Transgender Athletes

Shamwow said:
Winning is immaterial. Taking part is what counts right?
Click to expand...

It is honestly astonishing how deliberately disingenuous and obtuse you have been, and how long you've managed to keep it up.
 
Shamwow said:
You put ffs at the end of your post. What was that for?
Click to expand...
Because.... I wanted to add some context for you.

Changing 'Kids could do with learning a lesson by coming second' to 'Not getting the childhood they deserve' is some trip from another Galaxy even for you.
 
ravi2 said:
I dont think its that complex, if you are born a guy you compete in mens sports, if you are born a woman you compete in womens sports.
Its unfair for guys to transition and then want to compete with the ladies.
Click to expand...
The only thing I’d change there is that transmen do compete against biological men.

I posted a few pages ago about Mack Beggs and how that shows why I think that.

I don’t think an umbrella policy works here. It needs to be 2 policies.
 
My girlfriend is telling me to stop getting wound up so much by transphobes and ableists so I'll listen to a woman instead of all you men.
 
Shamwow said:
My girlfriend is telling me to stop getting wound up so much by transphobes and ableists so I'll listen to a woman instead of all you men.
Click to expand...

Bye. At least we don't have to argue with a misogynist now.
 
My wife went to bed a couple of hours ago.
 
Carolina Red said:
The only thing I’d change there is that transmen do compete against biological men.

I posted a few pages ago about Mack Beggs and how that shows why I think that.

I don’t think an umbrella policy works here. It needs to be 2 policies.
Click to expand...


Id agree with that, if transmen want to compete against biological men no problem.

Its not fair for transgender ladies to compete with biological ladies and I would like to understand the perspective of someone arguing against this.
 
ravi2 said:
I dont think its that complex, if you are born a guy you compete in mens sports, if you are born a woman you compete in womens sports.
Its unfair for guys to transition and then want to compete with the ladies.
Click to expand...
Would you stop trans people competing in say darts, where there is no biological advantage?
 
ravi2 said:
Id agree with that, if transmen want to compete against biological men no problem.

Its not fair for transgender ladies to compete with biological ladies and I would like to understand the perspective of someone arguing against this.
Click to expand...
Shamwow values inclusiveness above everything.
 
Jippy said:
Would you stop trans people competing in say darts, where there is no biological advantage?
Click to expand...
Just asking. Aren't male darts players on average taller, which is why women normally get a nearer line or whatever it is called?
 
Jippy said:
Would you stop trans people competing in say darts, where there is no biological advantage?
Click to expand...


That is a great question, darts never crossed my mind... in a game like darts i dont see why it has to be gendered in the first place. The playing field seems to be level in this case
 
Shamwow said:
It's not really up to you to say. Surely coming second to a trans women is a small price to pay for equality and inclusiveness? What are our priorities in having sport in the first place?
Click to expand...

To the individual missing out I'd say it was a huge deal. I know a few young athletes and they have put often more than half their young lives into training often missing out on significant things in life to get there. So while I'm supportive of transmission athletes in general you can't just dismiss others rights so easily.

And sport gives many things but of course it is about winning. That is where the tension and excitement comes from.
 
oates said:
Just asking. Aren't male darts players on average taller, which is why women normally get a nearer line or whatever it is called?
Click to expand...
Maybe I suppose, but Phil Taylor was only 5'7. The oche.

ravi2 said:
That is a great question, darts never crossed my mind... in a game like darts i dont see why it has to be gendered in the first place. The playing field seems to be level in this case
Click to expand...
It's more the youth and development infrastructure that's been lacking for women, as with many sports I guess.
 
Alex99 said:
I don't think anyone here wants transwomen excluded from Olympic sports, they just want them competing based on their biological sex, not their gender identity.

Men and women compete separately in sports because of the inherent advantages biological males have over biological females.

As a genuine question now, what aspects of society do you believe transwomen are excluded from (particularly in countries like the UK)?
Click to expand...

Transgender women will not compete with men because they're not men. If you exclude them from women events you are excluding them from the olympics, that's just the end result, regardless of the intention.

And what is the justification? It's unfair for ciswomen, they'll never win again because transgender women have an advantage and will dominate.

So I'll go back to my point, you are excluding women now, in the present, because something may or may not happen in the future.

These rules have been in place since 2004 and during all that time one transgender woman has qualified. Not dominate, not win, not get a medal... just qualify.

So I can't justify any exclusion based on something that's not happening. It's creating an immediate real world problem to avoid a potential problem affecting no one right now.

As for your question, you can read this, it was an eye opener for me because I don't know any transgender person and I tended to think that we, in the so called civilized west were past this: h0ttps://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2015-being-trans-eu-comparative-summary_en.pdf
 
NotThatSoph said:
We should probably wait until trans women start winning at least semi regularly before saying that they're guaranteed to win.
Click to expand...

They are already.

That 40 years old hubard already won the national pecking order ahead of the original athlete.

When it comes to olympics there are no halfways. You commit fully from the early ages of 5 or 6 even in some class. By 10 you'd mostly be living a separate lives from your fellow kids.

You spent most of your chilhood practicing that one stupid field for that one specific event. It's slightly better if your field of choice happens to have a professional league to play during the non Olympics (nba, nfl, etc) but for most fields it's only the olympic.

And we're not talking about 2 hours extra sessioj per day. These olympics potentials could spend like 8 hours a day training.

It's not a small price to pay. And there's no participation trophy. You can't even compete if you're not selected. So it's not like this stronger kids is invited to have fun. They're invited and you're out

And taking about semi? To be national olympics you need to be number 1 in so many previous event. From local, district, national level and even in national there's a cutout. Olympics means you're that elite few in that field in the whole nation.
 
Last edited:
Dominos said:
This is the fascinating part about watching the TERF vs liberal feminist debates unfold.

Radical feminists have helped create a culture whereby labelling and shaming someone as an "oppressor" is a pretty sure-fire way to win any debate regardless of the merits of the arguments - and now this exact same tactic is being used against them ("TERF", "transphobe") and they obviously don't like it. They of course continue to stick with labelling any opposition to them as misogynistic. Hard to feel too much sympaty for them given they have been more than happy to push an extreme woke "oppressed vs oppressor" narrative up until the point it stopped suiting their agenda and got used against them.

Liberal feminists have been more than happy to drum up as much animosity and resentment of men as possible, how men are collectively responsible for other men's actions, "women are oppressed and men are oppressors", and at the end of it they're shocked that the "TERFS" have such disdain of males. Liberal feminists believing that they're morally superior because their hostility towards males only applies to cis-gendered males is actually quite hilarious. Their constant misandry and promotion of the idea that certain "privileged" identity-groups can be held collectively responsible for the actions of everyone in said identity group is ironically the entire basis of what they call "TERF rhetoric".
Click to expand...
People who get hung up on all these labels lack the ability to debate or discuss the true points of issues.
Its not a football match, its not us versus them.
 
maniak said:
Transgender women will not compete with men because they're not men. If you exclude them from women events you are excluding them from the olympics, that's just the end result, regardless of the intention.

And what is the justification? It's unfair for ciswomen, they'll never win again because transgender women have an advantage and will dominate.

So I'll go back to my point, you are excluding women now, in the present, because something may or may not happen in the future.

These rules have been in place since 2004 and during all that time one transgender woman has qualified. Not dominate, not win, not get a medal... just qualify.

So I can't justify any exclusion based on something that's not happening. It's creating an immediate real world problem to avoid a potential problem affecting no one right now.

As for your question, you can read this, it was an eye opener for me because I don't know any transgender person and I tended to think that we, in the so called civilized west were past this: h0ttps://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2015-being-trans-eu-comparative-summary_en.pdf
Click to expand...

The rules have been in place since 2015 but came into effect too late to influence qualification and selection for the 2016 Olympics. This Olympic cycle is the first to be truly affected.

The rule change in 2015 saw a very large relaxation in the requirements first introduced in 2004. The 2004 rules required trans athletes to have legal recognition of their gender, have undergone sex reassignment surgery that included a gonadectomy, and have undergone hormone therapy for a recommended period of at least two years.

The 2015 relaxation negated the need for legal recognition of gender, with athletes now having only to say they are trans for 4 years (1 Olympic cycle), completely removed the requirement for any surgery, and changed the hormone requirements to 12 months of testosterone suppression below a certain level that still registers far higher than levels naturally found in biological females.

Sports have sex based categories, not categories based on gender identity to preserve fairness. Your entire justification is based on incorrect information and a misunderstanding of some fundamental facts.

As for the link you've shared, I'm not sure that's strictly relevant to the statement you made and the question I asked. You said trans women are excluded from aspects of society. I questioned what aspects they are excluded from, with particular reference to countries like the UK, and you seem to have presented me with a document detailing how EU-based trans people feel uncomfortable and/or face harassment and violence. These obviously aren't things anyone should condone, but illegal discrimination does not mean that they are excluded from aspects of society in the manner you seemed to be indicating in your original post.

And again, as people have said multiple times, I don't think anyone here is arguing for their complete exclusion, just that the solution for inclusion is not to allow biological males to compete in a category meant for biological females.
 
Sky1981 said:
They are already.

That 40 years old hubard already won the national pecking order ahead of the original athlete.

When it comes to olympics there are no halfways. You commit fully from the early ages of 5 or 6 even in some class. By 10 you'd mostly be living a separate lives from your fellow kids.

You spent most of your chilhood practicing that one stupid field for that one specific event. It's slightly better if your field of choice happens to have a professional league to play during the non Olympics (nba, nfl, etc) but for most fields it's only the olympic.

And we're not talking about 2 hours extra sessioj per day. These olympics potentials could spend like 8 hours a day training.

It's not a small price to pay. And there's no participation trophy. You can't even compete if you're not selected. So it's not like this stronger kids is invited to have fun. They're invited and youre3
Click to expand...

Hubbard's best total is, I believe, 285. Li Wenwen did 335 two months ago.

Which competitor is guaranteed to win?
 
Last edited:
NotThatSoph said:
Hubbard's best total is, I believe, 285. Li Wenwen did 335 two months ago.

Which competitor is guaranteed to win?
Click to expand...

Maybe you should learn more about how they select who goes to Olympics.

The whole NZ is competing from amateur, local, up to National Masters level, and the best 3 or maybe a few more is selected to represent NZ to olympics.

So going to Olympics means you're winning a whole bunch of smaller local competition.

Most athletes relies on this smaller competition to compete and survive. Especially if your field is not a popular field.
 
Last edited:
Alex99 said:
The rules have been in place since 2015 but came into effect too late to influence qualification and selection for the 2016 Olympics. This Olympic cycle is the first to be truly affected.

The rule change in 2015 saw a very large relaxation in the requirements first introduced in 2004. The 2004 rules required trans athletes to have legal recognition of their gender, have undergone sex reassignment surgery that included a gonadectomy, and have undergone hormone therapy for a recommended period of at least two years.

The 2015 relaxation negated the need for legal recognition of gender, with athletes now having only to say they are trans for 4 years (1 Olympic cycle), completely removed the requirement for any surgery, and changed the hormone requirements to 12 months of testosterone suppression below a certain level that still registers far higher than levels naturally found in biological females.

Sports have sex based categories, not categories based on gender identity to preserve fairness. Your entire justification is based on incorrect information and a misunderstanding of some fundamental facts.

As for the link you've shared, I'm not sure that's strictly relevant to the statement you made and the question I asked. You said trans women are excluded from aspects of society. I questioned what aspects they are excluded from, with particular reference to countries like the UK, and you seem to have presented me with a document detailing how EU-based trans people feel uncomfortable and/or face harassment and violence. These obviously aren't things anyone should condone, but illegal discrimination does not mean that they are excluded from aspects of society in the manner you seemed to be indicating in your original post.

And again, as people have said multiple times, I don't think anyone here is arguing for their complete exclusion, just that the solution for inclusion is not to allow biological males to compete in a category meant for biological females.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is that you posted earlier that you think that trans women are men who choose to become women. They are women.
 
altodevil said:
Pretty sure the majority of trans people. The vast majority in fact. Would realise the sensible choice is obviously for trans athletes to participate in their birth gender sports.
Click to expand...

This is a pisstake right?
 
maniak said:
These rules have been in place since 2004 and during all that time one transgender woman has qualified. Not dominate, not win, not get a medal... just qualify.
Click to expand...

It's already happening in other levels of sport and it does affect women even if they're not challenging for olympic medals. It affects things such as scholarships and opportunities to keep progressing and developing in a sport. Women and men aren't equal in terms of physical performance and no matter the level you're competing by placing a biological male to compete in a women's category they will be displacing biological women.


 
Shamwow said:
My girlfriend is telling me to stop getting wound up so much by transphobes and ableists so I'll listen to a woman instead of all you men.
Click to expand...
FYI I'm a woman who apparently have lived a privileged life and shouldn't expect equality and fairness because I was born lucky.
 
Sky1981 said:
Maybe you should learn more about how they select who goes to Olympics.

The whole NZ is competing from amateur, local, up to National Masters level, and the best 3 or maybe a few more is selected to represent NZ to olympics.

So going to Olympics means you're winning a whole bunch of smaller local competition.

Most athletes relies on this smaller competition to compete and survive. Especially if your field is not a popular field.
Click to expand...

And yet she won't win the Olympics. Why are we talking about "guaranteed to win" when what we have is one single athlete who has entered the top 10 in her field? She is obviously not guarenteed to win, she is strong so she has the ability to win certain contests based on form and competition. Trans women generally are obviously not guaranteed to win, seeing as they almost never do.
 
oates said:
No, I'm not having your 'caveated'. If I were to accept your 'partly' then we would need to see partly proof, whereas all you have is suspicion and what you want it to be. Adding a supposed caveat to an accusation still requires proof which you cannot supply. You can't make comparisons with arguments people are not proffering either. It's not good enough, you cannot expect to continue to make these base allegations and not get called on it which I am not the only one doing.
Click to expand...

Ok then, let’s start with some basics:

1. Are trans women women?
2. Do you think it’s OK for trans women to use women’s bathrooms?
3. Do you think it’s OK for trans women to use women’s changing rooms?
 
NotThatSoph said:
And yet she won't win the Olympics. Why are we talking about "guaranteed to win" when what we have is one single athlete who has entered the top 10 in her field? She is obviously not guarenteed to win, she is strong so she has the ability to win certain contests based on form and competition. Trans women generally are obviously not guaranteed to win, seeing as they almost never do.
Click to expand...

Acheron said:
It's already happening in other levels of sport and it does affect women even if they're not challenging for olympic medals. It affects things such as scholarships and opportunities to keep progressing and developing in a sport. Women and men aren't equal in terms of physical performance and no matter the level you're competing by placing a biological male to compete in a women's category they will be displacing biological women.


Click to expand...
 
stepic said:
Ok then, let’s start with some basics:

1. Are trans women women?
2. Do you think it’s OK for trans women to use women’s bathrooms?
3. Do you think it’s OK for trans women to use women’s changing rooms?
Click to expand...
What the actual feck does any of this have to do with competing against biological women in athletic competition?
 
NotThatSoph said:
Hubbard's best total is, I believe, 285. Li Wenwen did 335 two months ago.

Which competitor are guaranteed to win?
Click to expand...

Are you acknowledging that it would be something worth considering/addressing if, for example, Hubbard's best was 340?

Currently your posts seem to indicate that you think this is all perfectly fine because the one trans athlete we have competing (that is 22 years older than the person you've just compared them to) is not guaranteed to win in this one event, but have not once acknowledged the valid concerns raised by others of the very possible scenario of trans athletes in their 20s wanting to compete when the obvious mitigating factor of age that Laurel Hubbard has with her performance will no longer be present.

Are we only permitted to believe there's a potential issue in the scenario of a trans competitior being guaranteed victory at the absolute pinnacle of elite sports, or is there, you know, some nuance to this?

Under current IOC guidance trans athletes have to suppress testosterone below a certain level for 1 year yet studies have shown "after suppressing their testosterone for two years – a year longer than IOC guidelines – they were still 12% faster on average than biological females. " That's over a distance of 1.5 miles, which is just over 2k. The closest Olympic track event is the 1500m, of which the current women's world record is 3:53.96. Shave 12% off that and it's 3:25.88. The men's world record is 3:26.00.

Shamwow said:
Part of the problem is that you posted earlier that you think that trans women are men who choose to become women. They are women.
Click to expand...

I'd very much like you to find that post.

I said transitioning is a choice, meaning undertaking surgeries and hormone treatments, because it very much is. You even used the phrase "fully transitioned yourself" earlier, so I'm not sure what confusion you're having here.

You've proven repeatedly that you have no intention to debate sensibly and offer any arguments based on material reality, instead opting for disingenuous, indignant rightousness.

Also, I thought you were done here?

stepic said:
Ok then, let’s start with some basics:

1. Are trans women women?
2. Do you think it’s OK for trans women to use women’s bathrooms?
3. Do you think it’s OK for trans women to use women’s changing rooms?
Click to expand...

1. Are trans women biologically female?
2. What have bathrooms and changing rooms got to do with anything?
 

These are more examples of people far from the top of their fields, so they're obviously not guaranteed to win. If they were then they'd win.
 
Alex99 said:
@stepic you keep repeating this "17 years and one trans athlete" thing and have not once acknowledged the major rule change in 2015 (that were in effect for the Rio Olympics but not really in time to affect qualification and selection).

The initial guidelines from 2004 stated that trans-athletes had to have legal recognition of their gender, have undergone sex reassignment surgery (including a gonadectomy), and have undergone hormone therapy for a recommended time of at least two years.

The latest changes removed the need for any surgery and legal recognition of gender, instead allowing trans-athletes to compete solely on their own gender declaration, with the hormone requirement also changed to a single year of testosterone suppression.

This Olympic cycle is essentially the first where these new rules are in effect, so I'm not sure how you've concluded that we have 17 years of evidence on this. We're basically at zero.

To be so righteously indignant about something to the point that you've now called people transphobes for having some very justifiable concerns about the future of women's sports is just absurd.
Click to expand...

This is literally the same argument terfs use when they scaremonger about the introduction of self identification laws leading to increased attacks against women in women’s spaces. Even though in countries where self id has been implemented no such increase in criminality has occurred.

There’s one trans Olympian ever. That’s the fact. Your arguments are simply fear mongering.
 
Shamwow said:
My girlfriend is telling me to stop getting wound up so much by transphobes and ableists so I'll listen to a woman instead of all you men.
Click to expand...

I'd also suggest not labelling everyone who doesn't think there is a simple answer, either your simple answer or other's different simple answers, as transphobes and ableists. And are you saying that transgender/intersex people are disabled? I wouldn't have assumed you would have thought so from your posts.
 
stepic said:
This is literally the same argument terfs use when they scaremonger about the introduction of self identification laws leading to increased attacks against women in women’s spaces. Even though in countries where self id has been implemented no such increase in criminality has occurred.

There’s one trans Olympian ever. That’s the fact. Your arguments are simply fear mongering.
Click to expand...

Reverting to calling people transphobes already. Clearly you're here for a reasoned debate.

stepic said:
Feel free to answer the original questions if you like.
Click to expand...

Will you return the courtesy? Because it very much seems like you're only here to call people transphobes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.