Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.
Comments
-
I’m neither completely blind nor blinkered, yet at least 😂
But your just declaring an opinion nonsense and based upon my own built in biases adds nothing to the discussion. The approach requires removing biases, which support discrimination.
Nobody is suggesting that all discriminatory criteria are removed, and it’s unfair to imply anyone doesn’t understand why the criteria which they have no issue with exist - they recognise that there are legitimate reasons for criteria such as age and ability and nationality and so on, as demonstrated recently when Russian athletes were permitted to participate in the Olympics on the basis that they would represent the Russian Olympic Committee, and not the Russian nation. It would have been disproportionately unfair to the individual athletes to hold them all responsible and punishable accordingly for other people’s actions.
I’m also aware that there ARE far more resources being put into women’s sports than there are put into sex texting; my point is that whatever resources are put into sex testing, should instead be put into women’s sports, because in the time since women have participated in sports and been subject to sex testing, the justification for sex testing has been shown to be supporting unfounded claims as opposed to the amount of athletes it has determined are guilty of cheating.
0 -
Again with the rubbish.
We have billions of data points from objectively measured sports results going back more than 100 years that absolutely definitively show that athletes of the male sex have a consistent performance advantage over athletes of the female sex in the vast majority of sports. There is no need to argue consequences or await them. We have a massive massive volume of data. Male versus female abilities in non-sporting areas, and their historical reasons and evolution, will not change that data, whether you like it or not.
3 -
It’s not a question of whether I like anything or not, your data is useless. It doesn’t matter that you imagine your data supports your opinions, no bias on your part of course 🙄
The data you’re using does not consider the effects of criteria outside the scope of your data. It’s just bad data being used to provide insufficient scientific evidence of an advantage that transgender athletes have over athletes who are not transgender, on the basis of assumptions made about the influence of a single criteria (testosterone) on athletic performance.
The data and what is purported to be scientific evidence has been roundly criticised for a number of reasons by numerous scientists, the evidence simply doesn’t support the claims it hypothesises, but the people who claim that it does, will carry on using it regardless in support of their already held beliefs… but no bias on their part of course 🤔
0 -
I'm sorry, but you're being extremely disrespectful to a huge amount of people, whether you realise it or not. There are many people who devote a vast amount of their time and energy to their sports to get the best results they can. Just because they don't happen to be elite professionals doesn't mean that they don't deserve the same level of fair play and respect. It's a rather horrendous attitude you appear to be showing that they don't matter. I hope that's not your intention. But it is what you are doing.
since you brought up the subject of doping, then digging in a bit would prove that to you. There have been some cases of convicted dopers even here in Ireland at a relatively low non-elite amateur level. Athletes who actually spend their money, break the rules, and possibly endanger their health, to get a better result where there will be no money or fame as a consequence. That cheating impacts the people they are competing against, even if you don't regard them as being important since they are neither professionals nor elite level.
There are plenty of people, myself included (feel free to look back on my posting record), along with Seb Coe and Sonya (since they have been referenced here recently) who absolutely discuss doping etc. An interest in fairness in sports doesn't mean we have to focus on one area to the exclusion of others. It doesn't mean we are not allowed to address one area just because other areas also exist. I'm sure in you're role as a lawyer you would think that you should be allowed to address injustice in ANY area of the law, irrespective of whether injustice exists elsewhere.
The subject matter of the thread shows there has been an impact. Sport is a zero-sum game here. A person in position N pushes everyone behind them down one place. That's fine if it is as a result of fair competition. But it is an injustice if it's not.
3 -
Their data is useless? Is that because it goes against pretty much everything that you have been saying in this thread?
Data doesn't have bias when it comes to what we are talking about. As Enduro said, there is no bias involved when you see biological males have a performance advantage over biological females, that is just flat out fact across the board.
You are looking at testosterone as a binary reason, and skipping over the impact it has during puberty in males and what that does to their bodies. It bakes in advantages in bones, muscles and organ capacity. Taking test blockers won't change your heart or lung size, that stays the same.
12 -
Advertisement
-
I think you may be confusing me with @joeguevara there Enduro in referring to my role as a lawyer. joeguevara, not to be confused with Joe Guevara, is the human rights lawyer, not me, though I do admire one Irish human rights lawyer in particular -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_O'Flaherty
I reject your accusation that I’m being in any way disrespectful to anyone, let alone athletes who have trained hard and have overcome numerous obstacles to be in the position they’re in.
I also don’t think it’s unreasonable to point out that an inordinate amount of resources are dedicated to pursuing an illegitimate aim, which is the claim that without those resources being used in the means that they are, there would be a deluge of men attempting to compete with women in sports. That argument has been found to be without foundation, and the methods used have been found to be without justification, which is why they are no longer used.
The subject of the thread shows that the impact is by far and away over-stated within the context of the reasons for justifying the restrictions on transgender athletes participation in sports. I have no doubt you would rather see the thousands of amateur athletes who receive no recognition at all, would receive even a thousandth of the recognition for their achievements that Lia Thomas has for theirs, but let’s not play silly beggars over the reasons for why that is simply not the case as if sports actually are a zero sum game and the disproportionate focus on a single athlete is at the expense of all the thousands of athletes who participate in sports who receive support and recognition and aren’t interested in coming to wider public attention for accusations of cheating and being told that they don’t belong in the sport.
I don’t doubt your sincerity and commitment to sports, but that doesn’t mean that anyone who doesn’t share your opinions isn’t as equally committed to sports as you are. It simply means they don’t share your perspective. It’s already clear to them that you and many thousands more, don’t share their perspective, and if it wasn’t before, it certainly is now!
1 -
You are looking at testosterone as a binary reason, and skipping over the impact it has during puberty in males and what that does to their bodies. It bakes in advantages in bones, muscles and organ capacity. Taking test blockers won't change your heart or lung size, that stays the same.
I’m not looking at testosterone as a binary reason at all when I’m arguing that athletic performance is not nearly so simple as to be determined by a single factor which it is claimed has a greater influence on all other factors, and that rationale being used to maintain a system which existed before the means to measure the impact of testosterone existed! 😳
In consideration of the advantages though and fairness and all the rest of it, and in the interests of full disclosure this question is predicated upon my knowing the outcome of an athlete competing at international level in sports competitions who has been a lung transplant recipient to address an underlying medical condition which meant their formerly reduced lung capacity has increased considerably -
Would you argue in the same fashion that they now possess a trait which gives them a disproportionate advantage in competition and they should be excluded from participating on that basis? I don’t want you to actually answer that question as it won’t change the outcome, but what I’m pointing to is the fact that there is a difference in determining policies which have the effect of exclusion of a whole group of people on the basis of an individual trait, vs exclusion of an individual athlete on the basis that the legitimate aim is to maintain fair competition.
0 -
Conclusion
In this study, we confirmed that use of gender affirming hormones are associated with changes in athletic performance and demonstrated that the pretreatment differences between transgender and cis gender women persist beyond the 12 month time requirement currently being proposed for athletic competition by the World Athletics and the IOC.10 This study suggests that more than 12 months of testosterone suppression may be needed to ensure that transgender women do not have an unfair competitive advantage when participating in elite level athletic competition.
Interestingly, the study done in US AirForce (big and average age 26)) showed that trans men showed superior performance in some areas than men after a year on testosterone. It doesn't drill down into individual testosterone levels and whether they would breach current allowable levels for the substance in men's sport.
1 -
You are comparing apples to oranges there, my friend. There is a world of difference (as you probably already know) between taking test blockers and someone who has received a lung transplant. Not just with the invasive nature of the transplant itself, but the nature of it over all is absolutely nothing like taking test blockers or in the same realm as someone who identifies as the opposite gender.
Athletic performance (or differences between males and females) is wider than testosterone, however the impact of test in a male body through puberty is incredible. It has been listed but you have a variety of baked in differences, bones, organs, you name it (and you know it I am sure).
As it has been pointed out to you, if you want "fair" competition then let males and females compete at the same sport or game and see the differences. You can see the differences in athletics, weightlifting, soccer, boxing, MMA, tennis. You will argue that there is some advantage to males in these sports due to some sort of agenda, whereas the actual reason is just that males and females perform at different levels due to their physicality.
3 -
What in the name of god are you talking about. Are you such a narcissist that you think every post is about you? I clearly quoted the post by Joeguevara that I was responding to. It was not one of your posts. This isn't all about you and your opinions. Sorry, but that's the harsh truth.
5 -
Advertisement
-
Every post? You don’t half over-react to what was a simple mistake on my part. I don’t mind you basking in your moment of high-horsey though 👍
0 -
Did you just assume their gender?
4 -
I’m not comparing apples and oranges, I just wasn’t going to be that asshole that when you make the point about increased lung capacity as a result of testosterones influence on the body, it’s not the only way lung capacity can be increased, albeit an extreme example and as we’re agreed far more complex than simply swapping out the old pair of organs for a new set.
It’s for this reason too that I make the point that in spite of a number of small scale studies, the data just isn’t credible in terms of meeting the scientific standards of sufficient evidence to support the hypothesis - it’s inconclusive, which means it’s inconclusive, as opposed to claims or implications that the science is somehow settled on the issue.
For one thing the differences between synthetic hormones and naturally occurring hormones are vast, and it’s impossible to determine the impact the introduction of synthetic hormones will have on any individual level because of so many unknowns and because of the poor understanding of how synthetic hormones interact with the body.
Focussing on the influence of naturally occurring hormones is a completely different thing, and rationalisation that the impact of testosterone in a small subset of test subjects, in order to determine policies about fairness in competition is fraught with difficulty as the people you’re dealing with are already outliers in the general population. Transgender athletes are outliers of outliers of outliers - that’s why any studies are as small-scale as they are, and I wouldn’t use the small-scale studies I’m aware of which counter the narrative of another set of small-scale studies. I don’t see anything productive in doing so when fairness in sports cannot be determined by science, and there are numerous factors involved from ethical, medical, legal and social contexts.
I’m not arguing at all with the fact that men do enjoy considerable advantages in sports, and there could be no disputing outcomes under current rules in sports, which is why relying on historical data that doesn’t apply is nothing more than a futile exercise in search of an argument.
It doesn’t justify the exclusion of transgender people from sports as a policy, and there are always going to be cases where the policy is determined to be unfit for purpose due to being so restrictive that the unintended consequences are that it excludes women on the basis that they do not conform to very restrictive criteria - athletes who do not enjoy considerable social advantages that other athletes have in their favour which are outside of consideration on the basis that these advantages are taken for granted. A case in point being the US trouncing Thailand in the World Cup, and pretty much nobody batted an eyelid. The winners of course naturally concluded that it was a fair competition -
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/48600795
It’s a far more admirable character trait to be able to accept loss and pledge to do better, than it is to be a sore loser and claim you were robbed, as if you were ever entitled to the win.
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 72204
mary 2021 and Mad_maxx threadbanned
1 -
I have absolutely no idea what the hell you are even trying to say...
Why was there a link to a womens football match as well? What has that got to do with anything?
Just to clear it up for you though, I am not, nor have I said, that testosterone will increase lung capacity. What I did say is that males have on average larger lung capacity, which is a scientific fact. You can't even argue that one, but you will type some long winded post trying to.
During puberty in males, height, weight and LUNG CAPACITY increases, it doesn't to it to the same degree in females. You can not undo that, no blockers will reduce the size of your organs or reduce your height. And what causes this? Testosterone production through puberty in males.
Do you get it now? The impact of test on the male body is profound and long lasting, it makes irreversible changes to a males body.
6 -
I have absolutely no idea what the hell you are even trying to say...
Why was there a link to a womens football match as well? What has that got to do with anything?
You clearly do, but you’re choosing to be disingenuous about it. I explained what it was about - one group of women trounced another group of women, and nobody preaching about maintaining fairness in sports batted an eyelid. It was quite clear it wasn’t just because they were women, any more than it’s clear that just because they’re men, is the sole reason men outperform women in every sport. I’m not even going to be picky and do the #notallsports thing, because that would be silly and unreasonable.
Just to clear it up for you though, I am not, nor have I said, that testosterone will increase lung capacity. What I did say is that males have on average larger lung capacity, which is a scientific fact. You can't even argue that one, but you will type some long winded post trying to.
During puberty in males, height, weight and LUNG CAPACITY increases, it doesn't to it to the same degree in females. You can not undo that, no blockers will reduce the size of your organs or reduce your height. And what causes this? Testosterone production through puberty in males.
Do you get it now? The impact of test on the male body is profound and long lasting, it makes irreversible changes to a males body.
I get it alright - I get that what couldn’t be clearer is that you’re just taking the piss. I won’t bother arguing with you. It won’t make any difference to your opinion, but it’s an interesting case -
https://bmcpulmmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12890-020-01272-x
0 -
What the hell is going on, how am I taking the piss by pointing biological facts?
Are you really wondering why no one was crying foul for a woman's football football match? Probably because it was the womans World Cup champions playing against a bunch oh nobodies, and it has NOTHING to do with transgender issues, at all, in the slightest.
And your link at the end, yet again, what has that got to do with anything? You are just rambling off on things and it legit makes no sense whatsoever. You might want to do a refresher course in biology.
7 -
It’s not rocket science Frank.
I’m pointing out that what you’re talking about is unrelated to the subjects which are actually being talked about, and why the science is inconclusive as to the influence of hormones, be it testosterone, oestrogen, naturally occurring or synthetic hormones introduced into the human body.
Tons of studies out there if you’re actually interested in biology, and didn’t just stop at page 268 of the first year science textbook that covered the reproductive system in humans.
0 -
Your head is firmly in the sand, reinforced by concrete if you actually think that science is inconclusive of the effects of hormones on the body. Testosterone is the anabolic go-to for body builds of both sexes, why is that? Because it was a profound, studies and provable effect on the body in that it grows, hence the term anabolic.
If you legit think that science is unsure, your ideology is clouding your judgement on actual evidence. Nothing anyone in here says would change your mind when it comes to it, that much I can see.
8 -
Testosterone is the anabolic go-to for body builds of both sexes, why is that?
It is, if you believe half the shyte posted on Americancentric bodybuilding forums.
Otherwise I don’t encourage anyone to imagine there’s any truth to that statement unless they wish to develop shrunken testicles and a fine set of titties -
0 -
Advertisement
-
Fair play to Sonia for writing that article, particularly when she knew she'd get abuse for it and baselessly be labelled a transphobe.
I mean just look at this nonsense
So much outrage by so many of these types on Twitter, and not one of them presenting a sensible counter-argument.
9 -
What? Testosterone is the go to, it just is. Now if a man starts taking it he'll also need an estrogen inhibitor as the body will try to counter balance the level of test by also raising estrogen, which men have also. Otherwise he'll grow tits along with the muscle. Lads also take insulin and HGH etc etc. Plus when you do a "course" of test yer balls will stop working so after you finish you'll need nolvadex to kick start yer balls again.
Also can people please look at MMA where the likes of DAn Henderson were OK'd for HRT and tore through other competitors. Or when guys came over from Pride to tested orgs their performances dropped.
First they came for the socialists...
3 -
I really do apologise if I was disrespectful. It was certainly. I can see how it could have been interpreted like that but I would be the biggest hypocrite if I was intentionally disrespectful to a group of people while saying people shouldn’t disrespect another group.
i was thinking about alternative view that is the exact opposite approach to what I said earlier. I made the point that it was such a small percentage of transgender athletes that impact is small and just accept and move on. I never considered that equally the vast majority of transgender women do not compete in sport. Like it or not they are being impacted because of the backlash (right or wr ong) caused by transgender women competing.
Which is dreadfully unfair. I think when there are debates sometimes people have their views and there is very little middle ground on it. But the appointed or self appointed public and media advocates can cause a lot more harm which damages real dialogue which can action change for the good.
Equally knee jerk policy changes that are shoehorned into a clunky instrument give the illusion of inclusivity and positive diversity but can incite people who had no prima facile concerns but then reach a ‘fcuck this, I’m sick of I’ll thought out decisions that are forced rather than agreed.
So in reality the options ‘ban competitive sport’ not going to happen
allow transgender compete without restrictions - there are issues with that
Disallow transgender women complete in any womens sport - that doesn’t seem if there are no impacts
Allow participation with robust barriers such as hormones levels, lean muscle mass level if it’s strength based, an acceptable timeframe from transition To competing with adequate psychological as well as physical assessment to determine if the person is truly transgender or a failed male athlete who thinks that they Dan succceed here.
The benefit of the last is that studies can then be undertaken by independent and unbiased experts so that real decisions can be fact based.
Rushing into a decision simply because we live in a fast food, immediate gtatification world that could shape female sports forever helps nobody,
1 -
I’m not saying it isn’t, I’m agreeing that it is, but that statement on it’s own is misleading as to the effects of naturally occurring or synthetic hormones on the body. I’m seeing far too many young lads (and far too many grown men) reading American bodybuilding forums and taking what they want from it without any consideration of the negative and obviously unintended side-effects.
It’s obviously far more nuanced than Frank is making out, and you’ve elaborated on it fairly, and even still it’s missing the context of the effects of TRT in women with low testosterone levels, an emerging field of study which is considered controversial (much like the effects of hormone treatments in adolescents) -
1 -
What you seem to be saying there is that there are so few trans people in sport that any unfairness in so rare that we should ignore it for the sake of 'inclusion'.
The numbers don't matter, it's the principle of the thing that matters.
Twitter might not be so obsessed about it as you say if people like Sharron Daives didn't receive death threats.
And anyway, I' glad you used the term 'minuscule' because my argument is primarily against Trans ideology, of which specific issues like sports and bathrooms are just symptom issues of that ideology.
Specifically I'm against the 'platforming' of trans, such that everyone should be cognizant of trans, that one can't assume one's gender by their outward appearance, including assuming the gender of a newborn. That gender is inherently fluid, and trans people aren't in any way an 'other'. That when one's gender even does 'align' with the body they were born with, that that's still somehow due to the fluidity of gender. As if it could have gone either way. And I'm against the changing of language to be inclusive of trans, such as saying people with a cervix instead of using the term women, which is how JKR got in such hot water, with a few death threats of her own.
No, nature did not intend one's gender not to allign with their body, if there's such a thing at all, and those that feel their body doesn't align, is minuscule. One could argue that nature didn't intend homosexuality either, but I've never personally argued the 'born this way' argument. Because I don't believe it actually. I believe there is personal agency involved, in both issues.
2 -
It’s time to be asking some serious questions when the Irish Times publishes Sonia O’ Sullivans opinion piece, and The Independent (UK) publishes an article examining statistical data!! 😂
That’s a switch I didn’t see coming 😂
2 -
an awful lot of not very much in that article, but I do agree with this
1 -
Ahh here, there was plenty of reading in that article, something I thought I’d never say about The Independent as they’re a tabloid rag and a single article doesn’t change that.
Don’t normally bother with twitter either but that whole thread is worth viewing… amazing stuff! 😳
1 -
I can guarantee you that everyone getting their knickers in a twist about Lia Thomas have no clue that 27 official records were made during the championship she competed in - none of which were broken by her. If people really cared about women's achievements at this championship, this is basic information they would know.
Without diminishing her performance at the championship, it is far from the most remarkable. The idea that she 'dominated' are therefore ill-founded and taken out of context. If anything, Katie Douglass, a cis woman, who broke 18 out of those 27 records, dominated the championship, no doubt due to the advantages she had over her fellow competitors.
If people were really interested and cared about women's sport, surely that would be a more notable thing to highlight in the media. Yet all we see are articles, posts and negative comments about Lia Thomas.
In fact, Lia Thomas didn't place very high at all in her other events, placing 5th and 8th respectively - but of course that never gets any coverage. The only reason Lia Thomas is getting this much coverage in the first place is because she's trans - not because she's dominated or done exceptionally well.
Even if she did remarkably well, she still would not deserve to be questioned and accused of cheating. She followed all the right regulation surrounding trans athletes and had every right to compete and achieve something, just like every other woman at that championship.
She had the right to compete, and she also has the right to win and be celebrated for it. Trans athletes do not deserve to be constantly accused of 'cheating' or an 'unfair advantage', when they are competing within accepted guidelines placed. She did well in her sport and she deserves praise for it.
It doesn't really matter what people here or on twitter think about it - the regulations are placed by professionals and experts in the field, based on research and best practice. The regulations have evolved and will continue to evolve - but they must never be based on prejudice and exclusion, which much of the criticism from people online is.
It's astonishing how almost anyone suddenly becomes an expert on sport and performance when it's related to trans people, while hardly caring or supporting women's sport in the first place.
It's also astonishing how people do not recognise how the media is egging this debate on without any merit at all, and they're all falling for it and taking part in the outrage, increasing their engagement and clicking their articles. Congratulations, you've made them money by taking part in this moral panic manufactured by them.
There are so many challenges that women face in sport - including lack of funding, lack of access and the incredible amounts of emotional and sexual abuse that they suffer at the hands of coaches, trainers, families and others involved in their career.
So let's focus on the real issues facing women in sport, instead of manufactured outrage about trans athletes, who've been quietly competing in sport for decades without issues. If it was an issue that trans women were dominating women's sport, we would've already seen evidence of that. The fact is that we haven't.
LGBT people still face tremendous amounts of obstacles in sport, and have to overcome prejudice and stigma. They deserve to be celebrated for who they are, instead of being demonised and stigmatised for doing something they love, and something they have every right to do.
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
5 -
Advertisement
-
Why do people expect each media organisation to have a fixed position on everything and not reflect a "diversity" of views?
One thing I find interesting about articles like that one in the Independent is how they mostly argue against strawmen, eg "Lia Thomas is not breaking any records" or "she was actually a better swimmer when competing as a male than is being acknowledged". So, what? None of that affects the fact that she has an unfair advantage from being biologically male.
So, having knocked over the straw men, what does the article actually concede? Not much, it seems. It falls back on the old arguments about natural variation, and the fact that some female athletes are "like men" anyway. Though, comparing the average and max height of WNBA players with men in general is of limited value, when omitting the figures for male NBA players.
It grudgingly accepts the reality of trans women athletes having to take hormone supplements, but the natural variation argument doesn't really agree with that. The trans woman cyclist Veronica Ivy is one of the most straight forward proponents of her cause insofar as she plainly states that trans women shouldn't have to medicate themselves with hormones at all. Being born male is just another of those advantages that top sports people have.
By the way, I saw this photo from the NCAA's just there. See if you can spot LT from the dive angle.
6
