Transgender athletes

[Prometheus]

CharonY put forward a good solution a while back, i think it was missed.

19 hours ago, CharonY said:

https://theconversation.com/striking-a-balance-between-fairness-in-competition-and-the-rights-of-transgender-athletes-159685

I think this is could be a reasonable take (as opposed to bans):

 

 

[MigL]

Well, if we both agree that there is a problem, but we're not willing to propose solutions, what exactly are we discussing, Zap ?

And I will support that minority group also; I'm just not willing to do at the expense of supporting the women of the world.

Thanks, Prometheus, I had forgotten CharonY's post.

[Holmes]

7 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Well, NOT being an expert on transgender participation in sports, I am not willing to make that declaration, just as I would not have the hubris to tell you how to approach certain types of technical problems.

What I am willing to do is lend my support to a minority who is dumped on every day, so that they will be heard and not prematurely dismissed, and if possible, be able to compete with the rest of their fellow human beings.

Do you support all minorities no matter what it is that characterizes them?

 

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, Holmes said:

I propose four categories - M, F, MF and FM, then we can all move on and society can start functioning again.

We'd then have four types of bathrooms for categories in sports etc, life could be simple once more.

This seems a bit silly, considering how few transgender people are there (of which only a tiny fraction will be athletes). 

1 hour ago, Holmes said:

Do you support all minorities no matter what it is that characterizes them?

That seems a bit like a loaded question. The issue is that historically the assumptions of the majority of minorities can create rules and laws that disadvantage the latter (and often thereby reinforces notion of the majority). This includes the historic treatment (and criminalization) of LGBTQ folks. Much of today's society has at least made a nominal commitment to start off inclusive (rather than the more exclusive approach based on a strong opinions and nominal, if vague values).

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Well, if we both agree that there is a problem, but we're not willing to propose solutions, what exactly are we discussing, Zap ?

It seems that your position is that there is no room for transgender athletes in sports, and my position is that we should try to find a place for transgender athletes in sports. It seems to me we are discussing which one of our positions is the one to follow.

2 hours ago, Holmes said:

Do you support all minorities no matter what it is that characterizes them?

 

Do you mean to ask if I support pedophiles? I'm going to need you to be a bit more specific before I answer your question.

[StringJunky]

4 minutes ago, zapatos said:

It seems that your position is that there is no room for transgender athletes in sports, and my position is that we should try to find a place for transgender athletes in sports. It seems to me we are discussing which one of our positions is the one to follow.

I see a parallel here with classifying levels and types of disabilities in sport and levelling the field. I'm not aware there is the same level of actual controversy though, as  in Paralympics, for example.

[zapatos]

4 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I see a parallel here with classifying levels and types of disabilities in sport and levelling the field. I'm not aware there is the same level of actual controversy though, as  in Paralympics, for example.

I don't understand why we must have an outright ban of transgender people in sports. Is there really a big advantage for the transgender athlete in archery, badminton, artistic gymnastics, shooting, diving...?

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I don't understand why we must have an outright ban of transgender people in sports. Is there really a big advantage for the transgender athlete in archery, badminton, artistic gymnastics, shooting, diving...?

I thought we were discussing pathways to accommodating rather than banning.

[zapatos]

3 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I thought we were discussing pathways to accommodating rather than banning.

Some are and some are not. I didn't mean to imply you were were one of those proposing a ban. I was using your post to further my argument. Sorry for the awkward segue. 

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Some are and some are not. I didn't mean to imply you were were one of those proposing a ban. I was using your post to further my argument. Sorry for the awkward segue. 

That's ok.  

[iNow]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Is there really a big advantage for the transgender athlete in archery, badminton, artistic gymnastics, shooting, diving...?

It’s horrible. All six of them won a trophy. We need legislation to prevent that!!

[/sarcasm]

[dimreepr]

16 hours ago, MigL said:

And Dimreepr seems to think that the only benefit from a 'game' is learning that others can compete with unfair advantages, so there is no point in actually playing.

Thanks for telling me what I meant; sport/games are inheritantly unfair, there can be only one; F1 for instance, is it fair that the winner's are the one's who find a way round the regs or that Diego Maradona won a game of 'football' by handballing a goal?

We might all play the game to win, but cheating is no way to play the game, the point of playing is to test yourself; no one else cares... 😉

It would take a supercharged ego, to chop off a dick in order to win...

[dimreepr]

17 hours ago, Holmes said:

life could be simple once more.

Life is simple, here I am... 😉

[J.C.MacSwell]

On 7/1/2021 at 5:45 PM, Prometheus said:

CharonY put forward a good solution a while back, i think it was missed.

 

 

I did comment on it. It's a very good article and worth reading, but while the solution may be well intended...it simply can't work for the highest levels of sport. It would be onerous and left to pre-judgement of natural advantages in sports decided in fractions of seconds or centimetres.

It would essentially involve some no doubt politically appointed "expert" pre-judging an athletes "womaness". How de-humanizing would that be to some of our most vulnerable, transgender individuals? How unfair to women's Sport?

Or imagine at High School level...someone deciding which transgenders must compete in "open' class and which in "other"...

It's already hard enough having to decide on biological women:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/sports/intersex-runner-surgery-track-and-field.html#:~:text=Surgery to Compete.-,It Has Not Gone Well.,of naturally elevated testosterone levels.&text=The Uganda Athletics Federation named her athlete of the year.

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I did comment on it. It's a very good article and worth reading, but while the solution may be well intended...it simply can't work for the highest levels of sport. It would be onerous and left to pre-judgement of natural advantages in sports decided in fractions of seconds or centimetres.

It would essentially involve some no doubt politically appointed "expert" pre-judging an athletes "womaness". How de-humanizing would that be to some of our most vulnerable, transgender individuals? How unfair to women's Sport?

There is precedence already. The weight categories set in contact sports, for example. Or how disabilities are weighed in paralympics, as SJ, said. None of the rules in sports are perfect and sometimes create weird incentives.

I do not see how this is fundamentally different or impossible. As it has been said before, sports are games with made-up rules. And rules have been amended continuously to adapt to changing conditions such as accommodating broadcasting schedules, forcing athletes to show more (or less) cleavage and so on. Making up new ones to be more accommodating does not seem too much of a stretch here, especially with examples already being used.

[J.C.MacSwell]

Just now, CharonY said:

There is precedence already. The weight categories set in contact sports, for example. Or how disabilities are weighed in paralympics. None of the rules in sports are perfect and sometimes create weird incentives.

I do not see how this is fundamentally different or impossible.

The weight categories are decided by a scale. 

Paralympics are admittedly arbitrary and accepted by competitors.

It's fundamentally different unless you can't accept the division of Men's and Women's Sport to be fundamentally different.

If you hold that view, I can respect that, but don't agree with it.

Biological women deserve their own category...or they don't.

[StringJunky]

 This  paper on Intersex and the Olympics, I think, illuminates the difficulties with this subject, and these people are naturally in the grey zone gender-wise.

[J.C.MacSwell]

8 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

 This  paper on Intersex and the Olympics, I think, illuminates the difficulties with this subject, and these people are naturally in the grey zone gender-wise.

+1. This is the toughest part of the subject. As much as science should be clear on most of this, it obviously cannot be on some athletes. I admired Caster Semenya run, despite the questions she truly was an elite athlete. I didn't know where to place her other than being against the ruling that she had to artificially suppress her testosterone levels.

 

[MigL]

On 7/1/2021 at 7:31 PM, zapatos said:

I don't understand why we must have an outright ban of transgender people in sports.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that.
Nor is there a problem with all sports, as sports which require co-ordination are not a problem  ( tennis, golf, etc ), while those that require physical strength ( sprinting, weightlifting, shot put, etc ) are unfair to  cisgender women.
If those 6 trans athletes ( 😄 ) deserve a chance to fairly compete in sports, then so do the several billion women of the world.

[iNow]

19 minutes ago, MigL said:

If those 6 trans athletes ( 😄 ) deserve a chance to fairly compete in sports, then so do the several billion women of the world.

I hear ya, but this stance reminds me of folks asking why there’s no White History Month, or able-bodied folks moaning about lots having handicapped parking spaces, or people being confused about why we celebrate Jackie Robinson. 

As I said before, trans athletes are already competing. They have been for decades too, even if the issue “feels” new to many folks today. That fact alone should change the framing in peoples minds about this.

If, however, it doesn’t then the core issue now IMO becomes whether we’re going to continue forcing them to hide and pretend and be inauthentic with themselves and with us as passive spectators when they do, or whether we’re going to keep treating “them” as separate and different. 

Edited July 3, 2021 by iNow

[CharonY]

3 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

The weight categories are decided by a scale.

No, the scale just indicates weight. The organization  sets weight limits.

[J.C.MacSwell]

25 minutes ago, CharonY said:

No, the scale just indicates weight. The organization  sets weight limits.

Give me a break. How does that compare to judging as described in your article?

 

Does subjective vs quantitative mean nothing to biologists?

You're one of the most thoughtful and intelligent posters on this board. What is it that compels an argument like that one? Science?

 

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Give me a break. How does that compare to judging as described in your article?

 

Does subjective vs quantitative mean nothing to biologists?

You're one of the most thoughtful and intelligent posters on this board. What is it that compels an argument like that one? Science?

 

Simple, someone needed to come up with categories there, too. Do you think they pulled out those from a magic science drawer that provides objective answers to all questions?

They had to think how a given category could be useful to make the sport interesting but also safe and those changed over time.

Likewise they could simply e.g. look at pre-qualifier performance to decide thresholds.

No idea where you see the difficulty. In fact, you seem to forget basic science here. Your premise was that there are categorical (rather than gradual) performance differences related to transgender athletes. If that is true, simple performance tests should reveal them. If not, then those issues were not that categorical after all.

So yes, scientific thinking compels me to these arguments. What about you?

 

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

7 hours ago, CharonY said:

Simple, someone needed to come up with categories there, too. Do you think they pulled out those from a magic science drawer that provides objective answers to all questions?

They had to think how a given category could be useful to make the sport interesting but also safe and those changed over time.

Likewise they could simply e.g. look at pre-qualifier performance to decide thresholds.

No idea where you see the difficulty. In fact, you seem to forget basic science here. Your premise was that there are categorical (rather than gradual) performance differences related to transgender athletes. If that is true, simple performance tests should reveal them. If not, then those issues were not that categorical after all.

So yes, scientific thinking compels me to these arguments. What about you?

 

 

Setting weight classes can be arbitrary but, having done that, you have a reasonably strict and definable control for who gets to play in what category. (methods used by competitors to make weight notwithstanding).

No "expert", politically motivated or otherwise, gets to put their hand on the scale.

No one gets to feel ostracized, banned or picked on.

How does your proposal come anywhere close to that?

 

 

 

[iNow]

27 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Setting weight classes can be arbitrary <…> How does your proposal come anywhere close to that?

I think the better question perhaps is why can’t you see that gender divisions / classes and how trans humans interact with those is equally arbitrary… just like ALL rules in ALL sports which are arbitrary, too.