Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

12829313334258

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,177 ✭✭✭Fandymo


    Did Reka Gyorgy participate in the finals that Lia Thomas did?? If there was no biological male in that race, would she have made the final??



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    The irony is that this is the same person who coined the term “pundits fallacy”, is falling foul of it themselves…

    Assuming that one's favorite policy is politically the most expedient as well.

    https://www.jargondatabase.com/Category/Other/Logical-Fallacies-Jargon/Pundit's-Fallacy



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Evidence that a scientist agrees with your opinion, is not scientific evidence. If it existed, it would need to be unequivocal to justify the exclusion of athletes who are of the male sex, but the female gender, from competing at elite levels in sports,

    There isn’t data available in the first place on transgender athletes, to determine anything conclusive, There is of course mountains of data available on males and females performances, but trying to misapply the data to deduce a conclusion about a different set of subjects, immediately you should be able to see the issue.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    (along with making sure their hormone level doesn't act as a PED)

    That’s a “real world” line of argument is being taken by some people alright, same as a sports scientist who makes the point about 6’ 9” players in women’s basketball would be unfair, as though there aren’t 6’ 9” players in the WNBA, or bases their opinion on the idea that men are choosing to be women, that they’re prevented by law from taking sex hormones is the only reason it’s not happening at an earlier age. You’re accusing people of cheating, based upon your own personal beliefs. Don’t try and pass that off as a credible scientific argument.

    Utter garbage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    So all sports people should be allowed to take PED? Or only some?

    Os is this a vain attempt to re-classify what a PED is? (but again, only for some).

    Should we return the trophies to Lance Armstrong and apologise?

    None of this is my personal belief, I will follow the science.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,898 ✭✭✭Girly Gal


    Is Lia Thomas the first person to have competed at an elite level pre and post transition? I don't recall anyone else competing at elite level pre and post transition. I'm aware of cases where people transitioned after their sports career had finished.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,599 ✭✭✭Cyclingtourist


    "Evidence that a scientist agrees with your opinion, is not scientific evidence."

    He disagrees with your opinion, which is inconvenient.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,354 ✭✭✭plodder


    Jesus, that's some rant. Did you even read the paragraph I quoted? It was the Transgender Law Centre that said they can't convince people, not the blogger. A number of surveys have shown that barely a half of Democrat voters support trans women competing against women in sport. The figure is obviously a lot lower for Republican voters.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    You are, you are arguing it, whether it's hidden behind 10 random references to other things or not, you are either arguing that the female category shouldn't exist (because you say it's based on stereotypes) or that PED's should just be allowed whenever someone feels like the PED state represents their true state, hiding it behind walls of text doesn't hide it, it's either one or the other. This is the crux of your arguments and isn't representative of the topic being discussed in the OP where Thomas is specifically taking medicines to both represent their desired state and stay within the limits currently allowed for the female category for trans-women.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    I have no issue with him disagreeing with my opinion, it’s why I didn’t have an issue presenting his opinion in the first place, and why I’m making the point to you that evidence of scientists regardless of whether they agree or disagree with anyone, does not constitute scientific evidence of anything.

    Inconvenient would be if there were any negative consequences for anyone as a result of people introducing new laws claiming to be doing so because they were following the science. Plenty of people claim to be ‘following the science’, it doesn’t actually mean anything, they might as well be saying they follow the word of God. It still doesn’t justify their behaviour towards other people.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    That’s an awful lot of words to accuse me of arguing that anyone should be able to cheat in competition.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Sorry, but this has to be an attempt at either winding others up or someone unable to look at themselves in the mirror.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    You’re not one bit sorry, and I’m fine with myself in the mirror. You posted this earlier, and it doesn’t represent anything I’ve ever argued. It’s deliberately misleading -


    So all sports people should be allowed to take PED? Or only some?

    Os is this a vain attempt to re-classify what a PED is? (but again, only for some).

    Should we return the trophies to Lance Armstrong and apologise?

    None of this is my personal belief, I will follow the science.


    The first claim - you’re aware that athletes are permitted to take drugs which are on a banned substances list provided they have a legitimate reason for doing so. An exemption exists in the rules already.

    The second claim - you’re aware that I am not attempting to reclassify performance enhancing drugs. They are still classified as performance enhancing drugs.

    The third point is in the form of a rhetorical question, attempting to categorise athletes who are transgender who are taking hormones, with cheaters, and they should be prohibited from competing with other athletes of the same gender when they are not the same sex classification.

    The last claim - you’re following whatever you think has scientific merit in order to justify purposely putting anyone at a disadvantage in competition. If you can’t do that, then according to your personal beliefs, anyone who doesn’t volunteer to be disadvantaged, you can claim they have an advantage. It’s circular reasoning -

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I wasn't apologising, just remarking that it must be peak boards.ie to be accused of using too many words in this scenario.

    You are attempting to claim, extraordinarily, that there is no effective difference between males and females when it comes to sport and that any advantages incurred by higher testosterone levels are either somehow natural due to that being their desired state or while unnatural are no different from other natural advantages such as height (this is also ignoring the permanent changes that occur during puberty that can't really be undone, at least with today's medical technology).

    The endpoint of affirmation being used is that females be allowed to use PED's to match the trans-women they may be competing against or to pretend it doesn't matter at all and tell females they just aren't trying hard enough.



  • Registered Users Posts: 521 ✭✭✭DontHitTheDitch


    NBC news apparently doctoring photographs of the trans swimmer to make them look more feminine:

    Photographer 'Disappointed' That NBC Edited Lia Thomas Photos | PetaPixel



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Too many words, for what was a simple claim! You left that bit out. Sheesh 😂

    I’m not attempting to claim anything like that at all. I’m claiming that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the claims that males who’s sex does not correspond to their gender identity have an unfair advantage in women’s sports that would justify their exclusion. That’s it. That’s all there is to it.

    Anything after that is the product of your own imagination. I’m not interested in arguing with your imaginary scenarios.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    The problem with this issue of trans in sport is every sport is different. In terms of what personal physical attributes make a difference.

    I know nothing about swimming, I can't even swim. But I would have thought that being taller would give you an advantage. Just like if a runner were twice the size of everyone else, (exaggerating to make the point) that would give one a very obvious advantage, and I can see how the same would apply to swimming.

    This shows that men are on average taller than women.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I’m claiming that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the claims that males who’s sex does not correspond to their gender identity have an unfair advantage in women’s sports that would justify their exclusion.

    You have to disprove testosterone as having an impact on sports performance while then also allowing athletes to raise their testosterone levels.

    That has been scientifically proven leaving you nowhere else to go (as said previously that's before taking into account the permanent impact of male puberty). Any avenue you go down here can only advocate for PED to be allowed in order to suit your narrative once we reduce it to its impact, which means you will need to go wide with random anecdotes and pretend otherwise but you have built the crux of your argument on sand.

    Your only scenario is to walk back on affirmation alone and start on what levels of reduction are fitting to be allowed to compete as that is where the sports bodies currently stand, the low numbers impacted don't matter. And the male category is, effectively, open to all, risks not withstanding (and updating some of the rulebooks to allow it to happen which a lot of sports and countries have already done).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    The argument here is that some females are tall, the physical attributes that make the most difference tend to occur during puberty, larger lungs, hip more square, denser bones, some females will naturally have some of those characteristics but very few in such a way that makes sport an advantage for them (along with things like twitchy muscle fibres), so the very average trans woman will already be in the top few % of female characteristics which are advantageous to sport, reducing ongoing testosterone reduces some of that advantage, the jury is out on whether it is enough (and being trans has a set of disadvantages built in right now due to societal attitudes that may change over time, that makes it highly unlikely it will be very common and that athletes like Thomas will be an outlier for a number of years). I don't think the sports bodies will want to get it to the point where the single biggest advantage you can get in women's sports is to have been born male.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,674 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    >Just like if a runner were twice the size of everyone else, that would give one a very obvious advantage,

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3899678/

    All of the world-class sprinters were in the height range of 1.68-1.91 m (men) or 1.52-1.82 cm (women). The fact that the sprinters’ height data was normally distributed indicates that both very short and very tall stature may be disadvantageous for sprinters



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    I don’t know where you get the impression that the burden of proof is on me to prove anything. You want to introduce the discrimination, the burden of proof is on you to prove it’s necessity. That’s the way equality legislation works, that’s the way the IOC policy works, that’s not the way organisations like the WA policy works, for now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    I’m claiming that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the claims that males who’s sex does not correspond to their gender identity have an unfair advantage in women’s sports that would justify their exclusion. That’s it. That’s all there is to it.

    Well then you're in luck, because "males who’s sex does not correspond to their gender identity" are also known as simply "males", and we have stacks of evidence that males outperform females in almost every physical activity that depends on strength and/or speed.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,129 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    And if males who are not transgender were looking to participate in women’s sports, I’d agree there might be a legitimate justification for their exclusion at an individual level, as is permitted in accordance with existing equality legislation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,827 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    You've probably lost most people at this stage.

    However, as a thought exercise.

    What is the physical difference between a male and a male who is transgender, where no surgical or hormonal treatments are used by either?

    The answer of course is that there is no physical difference.

    The burden in this case is upon yourself, but, as I've pointed out, you are arguing a topic that no one else is (self affirmation is enough to switch categories in sports competition) and doesn't come into the Thomas case that the thread is about.

    And I'm sorry, but this is just bananas:

    there might be a legitimate justification for their exclusion at an individual level

    This reveals that you just want the female sports category to not exist, which is a very sh*tty thing to be espousing (again, reducing your argument to it's base where numerous whataboutery anecdotes can't wiggle yourself away from it).



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    This reveals that you just want the female sports category to not exist, which is a very sh*tty thing to be espousing (again, reducing your argument to it's base where numerous whataboutery anecdotes can't wiggle yourself away from it).

    It is interesting that whatever ideology-du-jour this island decides to become obsessed with in any given decade, it always carries with it some inherent downside for women.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,898 ✭✭✭Girly Gal


    Usain Bolt is 1.95 m, which according to the report is above the the height range of "all the world class sprinters", his height was an advantage as his technique and power matched or surpassed his shorter opponents. A taller sprinter with a similar technique and power will almost always beat a shorter sprinter, in order to win a smaller sprinter must compensate by having a better technique.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,977 ✭✭✭griffin100


    https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/60911823

    This is an interesting one and to me shows the potential unfairness in allowing biological men compete in women's sports. Bridges was an elite cyclist as a man, held a national record and most likely was training at a high intensity all through puberty. She wasn't a low level athlete before her transition. The athletic benefits that she accrued as a man are not going to be fully wiped out by undergoing testosterone treatment for a year. Being able to train at a higher intensity for such a long period of time is an advantage, hence the reason why banned athletes are still subject to drug testing if they wish to return after their ban. It will be interesting to see how she fairs against one of the best track cyclist of all time in Laura Trott if they indeed get to race each other.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,898 ✭✭✭Girly Gal


    I think the biggest issue, is the speed with which an athlete can go from competing in the male category to the female category, there should probably be a minimum time period of 3 years, as this would allow for the person to complete their medical transition and any surgeries and also allay fears that anyone is trying to play the system.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 455 ✭✭KieferFan69


    At the end of the day it’s just sport so let them compete if they’re not ashamed to - is my answer



Advertisement