Transgender Athletes

[jojojo]

Once again, I implore you: learn to understand sarcasm/context. Please. It will do you wonders.

I think you need to learn to understand that phrases like that do get used sarcastically about women all the time and are often used as a way to make women feel as if their reactions or emotions don't matter, or that their responses are stupid or weak. That presumably wasn't your intention, nonetheless that's what a lot of people heard.

 

[stepic]

I think you need to learn to understand that phrases like that do get used sarcastically about women all the time and are often used as a way to make women feel as if their reactions or emotions don't matter, or that their responses are stupid or weak. That presumably wasn't your intention, nonetheless that's what a lot of people heard.

that’s exactly why it was used.

it’s my opinion there is always a bit of an undercurrent of patronising ‘women are inferior/weak’ talk in all of this discourse. My opinion is the opposite of this, women are far stronger than men think. In these conversations it’s almost a given that trans women will beat cis women, because they have benefits of an ALL POWERFUL male body in their formative years. Yet cis women beat trans women all the time. Yes, the average man is stronger than the average woman; but that doesn’t mean any man could beat any woman, and likewise, it’s not a given that any trans woman could beat a cis woman either.

which is why it’s incredibly amusing to listen to people who seemingly can’t read or are deliberately choosing not to to try and make some kind of point (badly), when i’m literally saying the opposite. I mean the context wasn’t even that difficult.

 

[UweBein]

that’s exactly why it was used.

it’s my opinion there is always a bit of an undercurrent of patronising ‘women are inferior/weak’ talk in all of this discourse. My opinion is the opposite of this, women are far stronger than men think. In these conversations it’s almost a given that trans women will beat cis women, because they have benefits of an ALL POWERFUL male body in their formative years. Yet cis women beat trans women all the time. Yes, the average man is stronger than the average woman; but that doesn’t mean any man could beat any woman, and likewise, it’s not a given that any trans woman could beat a cis woman either.

which is why it’s incredibly amusing to listen to people who seemingly can’t read or are deliberately choosing not to to try and make some of point (badly), when i’m literally saying the opposite. I mean the context wasn’t even that difficult.

Definitely. Like the fastest woman could beat 99.9 % of men easily.
But it is a little bit different in certain cases... for example that US swimmer, that UK cyclist or take Caster. They are head & shoulders above the rest of the field.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

that’s exactly why it was used.

it’s my opinion there is always a bit of an undercurrent of patronising ‘women are inferior/weak’ talk in all of this discourse. My opinion is the opposite of this, women are far stronger than men think. In these conversations it’s almost a given that trans women will beat cis women, because they have benefits of an ALL POWERFUL male body in their formative years. Yet cis women beat trans women all the time. Yes, the average man is stronger than the average woman; but that doesn’t mean any man could beat any woman, and likewise, it’s not a given that any trans woman could beat a cis woman either.

which is why it’s incredibly amusing to listen to people who seemingly can’t read or are deliberately choosing not to to try and make some of point (badly), when i’m literally saying the opposite. I mean the context wasn’t even that difficult.

It’s a meaningless point to make though. Obviously not all trans women athletes can beat all cis women athletes. And obviously there are lots of cis women athletes who can beat cis male athletes. Anyone who’s played sport at any sort of decent level knows that elite female athletes are strong as feck. So pointing this out is really just stating the bleeding obvious. But it’s completely irrelevant to a discussion around the advantage that being born (and going through puberty) as a male will give athletes on average compared to being born female.

Success in elite sports comes down to very fine margins and the physical advantages we’re talking about here are more than enough to cause an uneven playing field, which is the concern here. It’s also the reason that sports have had male and female categories going back a very long time, with large differences between the world records in the two categories. So trying to point out that some women can beat some men at sports is a straw (wo)man.

 

[RedPed]

The problem I have with these types of discussions around trans-issues is that people use it as a stepping stone to just say fully transphobic things. I guess the 'smart' ones don't say anything outright transphobic, but resort to implications. It's depressing to read.

Having any kind of opposing or challenging view doesn't make the person transphobic, you do understand that don't you? That's the trouble with these kinds of issues. People tend to highlight things that just aren't there.

 

[stepic]

It’s a meaningless point to make though. Obviously not all trans women athletes can beat all cis women athletes. And obviously there are lots of cis women athletes who can beat cis male athletes. Anyone who’s played sport at any sort of decent level knows that elite female athletes are strong as feck. So pointing this out is really just stating the bleeding obvious. But it’s completely irrelevant to a discussion around the advantage that being born (and going through puberty) as a male will give athletes on average compared to being born female.

Success in elite sports comes down to very fine margins and the physical advantages we’re talking about here are more than enough to cause an uneven playing field, which is the concern here. It’s also the reason that sports have had male and female categories going back a very long time, with large differences between the world records in the two categories. So trying to point out that some women can beat some men at sports is a straw (wo)man.

well my actual original point was that given these supposed advantages you’d think there’d be at least one trans woman on the planet who massively dominated their sport like Bolt did in his.

even liv thomas for all the attention she gets when she wins the odd race isn’t anywhere near the best ranked swimmer.

Even if we grant that there are some differences/advantages, they’re no different to the inherent advantages some of us have as individuals over other individuals, cis/trans/whatever.

once trans women start completely dominating their sports in Bolt or Phelps-like fashion then happy to re-think my position. I don’t expect that to happen though really.

 

[stepic]

Having any kind of opposing or challenging view doesn't make the person transphobic, you do understand that don't you? That's the trouble with these kinds of issues. People tend to highlight things that just aren't there.

It’s already been explained multiple times why using terms like ‘biological man’ to describe a trans women, even in the context of sports, is problematic. The fact people continue to ignore that is exactly the point BD is making.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

What is the preferred nomenclature if one is attempting to express a biological difference though? It does seem to be a bit of a minefield. Woman born with male physiology?

 

[maniak]

What is the preferred nomenclature if one is attempting to express a biological difference though? It does seem to be a bit of a minefield. Woman born with male physiology?

Transgender woman?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

well my actual original point was that given these supposed advantages you’d think there’d be at least one trans woman on the planet who massively dominated their sport like Bolt did in his.

even liv thomas for all the attention she gets when she wins the odd race isn’t anywhere near the best ranked swimmer.

Even if we grant that there are some differences/advantages, they’re no different to the inherent advantages we all have as individuals over other individuals, cis/trans/whatever.

once trans women start completely dominating their sports in Bolt or Phelps-like fashion then happy to re-think my position. I don’t expect that to happen though really.

Those last two paragraphs are quite something.

 

[stepic]

Those last two paragraphs are quite something.

how so?

the advantages phelps had over his rivals were more pronounced than any advantage any trans woman competing currently has over their rivals, as evidenced by the fact no trans woman has ever dominated a sport like phelps did.

and I don’t expect trans women to ever dominate because a) there’s so few of them therefore the chances are incredibly unlikely, and b) the supposed advantages aren’t actually as large as people make out - again, clearly, based on the historical evidence.

neither are controversial statements. it’s just a load of hysteria, much like most of the discourse currently around trans people. wedge issue within culture war bullshit.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Transgender woman?

In general, yes, but that term doesn't seem to make much sense if attempting to draw attention to specific or inherent physical differences between a transgender woman vis a cis woman. Like, it seems to me that the objection to the term "biological male" is that it gives the impression of denying a female identity. I'd like to avoid that. I'm of the opinion that transgender women are undoubtedly women. I would never want to deny them that identity. Nevertheless I do think that being a trans woman confers certain physical advantages, a portion of which endure beyond transition, which unfortunately endanger fairness in female competition. I'm of the belief that these advantages are as a result of transgender women being born with unwanted but nonetheless extant and pertinent male characteristics.

There has to be some way of expressing this that remains palatable while allowing for more nuanced discussion than saying tautological stuff like "I don't think a transgender woman should participate with cis women in boxing because they're a transgender woman." If anything putting it like that is even more offensive because it comes across as a denial of rights purely as a function of identity.

That's as far away from what I want to say as possible. The division between male and female sports has never been about female identity as much as the simple truth that generally speaking a female physique is unable to successfully compete with an equivalent male one. It sucks, but as far as the science goes it seems like it's an unfortunate truth that transgender women retain a portion of the advantages conferred by growing into a male physique. Of course more generally speaking it is no advantage, it's a constant and miserable millstone these women have to endure, overcome or accept. Nonetheless when it comes to competitive sport there seem to be reasonable grounds for concern that these characteristics violate the reason for the division between male/female sports to begin with.

 

[Wibble]

There aren't any complexities defining biological sex. It can be tested, it can be observed, it can be explained. You're looking for some rope to make an idiotic point when there is none.

Your second sentence is a totally different point, and has no bearing on the first.

Referring to trans women as biological men is insulting depending on the context. To demean / belittle in public etc - yes. To discuss whether they should be allowed in women sports on an online forum - not at all.

In most cases. However, there are people who are intersex or similar which complicates things even though a separate issue to trans women participating in elite female sport.

People who insist on referring to trans women as men are almost universally transphobic in my experience. Even if they don't think they are.

 

[Wibble]

how so?

the advantages phelps had over his rivals were more pronounced than any advantage any trans woman competing currently has over their rivals, as evidenced by the fact no trans woman has ever dominated a sport like phelps did.

and I don’t expect trans women to ever dominate because a) there’s so few of them therefore the chances are incredibly unlikely, and b) the supposed advantages aren’t actually as large as people make out - again, clearly, based on the historical evidence.

neither are controversial statements. it’s just a load of hysteria, much like most of the discourse currently around trans people. wedge issue within culture war bullshit.

We have male and female competitions for a reason - specifically so women can be recognised for their achievements based on merit. Trans women want to be recognised as women as they are women in their mind and imo right minded people should support that. However, a trans woman, particularly one who has gone through puberty as male, has an advantage that can't be totally removed or reliably adjusted for (even assuming it is ethical to medically adjust things like testosterone levels purely for sporting purposes). As soon as you get a trans woman winning in elite sport e.g. Lia Thomas, you can't escape the fact that they are much higher ranked as a woman than they were previously as a man, and therefore the cis women who do less well as a result are being disadvantaged. I'd like to think of a way that makes everyone happy but I just can't see how it is possible. And a separate transgender competition will not only have too few participants to work but would probably make trans people 'other" in a way that they want to get avoid. Maybe all we can do is seek the least shit option.

 

[The Boy]

Referring to trans women as biological men is insulting depending on the context. To demean / belittle in public etc - yes. To discuss whether they should be allowed in women sports on an online forum - not at all.

Thanks for making that decision for them.

 

[stw2022]

it’s my opinion there is always a bit of an undercurrent of patronising ‘women are inferior/weak’ talk in all of this discourse. My opinion is the opposite of this, women are far stronger than men think. In these conversations it’s almost a given that trans women will beat cis women, because they have benefits of an ALL POWERFUL male body in their formative years. Yet cis women beat trans women all the time. Yes, the average man is stronger than the average woman; but that doesn’t mean any man could beat any woman, and likewise, it’s not a given that any trans woman could beat a cis woman either.

Then explain why you wouldn't be in favour of scrapping the Manchester United women's team and simply decree that players of all sexes should compete for a place in a single team.

The men's team wasn't called the men's team until the women's team existed. Now it is simply to distinguish it. Surely you object to that gender segregation, would like to have never seen the women's team created to begin with but rules changed so any woman good enough to play alongside Rashford, Fernandes and Martinez would need to compete to show herself capable to get a game?


The fact you DON'T think that means your just virtue signalling and actually know why men's and women's sports are largely separate entities for very, very good reason

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

that’s exactly why it was used.

it’s my opinion there is always a bit of an undercurrent of patronising ‘women are inferior/weak’ talk in all of this discourse. My opinion is the opposite of this, women are far stronger than men think. In these conversations it’s almost a given that trans women will beat cis women, because they have benefits of an ALL POWERFUL male body in their formative years. Yet cis women beat trans women all the time. Yes, the average man is stronger than the average woman; but that doesn’t mean any man could beat any woman, and likewise, it’s not a given that any trans woman could beat a cis woman either.

which is why it’s incredibly amusing to listen to people who seemingly can’t read or are deliberately choosing not to to try and make some kind of point (badly), when i’m literally saying the opposite. I mean the context wasn’t even that difficult.

Isn't this usually because the TW they beat is an amateur making a step up to a higher level and can't bridge the skill gap? When it is the same levels of experience, the cis women seldom win?

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

how so?

the advantages phelps had over his rivals were more pronounced than any advantage any trans woman competing currently has over their rivals, as evidenced by the fact no trans woman has ever dominated a sport like phelps did.

and I don’t expect trans women to ever dominate because a) there’s so few of them therefore the chances are incredibly unlikely, and b) the supposed advantages aren’t actually as large as people make out - again, clearly, based on the historical evidence.

neither are controversial statements. it’s just a load of hysteria, much like most of the discourse currently around trans people. wedge issue within culture war bullshit.

They weren't.

 

[RedPed]

It’s already been explained multiple times why using terms like ‘biological man’ to describe a trans women, even in the context of sports, is problematic. The fact people continue to ignore that is exactly the point BD is making.

When did 'biological man' even become a thing, ffs?

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

When did 'biological man' even become a thing, ffs?

Well I recall a few years back now when all this started brewing online, people started claiming that you could change sex, so in response people started using biological male to differentiate between male gender and male sex.

 

[The Corinthian]

Thanks for making that decision for them.

What point are you trying to make? That the term ‘biological male’ is inherently insulting when discussing transgender sports? Because it’s not. It’s contextual, like most things.

 

[stepic]

We have male and female competitions for a reason - specifically so women can be recognised for their achievements based on merit. Trans women want to be recognised as women as they are women in their mind and imo right minded people should support that. However, a trans woman, particularly one who has gone through puberty as male, has an advantage that can't be totally removed or reliably adjusted for (even assuming it is ethical to medically adjust things like testosterone levels purely for sporting purposes). As soon as you get a trans woman winning in elite sport e.g. Lia Thomas, you can't escape the fact that they are much higher ranked as a woman than they were previously as a man, and therefore the cis women who do less well as a result are being disadvantaged. I'd like to think of a way that makes everyone happy but I just can't see how it is possible. And a separate transgender competition will not only have too few participants to work but would probably make trans people 'other" in a way that they want to get avoid. Maybe all we can do is seek the least shit option.

i know the argument, it's just for me the least shit option is not to ban a subset of the population from participating in sports. there is no 100% equal playing field in any sport, you will always have some people naturally gifted and therefore advantaged over others. the only difference is people are seemingly happy for this advantage to be in place when the competition is purely cis, and not when there are trans people involved. i don't think it should matter, particularly as the numbers of trans people are so tiny, and there isn't a single dominant trans person force in any sport. someone is disadvantaged because of the inclusion of trans people? well women tennis players were disadvantaged participating in a sport when the williams' sisters were in their prime, too. there is no genuine equality in sports, that's partly what makes sports interesting.

when you also then throw in legislation like the mandatory inspection of children's genitals, because of the hysteria around trans people, you can see how things become problematic, not to mention this topic being used as a wedge issue against trans rights in general.

 

[stepic]

Isn't this usually because the TW they beat is an amateur making a step up to a higher level and can't bridge the skill gap? When it is the same levels of experience, the cis women seldom win?

no - lia thomas, to use as the obvious example people know about, routinely loses against cis women. she loses to cis woman more than she wins. it's just when she occasionally does wins everyone flips out.

 

[stepic]

They weren't.

then why did phelps dominate the men's field like no trans woman ever has in the women's field?

 

[The Corinthian]

i know the argument, it's just for me the least shit option is not to ban a subset of the population from participating in sports. there is no 100% equal playing field in any sport, you will always have some people naturally gifted and therefore advantaged over others. the only difference is people are seemingly happy for this advantage to be in place when the competition is purely cis, and not when there are trans people involved. i don't think it should matter, particularly as the numbers of trans people are so tiny, and there isn't a single dominant trans person force in any sport. someone is disadvantaged because of the inclusion of trans people? well women tennis players were disadvantaged participating in a sport when the williams' sisters were in their prime, too. there is no genuine equality in sports, that's partly what makes sports interesting.

when you also then throw in legislation like the mandatory inspection of children's genitals, because of the hysteria around trans people, you can see how things become problematic, not to mention this topic being used as a wedge issue against trans rights in general.

So would you be for PEDs in sport?

 

[JPRouve]

then why did phelps dominate the men's field like no trans woman ever has in the women's field?

Because the most skilled and physically gifted males don't move to women competitions.

 

[André Dominguez]

This is a very divisive topic, simply because we don't have enough data sample to make conclusions about the overall impact.

The reason we are not seeing them win as a constant basis yet is because there are few trans and also because we never had a "formidable trans athlete" to cause a major impact, but when that day arrives, sh*t will hit the fan and female athletes will massively complain, mark my words.

But if we focus on objective scientific data you cannot ignore there is a biological advantage. The main reasons that it might be a bit unfair is because they are competing against someone with bigger bone density, more capacity to build muscle mass and able to loose body fat faster and have a better % of fat ratio.

For example, a male athlete can keep an healthy body with fat % between 10-22% while a female athlete can only be healthy if the fat % is 20-32%. That is a big advantage, because most female athletes are clearly bellow the healthy fat % which means they are constantly living on the edge while a trans athlete could have a 10% body fat taking less risks on their health.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

no - lia thomas, to use as the obvious example people know about, routinely loses against cis women. she loses to cis woman more than she wins. it's just when she occasionally does wins everyone flips out.

This is incorrect unfortunately.

You have an individual who, in their previous class and division was 554th in 200m freestyle, 65th in 500m freestyle and 32nd in 1650m freestyle.

In their new class, they're 5th, 1st and 8th in the same respective events.

Last year, swimming as a woman, she broke six records at the Ivy League Championships.

Lia Thomas swims slower than she did when she was competing with men yet is still able to be hyper competitive when swimming with women, breaking pool met records and winning.

It's so obvious but I understand the compassion one feels on this subject might cloud their view, but to say Lia Thomas doesn't have an advantage is just wildly inaccurate. Likewise to say people only lose their mind when she wins, too is inaccurate. If she comes third, the contention (not one I necessarily share) is that she is taking third place from a natal, cis woman.

Especially in the states when sports and education scholarships are so intertwined, you can see why this kicks up a fuss.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

then why did phelps dominate the men's field like no trans woman ever has in the women's field?

Because trans people are an incredibly rare minority. Top athletes are also an incredibly rare minority as well. It's statistically unlikely.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

i know the argument, it's just for me the least shit option is not to ban a subset of the population from participating in sports. there is no 100% equal playing field in any sport, you will always have some people naturally gifted and therefore advantaged over others. the only difference is people are seemingly happy for this advantage to be in place when the competition is purely cis, and not when there are trans people involved. i don't think it should matter, particularly as the numbers of trans people are so tiny, and there isn't a single dominant trans person force in any sport. someone is disadvantaged because of the inclusion of trans people? well women tennis players were disadvantaged participating in a sport when the williams' sisters were in their prime, too. there is no genuine equality in sports, that's partly what makes sports interesting.

when you also then throw in legislation like the mandatory inspection of children's genitals, because of the hysteria around trans people, you can see how things become problematic, not to mention this topic being used as a wedge issue against trans rights in general.

Why the Williams sisters? Why not Graff?

 

[stepic]

This is incorrect unfortunately.

You have an individual who, in their previous class and division was 554th in 200m freestyle, 65th in 500m freestyle and 32nd in 1650m freestyle.

In their new class, they're 5th, 1st and 8th in the same respective events.

Last year, swimming as a woman, she broke six records at the Ivy League Championships.

Lia Thomas swims slower than she did when she was competing with men yet is still able to be hyper competitive when swimming with women, breaking pool met records and winning.

It's so obvious but I understand the compassion one feels on this subject might cloud their view, but to say Lia Thomas doesn't have an advantage is just wildly inaccurate. Likewise to say people only lose their mind when she wins, too is inaccurate. If she comes third, the contention (not one I necessarily share) is that she is taking third place from a natal, cis woman.

Especially in the states when sports and education scholarships are so intertwined, you can see why this kicks up a fuss.

i'm not denying she does better against women than when she competed in the men's division.

i said she loses to cis women more than she wins. you just referred to her finishing 5th and 8th yourself.

i also didn't say she doesn't have an advantage. i'm just highlighting that it isn't as large as people seem to suggest, and i'm also saying there are natural advantages between all people in sports.

if she comes third and therefore strips a cis woman of third, then so be it. the cis woman who now finished 4th also lost to 2 other cis women, so what's the difference? if a cis woman loses to serena williams in the semi finals of a tournament, she's not exactly going to complain how unfair it is she had to play against someone who is physically more dominant than she is, right? i know the arument is: they're both cis women. my and others argument is that it's irrelevant when the differences between individuals can be as pronounced between cis women as they are between cis and trans.

 

[stepic]

Because trans people are an incredibly rare minority. Top athletes are also an incredibly rare minority as well. It's statistically unlikely.

yes, almost like this is all just hysteric nonsense.

 

[Carolina Red]

i said she loses to cis women more than she wins. you just referred to her finishing 5th and 8th yourself.

Making this argument is ignoring the existence of the entire rest of the women that competed in this event in the entire NCAA.

 

[JPRouve]

Making this argument is ignoring the existence of the entire rest of the women that competed in this event in the entire NCAA.

Too many people don't care about women when they talk about this topic. It's extremely strange, it's as if women are an afterthought.

 

[Carolina Red]

Too many people don't care about women when they talk about this topic. It's extremely strangely, it's as if women are an afterthought.

Case in point…

if she comes third and therefore strips a cis woman of third, then so be it. the cis woman who now finished 4th also lost to 2 other cis women, so what's the difference?

 

[Ajr]

The argument is simple, but no one will listen. I'm really bloody tired of arguing this topic when in reality it's not bloody difficult. Studies that are commonly quoted are absolutely bs with incorrect hormone levels etc. It's obvious that people arguing on one side see trans woman as men, and refuse to budge on that so it's absolutely pointless because their opinions are therefore worthless. Maybe the barrier for hormone levels isn't quite right right now but that doesn't mean an outright ban is correct either.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

i'm not denying she does better against women than when she competed in the men's division.

i said she loses to cis women more than she wins. you just referred to her finishing 5th and 8th yourself.

i also didn't say she doesn't have an advantage. i'm just highlighting that it isn't as large as people seem to suggest, and i'm also saying there are natural advantages between all people in sports.

if she comes third and therefore strips a cis woman of third, then so be it. the cis woman who now finished 4th also lost to 2 other cis women, so what's the difference? if a cis woman loses to serena williams in the semi finals of a tournament, she's not exactly going to complain how unfair it is she had to play against someone who is physically more dominant than she is, right? i know the arument is: they're both cis women. my and others argument is that it's irrelevant when the differences between individuals can be as pronounced between cis women as they are between cis and trans.

if she comes third and therefore strips a cis woman of third, then so be it

See why women think that people don't give a shit about them?

i said she loses to cis women more than she wins

She is the eight best time in that class/distance, not eighth in a race. Again, please reread. This means she will certainly "win much more than she loses"

my and others argument is that it's irrelevant when the differences between individuals can be as pronounced between cis women as they are between cis and trans.

This, simply isn't true. In a massively rare outlier case, perhaps, but in the vast, vast VAST majority of the time, your statement is incorrect.

so what's the difference? if a cis woman loses to serena williams in the semi finals of a tournament, she's not exactly going to complain how unfair it is she had to play against someone who is physically more dominant than she is, right?

Again, I always see this with people on your side of this discussion, and for some reason they always use Serena Williams, or a WoC as an example. Never Steffi Graf or

It is hugely problematic to see cis black women being compared to biological males, which was historical white racist propaganda. I see it all the time and it makes my skin crawl. People always compare trans women to black women in this debate (not just athletes) - I ask you - Why?!

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

Too many people don't care about women when they talk about this topic. It's extremely strange, it's as if women are an afterthought.

Always. Combined with the anger when women put up boundaries.

 

[JPRouve]

The argument is simple, but no one will listen. I'm really bloody tired of arguing this topic when in reality it's not bloody difficult. Studies that are commonly quoted are absolutely bs with incorrect hormone levels etc. It's obvious that people arguing on one side see trans woman as men, and refuse to budge on that so it's absolutely pointless because their opinions are therefore worthless. Maybe the barrier for hormone levels isn't quite right right now but that doesn't mean an outright ban is correct either.

Don't transwomen that have spent almost the entirety of their growth as male, have male skeletons and the related ligaments/muscle density?

 

[JPRouve]

It has probably been proposed already but I believe that all trans-people(or even cis-women) should be welcomed in men's sport while women sport should be reserved to cis-women.