Transgender athletes

[CharonY]

It reads to me that there is a conflation between gender identity and transition here. Folks that change their identity do not, as far as I know, get to choose under which category they can compete. In fact, there are athletes who have competed in different pre- and post transition. 

What research has been focused on is which physical changes are happening after gender affirming procedures. And I will again mention that while a small fraction, there are folks who are testosterone resistant. Meaning that with an XY karyotype they have body structures that are indistinguishable from a typical female. So they would be severely disadvantaged if they were sorted according to their genetic makeup rather than their physical.

[swansont]

32 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I think you misunderstand what gender currently means.

It means how an individual chooses to identify. There is no other test.

Gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female or something else

https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender-people-gender-identity-gender-expression

I don’t see “chooses” in that definition. That’s something that you have added.

 

32 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You can argue whether anyone has a choice or free will, or not, but that can't be proven. We have decided to accept an individuals choice, as we understand choice.

Obviously the way you understand choice differs from mine. Why do you choose to be right- or left-handed?

 

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

Gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female or something else

https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbtq/transgender-people-gender-identity-gender-expression

I don’t see “chooses” in that definition. That’s something that you have added.

 

Obviously the way you understand choice differs from mine. Why do you choose to be right- or left-handed?

 

 

What would be the scientific test for that? How should the rules be enforced, if not simply accepting an individual's claim?

 

What was Bruce Jenner's gender identity back in 1976? Unknown?

It seems most of the definitions I google  are trying more to justify rather than describe the working use of the term.

With the definition you choose (seem motivated) to use, no one can prove their gender identity.

 

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

What would be the scientific test for that? How should the rules be enforced, if not simply accepting an individual's claim?

 

What was Bruce Jenner's gender identity back in 1976? Unknown?

It seems most of the definitions I google  are trying more to justify rather than describe the working use of the term.

With the definition you choose (seem motivated) to use, no one can prove their gender identity.

 

How did you figure out someone's sexual orientation in the past? How did you scientifically prove to yourself that you are a man? How does it related to categorization in sports, and if that is so confusing how did folks do that for cis-folks?

 

[swansont]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

What would be the scientific test for that?

What’s the scientific test for someone being attracted to another? For someone being an introvert or extrovert?

[dimreepr]

21 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Right. The risk players know their choice of colour will have no effect on the game. No need to complain about a current lack of evidence.

Don't you see the parallel's, or the irony?

If there's a current lack of evidence, then what are you complaining about?

If you accept their (the risk players) choice of colour will have no effect on the game, then what are you complaining about?

 

[Steve81]

18 hours ago, CharonY said:

How did you figure out someone's sexual orientation in the past? How did you scientifically prove to yourself that you are a man? How does it related to categorization in sports, and if that is so confusing how did folks do that for cis-folks?

Wasn’t addressed to me, but I’ll add my personal perspective.

I never honestly considered one way or the other whether I should identify as a male or a female. I was born and assigned male at that time, and that was that.

I will note that I hardly fit the mold of a stereotypical “man’s man”. I don’t care for sports in general, I have 0 skills using power tools, etc. 

So I guess my question is, how does gender dysphoria develop in the first place?

[J.C.MacSwell]

17 hours ago, CharonY said:

How did you figure out someone's sexual orientation in the past? 

 

16 hours ago, swansont said:

What’s the scientific test for someone being attracted to another? For someone being an introvert or extrovert?

None of this required answers for any sports inclusions or exclusions. For lesbian or gay pride sports or events I think you are just accepted, but that is more recreational level.

You both asked, yet I have no idea why. Lesbian athletes are over represented in many sports, and gay men underrepresented. If biology finds an inherent reason why, perhaps a new division or two could be created but I don't see the need for it. I don't see a significant performance gap due to sexual orientation at top levels that compares to the well known XY and XX gaps. This is not something the IOC, say, should be addressing at this time.

Clearly a very significant performance gap remains for XY and XX elite level athletes, regardless of their declared gender, medical interventions notwithstanding. If there is something inherent motivating gender declaration, it clearly doesn't show as being significant compared to XX vs XY.

 

17 hours ago, CharonY said:

How did you scientifically prove to yourself that you are a man? 

I happened to be in the 99+ % of humans where basic level biology made it obvious. One of the many that don't need to point at the fraction of 1% to question any personal exclusion from  elite female sports.

17 hours ago, CharonY said:

How does it related to categorization in sports, and if that is so confusing how did folks do that for cis-folks?

It was problematic for the less than 1% known as intersex, though only for females with regard to inclusion in elite sports.

If you want to include non intersex XY athletes in elite female sports based on possible inherent biological disadvantage, science has a lot of work to do before it becomes useful in doing so.

 

 

[dimreepr]

22 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

So I guess my question is, how does gender dysphoria develop in the first place?

That's a question for another topic.

6 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Clearly a very significant performance gap remains for XY and XX elite level athletes, regardless of their declared gender, medical interventions notwithstanding. If there is something inherent motivating gender declaration, it clearly doesn't show as being significant compared to XX vs XY.

I thought you said there's a lack of evidence, you can't have it both way's. 🙄 

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That's a question for another topic.

...unless there is some inherent link to potential sports performance. Swansont has suggested there may be.

In that case it may be on topic, though obviously nothing sports organizations need consider at this time.

 

[Steve81]

4 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

...unless there is some inherent link to potential sports performance. Swansont has suggested there may be.

In that case it may be on topic, though obviously nothing sports organizations need consider at this time.

 

I'm not so lazy that I'd be opposed to starting a new topic on the subject either way 😀

[npts2020]

4 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Clearly a very significant performance gap remains for XY and XX elite level athletes, regardless of their declared gender, medical interventions notwithstanding. If there is something inherent motivating gender declaration, it clearly doesn't show as being significant compared to XX vs XY.

Doesn't that depend on the sport? In equestrian events and auto racing men and women compete against each other and I would say Simone Biles is as good as any gymnast in the world.

[mistermack]

23 minutes ago, npts2020 said:

Doesn't that depend on the sport? In equestrian events and auto racing men and women compete against each other and I would say Simone Biles is as good as any gymnast in the world.

You would think so, but it might be more complicated than one might think : 

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/124518-transgender-athletes/?do=findComment&comment=1246232

I wonder how the women chess players will react to a transgender competitor in the women's competition? That would be an interesting one. No clear physical advantage for men, but they obviously have some sort of advantage. Maybe it's just a matter of numbers. But it does seem more than that at first sight. These things can be misleading though. Forty or fifty years ago, it was commonly said in boxing circles that there would never again be a white heavyweight champion. The domination of black boxers at the top was so great that it seemed like there was an inherent advantage in black heavyweights. That's gone out of the window now. You can read too much into current trends. 

[TheVat]

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

I wonder how the women chess players will react to a transgender competitor in the women's competition? That would be an interesting one. No clear physical advantage for men, but they obviously have some sort of advantage. Maybe it's just a matter of numbers. 

It's numbers.  Chess used to be so dominated by men (watch the series Queen's Gambit for a taste of the early days) that it was thought that having a separate women's division would help them get past some intimidation and in the door.  

Gender divisions nowadays in chess are absurd.  Almost all modern competitions in chess are open to all.  Segregated divisions now only make sense in backward places where women are already socially segregated and a women's chess group at least prevents them from being completely locked out.  The fact that women in Riyadh need a chess division is a symptom of their barbaric society, not lack of intellectual capacity.

The only advantage men had was that they were more likely to be praised when very young for an interest in chess, were more encouraged to join a high school chess club, got more positive feedback for obsessing for hours over chess study and practice, etc.

 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

It's numbers.  Chess used to be so dominated by men (watch the series Queen's Gambit for a taste of the early days) that it was thought that having a separate women's division would help them get past some intimidation and in the door.  

Gender divisions nowadays in chess are absurd.  Almost all modern competitions in chess are open to all.  Segregated divisions now only make sense in backward places where women are already socially segregated and a women's chess group at least prevents them from being completely locked out.  The fact that women in Riyadh need a chess division is a symptom of their barbaric society, not lack of intellectual capacity.

The only advantage men had was that they were more likely to be praised when very young for an interest in chess, were more encouraged to join a high school chess club, got more positive feedback for obsessing for hours over chess study and practice, etc.

 

Don’t ignore the possibility that women might prefer to not have to deal with sexual harassment, and that might be a contributing motivation for segregated divisions.

[mistermack]

Maybe men are in favour of women-only leagues because they don't like losing to a woman. I'm a horrendously bad loser at chess, (although you would never tell from watching), and it doesn't matter if I'm playing a master or a machine. I can start a game, knowing the person playing me is going to thrash me, and I still hate it when I lose. It's all internal, I never show it, I'm just seething at myself inside. Even though I know I'm a rubbish chess player.

Maybe there are more like me out there, in the chess world, and they find it worse if they lose to a woman. I wouldn't, my irritation is aimed at myself, I wouldn't care if it was man, woman, machine or chimp that beat me. But men with an ego might take losses to women badly. 

[iNow]

37 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Maybe men are in favour of women-only leagues because they don't like losing to a woman.

We don’t call those men. We call them insecure twat waffles. 

And I, for one, don’t recommend rejecting trans athletes from competing in elite sports due to all those “boys can’t lose to girls” delicate sensibilities folks out there having twisted panties about it.

Edited August 12, 2023 by iNow

[TheVat]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Don’t ignore the possibility that women might prefer to not have to deal with sexual harassment, and that might be a contributing motivation for segregated divisions.

Yes that could be in the mix, too.  Though sad to think the kind of men who are engaged in the ultimate test of cerebral fitness and getting their kicks above the waistline (I'm grabbing phrases from the musical, Chess - credit to Tim Rice) would sink so low.  Chess is not the first thing I think of when sexual harassment cultures come up.  

32 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I can start a game, knowing the person playing me is going to thrash me, and I still hate it when I lose. It's all internal, I never show it, I'm just seething at myself inside. Even though I know I'm a rubbish chess player.

From my brushes with the chess world  I would say that is not the best temperament to have for chess.  Good chess comes from a fairly "zen" place.  Well, that, and OCD.  

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

We don’t call those men. We call them insecure twat waffles. 

Just saw this.  Yep.  Well put, and LOL.

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Don’t ignore the possibility that women might prefer to not have to deal with sexual harassment, and that might be a contributing motivation for segregated divisions.

Or simply female camaraderie. One of the regrettable things about exclusion I think would be missing out on that. I don't think it's anything close to enough to tip the scales for trans inclusion at elite levels, but at recreational level I think it does.

 

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Chess is not the first thing I think of when sexual harassment cultures come up.  

I’m picturing a skinny pimply pale red headed kid with a goodwill jewel buttoned bright and brown plaid cowboy shirt and coke bottle glasses snorting snot bubbles and with a high pitched voice choking out,

”Haha… snorfle… how about if I win you let me touch your boob… snorfle snorfle… and if you win I’ll let you touch my wiener… snorfle halunk…  it’s win-win, wouldn’t you say? Snorfle snottle snorfle.”

[mistermack]

8 minutes ago, TheVat said:

From my brushes with the chess world  I would say that is not the best temperament to have for chess.  Good chess comes from a fairly "zen" place.  Well, that, and OCD.

I don't play chess, haven't for years, except now and again I'll hazard a go against an online computer. I know I haven't got the temperament for it. As soon as my opponent moves, I have to move, almost instantly. I just can't sit there and plan. For some reason, I have a compulsion to move straight away. And I usually see what was wrong with the move within another second. That's part of the reason I'm rubbish at it.

[iNow]

1 minute ago, mistermack said:

That's part of the reason I'm rubbish at it.

Lack of self control?

[mistermack]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

Lack of self control?

In chess certainly. I wouldn't say it's typical. My self control is about average, not great, but not the worst. But I suppose a game of chess doesn't really matter, especially against a computer, so control doesn't come at a premium.

[iNow]

In other words, no reason to exclude people based on their plumbing or expressed gender identity 

Edited August 12, 2023 by iNow

[mistermack]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

In other words, no reason to exclude people based on their plumbing or expressed gender identity 

So, just let men play the women, so long as they claim female gender? There's a lot of money at stake, it would be well worth it. Wimbledon, US open, women's events won by second grade men claiming female gender? I don't think it would go down too well.