Transgender athletes

[StringJunky]

14 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Yes. Fortunately surgery is no longer required.

You're suggesting my post is disingenuous?

I've just made my case. Using terms like "successfully drugged" sounds rather derogatory.

[J.C.MacSwell]

31 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I've just made my case. Using terms like "successfully drugged" sounds rather derogatory.

Can you suggest a term that means exactly that that you would be more comfortable with?

It sounds like your "case" didn't have anything toward attacking my argument.

Edited July 3, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell

[StringJunky]

4 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Can you suggest a term that means exactly that that you would be more comfortable with?

It sounds like your "case" didn't have anything toward attacking my argument.

How about 'treated'?

[Michael_123_]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

The counterargument seems to be that if they can be successfully drugged to the point XY chromosome advantage seems to disappear then it would be unfair not to let them compete, the onus should be on anyone wanting to question it to prove any remaining advantage, and that at the same time anyone questioning it should be considered anti-LGBTQIA+.

 

One of the papers I linked to shows how, after one year of hormone treatment, the transgender women still maintain a 9% competitive advantage over other women.

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

How about 'treated'?

Okay. Successfully treated with drugs for the purpose of meeting an arbitrary target not set by their doctors, for the purpose of qualifying for and competing in a sport they would otherwise not be eligible to compete in.

Accurate?

2 hours ago, Michael_123_ said:

One of the papers I linked to shows how, after one year of hormone treatment, the transgender women still maintain a 9% competitive advantage over other women.

At a point well before they eliminate all XY advantages entirely, they will have sufficiently harmed the individual to make up the difference. That seems to be their goal. 

It's a pretty despicable goal IMO. Fortunately they aren't allowed to do that at High School level and below.

[iNow]

3 hours ago, Michael_123_ said:

the transgender women still maintain a 9% competitive advantage over other women.

Which women? Individual differences seem far more relevant here than binary gender framed averages. 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

At a point well before they eliminate all XY advantages entirely, they will have sufficiently harmed the individual to make up the difference. That seems to be their goal. 

Who is this horrible “they” in reality, though? This sounds more like another fictional bogeyman / made up enemy than an actual group of people with any meaningful power to effect change. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

Who is this horrible “they” in reality, though? This sounds more like another fictional bogeyman / made up enemy than an actual group of people with any meaningful power to effect change. 

Actually them as a group. On both sides of the argument that come up with absurdly unhealthy compromises. Changes are happening all the time. There have been considerable changes since this thread started.

[iNow]

Thank you for confirming you’re unable to name any specific individuals or actual groups engaging in these behaviors. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Thank you for confirming you’re unable to name any specific individuals or actual groups engaging in these behaviors. 

Here is one example. Athletics has barred transgender women  that went through puberty as males, and tightened restrictions on intersex athletes. (demanded the intersex athletes unnaturally suppress testosterone levels or be disqualified):

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/summer/trackandfield/world-athletics-bans-trangender-women-1.6788581

Every sport will do it differently and even within athletics different events can be ruled differently.

Another article

Transgender women athletes' future in competition uncertain as sports organizations change rules, issue bans:

Subtitle: Experts say not enough research to prove trans women athletes have unfair competitive advantage: (note where those "experts" referred to suggest the onus should be despite much science indicating the contrary)

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/transgender-women-athletes-future-swimming-ban-1.6496497

from the article:

"Days before FINA made its decision public, the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) — which oversees international cycling events, including road, track, mountain and BMX — changed its policy for trans women athletes.

Rather than banning them from competing, UCI halved the maximum permitted testosterone level from 5 nmol/L — the limit currently in place for a number of other sports, including athletics — to 2.5 nmol/L, and it doubled the amount of time athletes must maintain low testosterone before they can compete, to 24 months."

But thankyou INow, for confirming you have no idea what you are talking about.

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Who is this horrible “they” in reality, though? This sounds more like another fictional bogeyman / made up enemy than an actual group of people with any meaningful power to effect change. 

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell

[dimreepr]

58 pages and counting, of a discussion about 'them' competing; "I'm Dr Who, I'm sorry I've lost my place, are we past racism yet?"

[iNow]

9 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

But thankyou INow, for confirming you have no idea what you are talking about.

So now one anecdote qualifies for “them” generalizations? Gotcha. I’m obviously in way over my head. 🙄

Here yet again (like reparations) we have a rando coming in merely to stir the pot and cause discord among folks who otherwise get along just fine. It’s amazing how easy some ppl make it for these folks to do so. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

Here yet again (like reparations) we have a rando coming in merely to stir the pot and cause discord among folks who otherwise get along just fine. It’s amazing how easy some ppl make it for these folks to do so. 

That was just a "back at ya" tongue in cheek...No worries...I still look forward to your comments.

 

15 minutes ago, iNow said:

So now one anecdote qualifies for “them” generalizations? Gotcha. I’m obviously in way over my head. 🙄

"They" are in part those mandated to work this out and set rules for each sport, and include many with clout on both sides of the debate. I think my generalizations and comments were pretty fitting overall, though maybe a little harsh or blunt (but never disrespectful to the transgender athletes themselves). Pretty hard to thread the needle of compromise given that the hole is obviously small (non existent hole for many sports IMO).

It seems also that many seem to have decided on erring on the side of fairness to cis-women over inclusion for transgenders, and are slowly accepting that no compromise that is workable to yield both can be found...which is what I have expected all along and I have never considered this experiment to be good for women's sports or the transgender women involved.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

It seems also that many seem to have decided on erring on the side of fairness to cis-women over inclusion for transgenders, and are slowly accepting that no compromise that is workable to yield both can be found...which is what I have expected all along and I have never considered this experiment to be good for women's sports or the transgender women involved.

Officially, fairness = same effort = same reward; 'them' only enters the equation when I 'might' loose, something...

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Officially, fairness = same effort = same reward; 'them' only enters the equation when I 'might' loose, something...

You might reasonably think that's fair, but officially for elite sport that isn't even close to what they consider fair...to quote a Clint Eastwood character "deserves got nuthin' to do with it!"

But I think your comment accurately describes what many think is the best way to find a compromise for transgenders...give them the same chance as anyone else in the gender sport of their choice...except it isn't even close to true for cis-genders so the target is indefinable.

[dimreepr]

10 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

But I think your comment accurately describes what many think is the best way to find a compromise

Why do WE need to compromise? 'It's' either accurate or not... 🧐

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Why do WE need to compromise? 'It's' either accurate or not... 🧐

It's an accurate description of flawed thinking. More on the lines of belief that having equal outcomes can produce less poverty than equal opportunity.

But answer me this: Should the goal of handicapping transgender women through drug treatment to reduce their XY advantages be targeted to match those of average XX natural ability, or targeted to match those with the most natural abilities?

The latter gives them essentially weak chances at best for elite women's sport, and the former makes any of above average XY potential suddenly positioned to compete at elite levels that they never could achieve against XY competition...and of course well above average examples could dominate even with the Bruce Jenners and Mike Tysons choosing to stay in male sports, even though the chance remains that any given individual could choose to transgender.

The mandate for those in charge of this for elite sport is to protect elite sport, not make it fair for everyone in the definition you suggest...otherwise I would have been on the starting line for the final in the 100m against Usain Bolt...but with a 50m+ head start.

Edited July 4, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell

[mistermack]

It's a strange situation with transgender people.  It's considered impossible to change their sexual inclinations to match their genetic makeup. In fact it's considered demeaning, insulting and abusive to even suggest it. 

But the same attitude doesn't apply in the reverse, to "change" their physical makeup to match their sexual self-identity.  I wonder what would happen if in the future, they found a drug that actually did change the sexual orientation mentally. Would it be considered abusive to give it to children in their teens? 

[zapatos]

6 minutes ago, mistermack said:

It's a strange situation with transgender people.  It's considered impossible to change their sexual inclinations to match their genetic makeup. In fact it's considered demeaning, insulting and abusive to even suggest it. 

But the same attitude doesn't apply in the reverse, to "change" their physical makeup to match their sexual self-identity.  I wonder what would happen if in the future, they found a drug that actually did change the sexual orientation mentally. Would it be considered abusive to give it to children in their teens? 

I think the difference lies in the wishes of the individual. I'm no expert nor am I transgender, but it seems to me that transgender people often desire to change their physical makeup, while people who are not transgender (or otherwise LGBTQ+) wish to impose onto the LGBTQ+ something the LGBTQ+ is not seeking. 

Allowing an individual to do what they feel is best for themselves is generally considered a human right. Trying to force a change on an individual because you do not like them that way is indeed demeaning, insulting and abusive. 

[mistermack]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I think the difference lies in the wishes of the individual.

I agree of course, but only up to a point. Children are a special kind of individual. What they want isn't always the best for them, and we do owe them protection, sometimes even from themselves. As in the case of anorexics and bulimics, or self-harmers etc. 

And children can get pushed and indoctrinated by an overbearing parent. So when they say "I want this", is it them speaking, or someone exerting influence ?

[zapatos]

41 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I agree of course, but only up to a point. Children are a special kind of individual. What they want isn't always the best for them, and we do owe them protection, sometimes even from themselves. As in the case of anorexics and bulimics, or self-harmers etc. 

And children can get pushed and indoctrinated by an overbearing parent. So when they say "I want this", is it them speaking, or someone exerting influence ?

Of course mistakes can be made, but I tend to trust the decisions made by parents along with their physicians and psychiatrists on behalf of their children, over that of third parties who are often guided by religion or politics rather than science.

Do you think there are many parents who push or indoctrinate children into a sex change that the children do not want? That would seem to be an extremely rare occurrence. 

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by zapatos

[swansont]

57 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Do you think there are many parents who push or indoctrinate children into a sex change that the children do not want? That would seem to be an extremely rare occurrence. 

I think this is the wrong line of questioning. I don’t care what anyone thinks, pertaining to this. It’s not at all uncommon for people to think things that are not true, and that rare occurrences are widespread; we see this all the time these days in politics.

I want evidence.

[mistermack]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Do you think there are many parents who push or indoctrinate children into a sex change that the children do not want? That would seem to be an extremely rare occurrence. 

It's not just parents who push. In fact, it's often psychologists etc pushing, against the instincts of dubious parents. But rare occurrence doesn't matter in the slightest. Murder is a rare occurrence, but we have strict laws around it because it's life-changing. That's the point. 

It's even illegal to aid an adult to commit suicide, even though they are old enough to know their own mind, and not be overly influenced by someone else. We acknowledge that irreversible life-changing actions can sometimes be the business of legislators. 

[iNow]

6 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

That was just a "back at ya" tongue in cheek...No worries

I recognize this wasn’t clear in my prev post, but I wasn’t referring to you 

53 minutes ago, mistermack said:

It's not just parents who push. In fact, it's often psychologists etc pushing, against the instincts of dubious parents

Which ones? Where are these nonfictional folks, specifically?

[swansont]

4 hours ago, mistermack said:

It's not just parents who push. In fact, it's often psychologists etc pushing, against the instincts of dubious parents. But rare occurrence doesn't matter in the slightest. Murder is a rare occurrence, but we have strict laws around it because it's life-changing. That's the point. 

It can’t be often if it’s a rare occurrence.

Trying to create an equivalence of teen transitioning rates with murder rates by calling them rare blatantly ignores the rather large difference in the rates at which they occur. I seem to recall dredging up the numbers for genital surgery for teens in the US in another thread; it’s about 20 per year. Compare with the murder count, which is roughly a thousand times larger.

 

4 hours ago, mistermack said:

It's even illegal to aid an adult to commit suicide, 

That’s not universally true 

 

edit:

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127240-how-best-to-stop-excluding-trans-kids-from-sports/page/5/#comment-1238814

 

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

It's not just parents who push. In fact, it's often psychologists etc pushing, against the instincts of dubious parents. But rare occurrence doesn't matter in the slightest. Murder is a rare occurrence, but we have strict laws around it because it's life-changing. That's the point. 

 

It's a rare occurrence to die via cosmetic surgery too. But we don't consider outlawing cosmetic surgery just because someone can get it when it is not warranted. 

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

it's often psychologists etc pushing, against the instincts of dubious parents

Citation that psychologists often push for a sex change against the instincts of dubious parents?

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

It's not just parents who push

Citation regarding 'parents pushing' for a sex change against the wishes of the child?

These are two really important citations I'm asking for. After all, you are arguing against doctor/parent decisions regarding a minor child and to  do so I think it is important that you have some data to back up your claim.