there would be the same sorts of people in the same sorts of numbers who would argue that the inclusion of women in an open competition would mean that men would be deprived of their perceived entitlement to participate or compete only with men, due to women being permitted to compete against men. I know plenty of men who would object to women’s participation in their sports. For one thing it would mean those men would no longer feel free to express their homoerotic tendencies without judgement in the comfort and safety of their dressing rooms which they mean to keep to themselves, because who doesn’t love an old game of snapping a wet towel on their teammates arsecheeks in the showers? 😏
Post edited by One eyed Jack on0 -
Well, I think an excellent infographic has been posted on this thread somewhere showing the significant irreversible physical differences that puberty locks in to males and females. I believe it was used by World Rugby to help them illustrate why males and females should not play contact sports against each other. The boards.ie site changes and draining heatwave weather are making me far too lazy to bother looking right now. But there is just so much scientific research out there on the topic. Pubmed is a good resource. Review articles are good for more general, digestible summaries so filter for those in searches rather than experimental papers, which are much more narrow in focus.
I mean, personally I think looking for these papers is the same as typing “common sense” into the browser but I understand that when trying to make one’s point, that’s not really enough.
2 -
It's not a stupid question. It's a question that gets right to the heart of the issue here. If there are not rules in place to prevent males from declaring themselves female to compete in the female category to achieve sporting success in the female category that they wouldn't be able to achieve in the males at the expense of female competitors, that would be hugely grossly unfair to female competitors. Clearly you're a moral coward if you can't admit to that fact. I can spell out exactly how these rules affect transgender athletes, but I'm assuming you have enough intelligence to know this. If you continue to play stupid (and apparently convincing absolutely nobody on this thread) I'm happy to do so. How stupid should I assume you are?
Whether you like it or not people do get caught out by rules that in place to stop cheating, even though the person themselves may not have intended to cheat. Sha'karri Richardson being a recent prominent example. That's the way the world works. It's not perfect. It never will be. It might be an idea for you to take that on board. It's a better solution than letting the sporting field wide open to cheaters (And to spell it out, that would result in sports being dominated by cheaters, at the expense of all non-cheaters (As has happened many times in the past)... and in case you're too blind to see it, that would also include genuine transgender athletes)
Nobody is being deprived of their liberty and freedom by rules set by sports governing bodies. What a stupidly ridiculous thing to say.
And still you are unable to provide any examples of anyone campaigning against open categories, apart from anecdotes about your mates apparently. Again, YOUR reason for dismissing open categories as a solution was SPECIFICALLY that open categories would not be accepted. Yet you are still unable to provide ANY real examples (beyond anecdotes about "people you know") of any such campaigns against existing open categories. The reasons are as usual transparently obvious.... you don't like it as a solution because it doesn't comply with your desired outcome.
4 -
It’s an incredibly stupid question because it has nothing to do with people who are transgender, participating in sports. It has everything to do with people who are not transgender, cheating. I have already acknowledged that there need to be rules in place to prevent cheating, and punishment for athletes who are caught cheating. I think what’s grossly unfair is assuming that people are cheating, or that they set out to cheat, it violates one of the fundamental principles of sports which is fair play, and assumes bad actors when there is absolutely no reasonable basis on which to form your conclusions! In the history of women’s events (and let’s not forget that they were established because women were excluded from participating in open competition with men), there have been less than a handful of anecdotes of men who were caught trying to impersonate women to enter into women’s competitions.
My reason specifically that open categories would not be accepted is because historically speaking, they weren’t - women were excluded from participating in men’s competitions, and they were regarded as men’s competitions, because women were thought to be incapable of competing with men, and that it would be considered unladylike, and such women should be regarded with suspicion, not unlike your suggestion that we should presume people are cheating as a reason to exclude anyone from participating in sports, because of course you’re just trying to be fair. You hardly need to ask me how stupid do you think I should be treated when it’s evident you’re already assuming I have a single digit IQ.
I certainly didn’t dismiss the posters argument, I pointed out the futility of it, as it would inevitably lead to the position sports is in now, based upon how their suggestion was already implemented throughout history. You would still come to the same place where people are arguing that the rules of their chosen sports are unfairly discriminatory against them and people like them on the basis of prejudiced sex stereotypes and their inability to conform - they are only able to hide it for so long before they can’t.
Caitlyn Jenner for example was nearly 70, and long past their sporting heyday. The idea that anyone isn’t aware of the ridicule and humiliation on a global scale that they would have to endure for being caught cheating in sports isn’t enough to deter some people, but that same ridicule and humiliation is magnified tenfold and reserved it appears for athletes who are transgender, and particularly men who wish to participate or compete in women’s sports and events in accordance with their gender. Nobody is suggesting that there shouldn’t be rules and standards and guidelines and so on, they’re suggesting that the current guidelines and rules and standards are somewhat of a Hobson’s choice as it were for people who are transgender -
- Undergo unnecessary medical treatments or surgeries which present significant, unknown and unquantifiable risks to their physical and mental health to participate or compete in their chosen sports in accordance with their gender
- Stand accused of cheating or prohibited from participating or competing entirely if they don’t undergo unnecessary medical treatments or surgeries which present significant, unknown and unquantifiable risks to their physical and mental health to participate or compete in their chosen sports in accordance with their gender
It’s a catch-22 and it’s unfairly discriminatory and you know it, but I won’t accuse you of being a moral coward afraid to admit it because this isn’t the fcuking schoolyard and I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you’re actually an adult.
0 -
Advertisement
-
My suggestion of having open competition instead of the men’s category is not perfect but I can’t think of a better solution.
it completely takes gender out of sports and therefore at least it will be fair. Transgender athletes can then compete as women if they want no problem.
2 -
When is big Lauren competing?
-1 -
In order of not offending anyone I propose to hold Olympic games 2-3x a year so we can split them in different games and everyone can compete in their own imaginary or real bubble/category.
Old Olympic games,
Male Olympic games,
Female Olympic games,
Transgender Male Olympic games,
Transgender Female Olympic games,
They all then will have to be divided again to all-of-the-above Paralympic games and finally to all-of-the-above racial games. Why would you want to have people born and raised with white privilege to compete against POC?
Numbers get a little dizzy and blurry but if I have to make a wild guess then it is 5 (main cats) x 2 (para) so 10 x 2 (dreaded white privilege vs POC which can then be divided to African and Asian mainly - so about 40 so far and then probably to another 20-30 regional variants).
I would also try not to exclude personal beliefs and to be honest we should at start cater to say 4-5 biggest main religious groups with an aim to of course try to accommodate various offshoots and sects.
I can see a lot of jobs created in the process, along with a lot of headache how to choose venues and terms but then we can also think about just abandoning all of it in order of eternal peace so nobody can feel offended. But then again someone may get offended that they cant compete so honestly I am a little lost. We should ponder this idea for some time and maybe we can come up with something if we do not lose sanity in the process.
ps, forgot about fluid gender games where participants may change gender several times a day so I have to pull out calculator again.
1 -
17 -
You're 100%correct as far as I can see. I also agree its a good compromise that tries to minimise harm. But you're dealing with a "No compromise" position where only admittance to the Female category is acceptable, and to hell with any adverse consequences that might (very predictably) result from that.
It's unfortunate for trans athletes that no-comprise positions very very often result in those positions being ultimately rejected (the "No abortion in any circumstances" being a recent example of that no compromise stubbornness spectacularly alienating the majority of this country, ultimately to the massive detriment of their own cause). The TRAs digging their heels in are causing real harm to the cause they think they are advancing.
3 -
It has everything to do with trans-gender participating, and you know it. Trans-gender athletes, in common with non trans-gender athletes will need to stay on the right side of the rules in order not to be penalised by the rules. In the case of rules to exclude males from simply declaring themselves female in order to compete in the female category, anyone with a brain can see that this will cause a problem for trans-gender athletes who have legally transitioned their gender, but have not changed their physical biology. If you can't see that, then I despair for you. Truly. But I actually don't think you're that stupid. I think the position your taking of assuming that the rest of can't see this and that you can talk you way out of this obvious conundrum with paragraphs of irrelevant asides is where the stupidity arises.
There might be one or two sports where the female category was created because females were excluded from competing. But in the vast majority of sports the female category was created for exactly the opposite reason. To allow women to compete fairly (and in some cases safely) by excluding males. Same with age categories. Same with weight categories. Same with ability categories etc etc etc.
Ancient history is irrelevant here.
So I'm still calling out your reason for objecting to the open categories as being bullshit, especially since you still cannot provide any examples of objections to existing open categories despite multiple posts on this matter. Not one.
I genuinely have no idea what point you're trying to make out about Caitlyn Jenner. But I do know that she is opposed to allowing trans women from competing in the female category, as it would unfair to female athletes. And frankly, few people are as well qualified to speak on that matter from experience than she is.
And finally, no it is not unfairly discriminatory. Similar rules on intersex athletes have been tested all the way to the highest court in sport and beyond, and have been upheld. As a result Caster Semenya (who is 100% female gender ad has been for her who life, but is intersex) is unable to compete in the female category in the Olympics. The rules that have excluded her have been deemed fair, but she has still lost out. That seems unfair on Caster. But on the other hand allowing her to compete would be unfair on the athletes she would be competing against, as has been validated by the courts. This is a zero sum game at the top level. You should face that reality. It's moral cowardice to try to avoid that reality and think that by writing paragraphs of irrelevant side material you can somehow avoid the fact that your position will create both winners AND losers, and be potential be unfair to those losers.
2 -
If am man lying about being a woman is "cheating", then a man who has legitimately transitioned to being a woman must therefore have an inherent advantage. It's like declaring that you now identify as someone who takes steroids and that's ok if you really feel that way and aren't lying about it.
I think the people who find no problem with this or dismiss the difference haven't spent time around men and women working out. There is a strong well-trained woman in my gym who really looks it, to the point where she'd be too built for a lot of people's tastes, and I can deadlift more than her by virtue of being a man. Like I'm still learning how to do it properly, and here this woman is with very prominent quads etc. and I can simply lift more than her even though we're around the same weight and height. The advantage the male body has when it comes to strength is massive, and it doesn't go away when you transition.
11 -
First off anyways, this is a discussion forum. You’re free to treat it like Twitter or Facebook if you wish by limiting yourself to 140 characters or less, or a meme you hope garners a few likes, or whatever else, but you cannot expect to be taken seriously when you expect that other people should also treat a discussion forum like Twitter, Facebook etc. It’s for that very reason I avoid those platforms, and on LinkedIn I don’t think I can make demands of other other people either. I have the choice to simply ignore them, like I did this morning when I got a notification that a guy I work with has updated his bio with his preferred pronouns- I disconnected from any association with him immediately. No drama or no announcing to the world that I was ignoring him, just done it and got on with my day.
Your first paragraph I’m largely in agreement with up to the point where you argue that I think people can’t see what the problems are. I know well people can see what problems they have with the whole idea. They’re clearly not the same problems that everyone has though, are they? I’ve no doubt you can see that much too.
It’s not just one or two sports btw, it’s nearly all sports, and the point is that in any sports where athletes are segregated by sex, open competitions simply aren’t an option. This does present something of a conundrum for the organisations and governing bodies of those sports, and having an open men’s and women’s category, and a category reserved for biological females only, just isn’t going to cut it. It hasn’t done in the past (one doesn’t even have to refer to ancient history), and it certainly won’t cut it in the future, because people will still want to participate and compete in the other categories, or won’t want to compete in the existing categories because they don’t approve of other people being permitted to participate or compete in the same categories as them.
The reason I made the point about Caitlyn Jenner is because they are an example of what currently athletes who are transgender are being forced to do if they want to participate in sports - they must participate in sports in accordance with their sex, which causes many of them distress, and they have to make a choice between “faking it” as it were, from their point of view, or being out when they retire from the sport, or simply never being able to be themselves as they see it at all. Men who aren’t transgender, even mediocre males, don’t wish to be associated with women, or be regarded as female, because women and girls and I defy you to deny this, are seen as being of lesser status in society than males or men. The idea that there will be vast swathes of mediocre male athletes wishing to participate in women’s competitions is the stuff of fantasy, it’s just not going to happen. You cannot expect anyone to take that argument seriously, not least because of the fact that it has nothing to do with people who are transgender who are regarded as being of even less status than women!
And finally, it IS unfairly discriminatory to use cheaters as a justification for why people who are not cheaters should be denied being treated as being of equal status to anyone else. It IS unfairly discriminatory to argue that anyone should be denied being treated as equals without discrimination because of what other people who are not them, might do, if they were not discriminated against! Caster Semenya’s case btw hasn’t been heard in the highest court just yet. CAS is a Mickey Mouse arbitration body with limited jurisdiction in relation to sports only, and that’s why the case was heard in the Swiss Supreme Court, and has now been accepted to be heard at the ECHR.
FWIW, Semenya was prohibited in competitions between 400m and 1 mile only, and some have suggested that the WA rules were written specifically with the intent of targeting Semenya, as she was eligible to qualify for the Tokyo Olympics in other events. The fact is though that because it’s not simply a question of testosterone levels, she failed to qualify by being 20 seconds outside the qualifying time in the 5,000m -
Worth noting btw, and I’m not sure if you were aware of it, but since you do acknowledge at least that one of the conditions of their participation is that athletes competing in women’s competitions must be recognised in law as their preferred gender in the country they’re representing, that in Japan, in order to be recognised as their preferred gender in law, they are required to undergo compulsory sterilisation -
Tokyo rushed to introduce municipal laws to get around that ugly reality -
0 -
Open categories won't work because some men might get upset that women are allowed in (even though they will never be competitive) therefore we must allow androgenised people with highly pronounced advantages into women's sports is a pretty awful take.
If some men are bothered by the theoretical acceptance of women into their categories they are welcome to act like children and not participate.
2 -
I really don't think there would be any push back from men if women were allowed into their categories. The very best elite women are frequently outrun by males at underage and junior level.
The real issue is, for open competition, is that biological females wouldn't be present at competition, let alone be competitive.
2 -
Advertisement
-
Oh I agree, its just another non-sequitur diversion from the core issue which is ultimately quite a simple one.
3 -
TBH, I think there'd be more upset from males who are barred from female sports. Why? Because IMO, it's about validation for some of these males who want to compete in female categories. It's being said to them basically "You simply won't ever be dainty enough!". Whereas many male categories are already open categories and men don't really care as they are in effect male categories. We don't see females appearing in them and we all know why!
2 -
How many women in that scenario would even qualify for most Olympic events?
When the net result of your modest proposal is that 95% of winners on the podium are men, there will be absolutely no whining about that at all...
Yes, lets disenfranchise 51% of the population to spare the fee-fees of 0.25% of the population.
4 -
Zero
It would not just be 100% of winners being men, it would be 100% of qualifiers.
3 -
I think you’re even being kind at saying 95% there. It would be as good as 100%, let’s face it.
0 -
No, my proposal is an open competition alongside a competition for biological females only.
0 -
A MtoF transsexual would be at such a disadvantage in open competition that they wouldn't qualify.
You would have to have three competitions, Men, Women and an inclusive category for women and MtoF transitioned persons. The question would be though is who would compete in the latter category. Why would any woman want to compete against another that had gone through male puberty? You'd effectively be left with a trans only category.
0 -
But if that's such a problem, then why are we allowing MtF transexuals compete against biological women now? It's ok for them to beat women, but not ok for them to be beaten by men?
Couldn't they just reduce their hormone intake, just as (I presume) trans men who want to carry a pregnancy do? That way they'd be closer to their natural bodies, and would at less of a disadvantage than biological women are against someone like Laurel Hubbard.
3 -
Who would want to compete in the latter category? Why, all the ‘mediocre males’ of course, and the odd woke feminist 😏
Seriously though, one could be forgiven for overlooking the reality that the “Gay Games” as they’re called, already exist! They couldn’t call it the “Gay Olympics” because the IOC has a fanny fit if anyone dares to use the word “Olympics” without their permission -
Basically - cut it, slice it, dice it any which way you like, have unique categories for every individual athlete and a competition and organisation for everyone, and STILL you will have the outcomes of people wanting to participate in other competitions and events on the terms that suit themselves, that other people may either support them and support their inclusion, or disagree with them, and try and block their participation, and support their exclusion.
Kinda reminds me of when I was the Chair of the Board of Management in a Catholic primary school, and the Diocesan legal advisor was advising on the various schools policies - the PowerPoint presentation was all about “Diversity and Inclusion in Catholic ethos schools”, and the legal advisor immediately observed “Hmm, that should be ‘Welcoming’, not ‘Inclusion’, I’ll have to get that changed”.
”What’s the difference?” I began to ask, before I copped it - “Oh, I see…” They meant diversity and inclusion on THEIR terms, not the terms that anyone who isn’t Catholic might imagine they mean. Shnakey bastards like that, similar to the way in which the IOC have managed to pull off the greatest global virtue signalling con job in sports and still maintain that they value diversity and inclusion without mentioning that they mean on THEIR terms, not what diversity and inclusion might mean in an objective sense 😒
-1 -
Advertisement
-
I was going to suggest maybe changing male/female categories to XX/XY but apparently that's not straight forward either...
Just get rid of competitive sports and competitions altogether. Everyone is a winner.
1
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
