Transgender Athletes

[Stack]

Initially I would think there shouldn't be a differences but in some of those examples there are sex categories, like let's say chess. I might be wrong but it was my understanding than men perform better than women, when they play each other and are similarly ranked.

Another example would be esports, games such as DotA2 and League of Legends I don't think there are sex categories, just one open categorie buyt is vastly occupied by men. Outside of strenght wouldn't things like endurance and reflexes would be an advantage for men? I'm just wondering because it doesn't seem there should be a difference in those activities but men end up performing better in almost everything.

I wonder if in chess and esports as you have mentioned a factor would be that much more men take part in those things which leads to better performances

 

[Cloud7]

I wonder if in chess and esports as you have mentioned a factor would be that much more men take part in those things which leads to better performances

I can't say for esports, but in the comments about this chess story that I saw on some site or the other, they said that the reason why there are male and female categories in chess is because there are loads more men that play it than women, so by virtue of just the sheer numbers of men vs women it would be harder for women to break through in it, so a separate category was created. I have no idea if that is true, and it could very well be totally wrong but that made some sense to me.

 

[Camilo]

I can't say for esports, but in the comments about this chess story that I saw on some site or the other, they said that the reason why there are male and female categories in chess is because there are loads more men that play it than women, so by virtue of just the sheer numbers of men vs women it would be harder for women to break through in it, so a separate category was created. I have no idea if that is true, and it could very well be totally wrong but that made some sense to me.

That makes zero sense.

Yes, if less women play chess they have less chance of winning. But individuals play chess, it's not men vs women. X woman has just as much chance as winning as Y man.

 

[Cloud7]

That makes zero sense.

Yes, if less women play chess they have less chance of winning. But individuals play chess, it's not men vs women. X woman has just as much chance as winning as Y man.

Yeah but surely if far less women play chess than men, just by virtue of the numbers you're far more likely to have more men dominating, no? And if it's all one pool of people and it's mostly dominated by men, then the knock on effect of that might be that women are less interested in it going forward, which would then turn it into a self propagating cycle? By giving women a separate category where there aren't overwhelmingly more numbers of men would you not give them the space for it to develop and generate more interest from them?

You are right in that there's no inherent difference between a man and a woman playing a chess match against each other as opposed to man vs man or woman vs woman, but I do think the numbers being heavily skewed in favor of men does put the women at a disadvantage, and the separate categories are worth it to try to reduce that skew.

That is if that point about the numbers is actually true.

 

[Camilo]

Yeah but surely if far less women play chess than men, just by virtue of the numbers you're far more likely to have more men dominating, no? And if it's all one pool of people and it's mostly dominated by men, then the knock on effect of that might be that women are less interested in it going forward, which would then turn it into a self propagating cycle? By giving women a separate category where there aren't overwhelmingly more numbers of men would you not give them the space for it to develop and generate more interest from them?

You are right in that there's no inherent difference between a man and a woman playing a chess match against each other as opposed to man vs man or woman vs woman, but I do think the numbers being heavily skewed in favor of men does put the women at a disadvantage, and the separate categories are worth it to try to reduce that skew.

That is if that point about the numbers is actually true.

What's wrong with that? Proportionally, it has to be entirely fair. More men play, more men win. Of course they do. That's common sense. Do the few women who play have less chance of winning than one of the men? Nope. Unless they're shit, they've just as much chance as winning.

 

[Camilo]

The problem is there are so few top female chess players. At grandmaster level there's only something like 40 female grandmasters compared to about 2000 male. So if you didnt have female categories you'd never see them in paid tournaments and they'd never be able to make any money.

That makes no sense.

 

[arnie_ni]

What part makes no sense?

It's the same in open seater racing. Same in esports. If they didnt create female only competitions you would never see a female competitor. The theory being if women cant see women being successful in these sports it discourages participation.

If they were good enough they'd be in the competitions is what the other poster is saying.

There's wont be separate category because of lack of numbers, rather its because there's lack of female competitors good enough to compete with their male counterparts.

 

[Wing Attack Plan R]

For someone to be truly transgender, they will have to have completed their metamorphosis to the other gender. The halfway shit doesn’t count. So, for instance, the college swimmer who takes hormones for one year and then competes in women’s category should not be allowed. If that same swimmer has had the reassignment surgery, then they aren’t fecking around.

I would add that boosting hormone levels to maintain the transition would also count as an artificial enhancement. If you have elevated levels of testosterone or estrogen, you are ineligible to compete, just like any other PED.

At a basic level, a person has XX or XY chromosomes. We can get away from “male” and “female” categories and make it XX or XY. That cannot be changed by a person with surgery or drugs, and it is what it is. It has nothing to do with your identity, or your feelings, it’s just science.

 

[Acheron]

I wonder if in chess and esports as you have mentioned a factor would be that much more men take part in those things which leads to better performances

In chess I read about it also being a psychological thing, like men would be more stubborn and would try harder if they know they're against a woman, whereas a woman would perform worse if she knows she's playing against a man.

As for certain type of esports it seems reaction time and reflexes can be very important, I',m not sure if men are supposed to be better at that than women but certainly younger individuals have an advantage in that regard or at least that's the explanation why a lot of pros are teenagers or in their early 20s and not a lot of guys in their late 20s.

I do believe there are a lot of girls who play comepetitive videogames but if the scene is filled with guys it might not seem as an appealing to girls. It might be something similar with how the engineer careers are filled with dudes and barely any women.

 

[Camilo]

What part makes no sense?

It's the same in open seater racing. Same in esports. If they didnt create female only competitions you would never see a female competitor. The theory being if women cant see women being successful in these sports it discourages participation.

There's nothing stopping women competing. A woman has just as much chance as winning as a man in chess, unless you think they're less intelligent?

If there are less women competing in the sport then there should be less women winning. What's wrong with that?

If women can't see other women being successful it discourages them?! I don't think women are quite that pathetic and stupid. That sounds like patronising rubbish.

 

[stw2022]

There's nothing stopping women competing. A woman has just as much chance as winning as a man in chess, unless you think they're less intelligent?

If there are less women competing in the sport then there should be less women winning. What's wrong with that?

If women can't see other women being successful it discourages them?! I don't think women are quite that pathetic and stupid. That sounds like patronising rubbish.

So why not just scrap women's football, demand any woman who wants to play should be able to compete with the men and call anyone who calls that argument disingenuous bullshit, patronising?

Political party drives to increase racial representation scrapped as patronising rubbish too you'd want?

Let's just accept white men domination all areas of culture and public life. Anything else sounds like patronising rubbish to you. Next they'll be putting garlic in bread.

 

[arnie_ni]

So why not just scrap women's football, demand any woman who wants to play should be able to compete with the men and call anyone who calls that argument disingenuous bullshit, patronising?

Political party drives to increase racial representation scrapped as patronising rubbish too you'd want?

Let's just accept white men domination all areas of culture and public life. Anything else sounds like patronising rubbish to you. Next they'll be putting garlic in bread.

Chess and football are entirely different. One is physical one is intelligence

 

[maniak]

A quick google search shows a lot of women chess players complaining about sexism, misogyny and harassment, which seems to be one of the reasons a lot of girls quit during their teenage years while boys keep going.

Because we seem to be very far form eradicating these behaviors, it doesn't seem so strange that women want to have their own competitions.

 

[9 Stone Elvis]

There's nothing stopping women competing. A woman has just as much chance as winning as a man in chess, unless you think they're less intelligent?

If there are less women competing in the sport then there should be less women winning. What's wrong with that?

If women can't see other women being successful it discourages them?! I don't think women are quite that pathetic and stupid. That sounds like patronising rubbish.

Nothing patronising about it. You can look across demographics other than gender. If you dont see people like you performing then you dont have anyone to aspire to be. The uptake in womens football will continue to rise as long as there is more coverage and more females playing for girls to look up to. You can probably look at other sports and see a lack of uptake for other reasons. You probably dont get a lot of working class uptake of polo for example. Also its logical that with darts, pool and snooker there is no reason for a woman not to be able to compete physically but if its not seen as a sport women compete in then numbers will be low and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[calodo2003]

 

[VorZakone]

Swimming World Cup category for transgender athletes cancelled after no entries received

World Aquatics’ plans to debut an open category for transgender athletes at the World Cup in Berlin this week have been cancelled after no entries were received.

“Following the close of registration for the open category competitions at the World Aquatics Swimming World Cup – Berlin 2023 meet scheduled for 6-8 October, World Aquatics can confirm that no entries have been received for the open category events,” it said.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-athletes-cancelled-after-no-entries-received

 

[Snow]

There's nothing stopping women competing. A woman has just as much chance as winning as a man in chess, unless you think they're less intelligent?

If there are less women competing in the sport then there should be less women winning. What's wrong with that?

If women can't see other women being successful it discourages them?! I don't think women are quite that pathetic and stupid. That sounds like patronising rubbish.

Let me ask you this, do you think the concept of a role model is real?

Do you think voting matters? Do you think voting matters? A lot of people don't vote because they don't see their vote having an affect. A lot of women don't bother with getting to the top of chess or activities of equal to men because they don't want to bother being barraded by sexism all the time. The women grandmasters who beat the greats at chess, were they lauded? No, not as much as excuses were made for why the great men lost.

Another angle. Why should parents encourage their daughter to take up chess when there isn't an obvious path for the future. If it's only men then that leads to the thinking that women can't do it. The fact of the matter is the sexism in our history which allowed boys the freedom to practice what they want, be encouraged to do what they want whilst girls were encouraged to do things that mainly dads didn't want to do. Then those boys become dads and repeat the cycle.

Women's only leagues and tournaments are steps towards breaking these cycles. These institutionalized biases. It's not enough to tear down the wall, hand them a chess board and say off you go now.

 

[NotThatSoph]

Swimming World Cup category for transgender athletes cancelled after no entries received


https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...-athletes-cancelled-after-no-entries-received

An open category and non-participitation is the same option. There aren't even close to enough trans people for any sport beyond a pure hobby basis, so any open category or a category for only trans people is just a creation made for people who want to exclude trans women from women's sport but for some reason aren't comfortable with calling it a ban.

This isn't a comment on whether or not a ban is legitimate, just that an own category for trans people is functionally equal to a ban and should be spoken of as such.

 

[Camilo]

Let me ask you this, do you think the concept of a role model is real?

Do you think voting matters? Do you think voting matters? A lot of people don't vote because they don't see their vote having an affect. A lot of women don't bother with getting to the top of chess or activities of equal to men because they don't want to bother being barraded by sexism all the time. The women grandmasters who beat the greats at chess, were they lauded? No, not as much as excuses were made for why the great men lost.

Another angle. Why should parents encourage their daughter to take up chess when there isn't an obvious path for the future. If it's only men then that leads to the thinking that women can't do it. The fact of the matter is the sexism in our history which allowed boys the freedom to practice what they want, be encouraged to do what they want whilst girls were encouraged to do things that mainly dads didn't want to do. Then those boys become dads and repeat the cycle.

Women's only leagues and tournaments are steps towards breaking these cycles. These institutionalized biases. It's not enough to tear down the wall, hand them a chess board and say off you go now.

Pretty old fashioned sexist opinion to suggest you can only have a roll model of the same sex.

 

[Sky1981]

This isn't a comment on whether or not a ban is legitimate, just that an own category for trans people is functionally equal to a ban and should be spoken of as such.

It's not a ban, just not an instant win.

This is new territory, just keep it open for now and see what's coming up.

Sorry, you can't please everyone all at once.

 

[The Corinthian]

This isn't a comment on whether or not a ban is legitimate, just that an own category for trans people is functionally equal to a ban and should be spoken of as such.

That’s a massive stretch in logic. Actually it’s a gap in logic.

If no trans athlete is applying to an open category it’s not a failing of the sporting body.

 

[McGrathsipan]

This isn't a comment on whether or not a ban is legitimate, just that an own category for trans people is functionally equal to a ban and should be spoken of as such.

Absolute nonsense

 

[Ajr]

Absolute nonsense

If there isn't enough people to make up a catagory and it never runs, how does that give an opportunity to someone to play in it?

 

[Alex99]

If there isn't enough people to make up a catagory and it never runs, how does that give an opportunity to someone to play in it?

They said they received no applicants at all. This isn't a case of scrapping it because they only had one or two and decided it wasn't worth the effort.

The opportunity was there and no one took it.

 

[SilentWitness]

I'd be interested to know from the transgender athletes why they did not apply.

 

[Ajr]

I'd be interested to know from the transgender athletes why they did not apply.

Because there are very few and most players give up their sport when they transition due to various reasons

 

[VorZakone]

What is the point of an open category if there aren't enough trans athletes?

 

[SilentWitness]

Because there are very few and most players give up their sport when they transition due to various reasons

You'd assume that and also that they want to compete in the women or men categories rather than an open category but I'd still be interested to hear why. In all of this it feels like trans athletes haven't been consulted or spoke with at all and it's just been decided there will be an open category and they should be happy with that.

 

[Alex99]

What is the point of an open category if there aren't enough trans athletes?

It is (was?) an attempt at creating a fair platform for trans athletes to compete at elite level.

The science does not appear to support fair inclusion into female categories, which is the biggest issue/talking point.

If the issue is competing outside of gender identity, which is the only thing I can see it being, what options are there for non-binary athletes if not a separate category such as an open division?

 

[The Corinthian]

You'd assume that and also that they want to compete in the women or men categories rather than an open category but I'd still be interested to hear why. In all of this it feels like trans athletes haven't been consulted or spoke with at all and it's just been decided there will be an open category and they should be happy with that.

The consultation with trans athletes has suggested that they should be allowed to compete in female categories despite the massive inherent advantages they face, which is why sporting bodies have decided to include an open category as it retains the integrity of female sport, and literally doesn’t exclude anyone else from competing. The fact that no trans athlete applied to it isn’t a failing of the sporting body being inclusive.

 

[Ajr]

You'd assume that and also that they want to compete in the women or men categories rather than an open category but I'd still be interested to hear why. In all of this it feels like trans athletes haven't been consulted or spoke with at all and it's just been decided there will be an open category and they should be happy with that.

Of course, no trans athletes have been consulted with and don't have a voice in anything.

 

[Ajr]

The consultation with trans athletes has suggested that they should be allowed to compete in female categories despite the massive inherent advantages they face, which is why sporting bodies have decided to include an open category as it retains the integrity of female sport, and literally doesn’t exclude anyone else from competing. The fact that no trans athlete applied to it isn’t a failing of the sporting body being inclusive.

In this "open" catagory it's literally not allowing cis females in a lot of cases

 

[The Corinthian]

In this "open" catagory it's literally not allowing cis females in a lot of cases

Yes because they have a female category?

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

I'd be interested to know from the transgender athletes why they did not apply.

I could hazard a guess.

 

[SilentWitness]

The consultation with trans athletes has suggested that they should be allowed to compete in female categories despite the massive inherent advantages they face, which is why sporting bodies have decided to include an open category as it retains the integrity of female sport, and literally doesn’t exclude anyone else from competing. The fact that no trans athlete applied to it isn’t a failing of the sporting body being inclusive.

It is a failing if you've consulted them and received no positive communication or any consultation about them competing in an open category if they create one. By creating one and then cancelling it because there are no entries does more harm than good.

In this thread previously I made a post about an open category being an avenue that could be a first step in bridging the divide between people who don't agree with trans women competing in women categories in sport vs those who think they should be able to but you need to do it through consultation and dialogue rather than just creating this open category and saying here you go which this example appears to be a case of. I find it hard to believe that there was any dialogue due to the 0 entries.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Yes because they have a female category?

If the open category is closed to people by what definition is it an open category? Also, isn't it a bit weird that women aren't allowed to compete in an open category if they want to? I certainly understand enforced segregation in boxing. Not really getting it in swimming.

 

[Carolina Red]

Wouldn’t it be called “open” because it’s available to both ftm and mtf trans athletes and it’s an already commonly used term in athletic events?

 

[The Corinthian]

It is a failing if you've consulted them and received no positive communication or any consultation about them competing in an open category if they create one. By creating one and then cancelling it because there are no entries does more harm than good.

Come off it - how does it do more harm then good? That's just hyperbole.

In this thread previously I made a post about an open category being an avenue that could be a first step in bridging the divide between people who don't agree with trans women competing in women categories in sport vs those who think they should be able to but you need to do it through consultation and dialogue rather than just creating this open category and saying here you go which this example appears to be a case of. I find it hard to believe that there was any dialogue due to the 0 entries.

That's my point - to date, or up until very recently, there hasn't been a distinction made between trans athletes and female athletes in the female category which has resulted in:
1) Trans athletes breaking long held female athlete records
2) Non participation of female athletes in female sports
3) General erasure/removal of female women gaining scholarships / spaces on teams due to trans participation

which undoubtedly affects sporting integrity and fairness. It's why sporting bodies have gone down the route of an open category.

And what about consulting female athletes? Say for example they wish for their to be an open category for trans athletes to fall into to protect the integrity of female sports? Shouldn't their wishes to be taken into consideration? Because that's the overriding message coming out from female athletes, specifically, individual sports and competitions.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

Wouldn’t it be called “open” because it’s available to both ftm and mtf trans athletes and it’s an already commonly used term in athletic events?

Let's be honest. It isn't open is it. It's closed to those born female.

 

[The Corinthian]

If the open category is closed to people by what definition is it an open category? Also, isn't it a bit weird that women aren't allowed to compete in an open category if they want to? I certainly understand enforced segregation in boxing. Not really getting it in swimming.

To be honest, I haven't read any examples of any women wishing to compete in an open category, nor any examples of women being barred from doing so. @Ajr - do you know any?