Transgender athletes

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, TheVat said:

As regards "I reject your premise that allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female is unfair. "  this was not my premise. 

Perhaps you don’t realize it, but it’s embedded in your and other peoples words.

I take your point that many people are concerned about fairness in sports and that is their reason for opposition. No quarrel there.

However, there’s no other valid conclusion one can logically draw from that stance other than those people consider the idea of allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female as unfair. 

[TheVat]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

You forgot the part where Podunk residents are socialists who teach critical race theory.

As long as we’re going to try and scare people with made-up scenarios. 

Again, see my reply above,   I am trying to explain the psychology of sports fans,  and where these questions of parity come from.  Made-up scenarios are pretty much how most people mull over proposed changes in their society.  There are so few trans females in sports,  that people naturally tend to try gedankexperment to hypothesize over the what-ifs.   They can be wrong (just as they usually are about the spectre of CRT), but their concerns don't vanish until science can cast light on the athletic parity issues.   

[iNow]

1 minute ago, TheVat said:

the athletic parity issues

Again here you betray your previous denial and show the falseness of your protest by suggesting that allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female is something which lacks parity (I.e. you think / are suggesting other people think doing so is unfair). 

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

This particular link was to rebut your specific claim. This is not an acknowledgment of the error; this is moving the goalposts. There was no mention of testosterone or sports. The article doesn’t mention testosterone levels or sports.

I was asked for the sake of discussion how I defined biological males and biological females. That was how I could best summarize what I meant by those terms.

Otherwise points taken.

[zapatos]

8 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Made-up scenarios are pretty much how most people mull over proposed changes in their society.  There are so few trans females in sports,  that people naturally tend to try gedankexperment to hypothesize over the what-ifs. 

Unfortunately made-up scenarios are also the go-to boogeyman for those with an agenda. Therefore it is important to attempt to have the made-up scenarios correspond to real-life as much as possible. If you use extreme examples like have been used more than once in this thread you can be seen as fear-mongering rather than honestly discussing.

[TheVat]

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

Again here you betray your previous denial and show the falseness of your protest by suggesting that allowing transgendered females to compete in sports as female is something which lacks parity (I.e. you think / are suggesting other people think doing so is unfair). 

If you could change "something which lacks parity, " to "something which could potentially lack parity in particular sports domains, " then I think you would be honoring science more and the idea that one may TEST a hypothesis without embracing it.   I deny your wording for the simple reason that I think the hypothesis of disparity has to be tested before I would assert it in that way.   

[zapatos]

20 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

At the most competitive levels for many sports I don't know how you can avoid it, whether for direct screening or CY's suggestion of evaluating on a case by case basis.

 

As chromosome testing has been shown to be inconclusive in identifying maleness, do you have a proposal for what we do until that issue can be resolved?

[TheVat]

4 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Unfortunately made-up scenarios are also the go-to boogeyman for those with an agenda. Therefore it is important to attempt to have the made-up scenarios correspond to real-life as much as possible. If you use extreme examples like have been used more than once in this thread you can be seen as fear-mongering rather than honestly discussing.

Thanks, Zapatos.   I offered my example honestly,  as it represented an actual controversy in my state over a trans player on a high school team.   I agree completely that fear mongering is counterproductive, and offered the scenario as an example of how ordinary people develop concerns over the issue.   If hormone treatments could safely reduce human joints,  bones, and body mass,  then there would be little need for people to have such worries about high-contact sports,  eh?   

[J.C.MacSwell]

18 minutes ago, zapatos said:

As chromosome testing has been shown to be inconclusive in identifying maleness, do you have a proposal for what we do until that issue can be resolved?

I've stated a number of times that I do not know how to categorize intersex athletes. 

23 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Unfortunately made-up scenarios are also the go-to boogeyman for those with an agenda. Therefore it is important to attempt to have the made-up scenarios correspond to real-life as much as possible. If you use extreme examples like have been used more than once in this thread you can be seen as fear-mongering rather than honestly discussing.

Say the World's top male decathlete transitioning to female...would that extreme example be outside of the realm of possibilities? (Caitlyn Jenner by the way, doesn't think it would be fair to allow transgender females in female sports)

If you are going to make up new rules or change old ones, you need to look at potential consequences.

Anyone not open to discussing plausibilities, and consider it dishonest discussion...should take no part in setting rules for competitive sports.

Edited July 11, 2021 by J.C.MacSwell

[zapatos]

16 minutes ago, TheVat said:

I offered my example honestly,  as it represented an actual controversy in my state over a trans player on a high school team.

My mistake as I didn't realize the 6/3 210 vs 5/6 125 was a real-life example. However I do feel the Mike Tyson and Usain Bolt examples were over the top.

 

20 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I've stated a number of times that I do not know how to categorize intersex athletes. 

As you stated XY was 'clearly biologically male' I assumed that meant all XY people.

22 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Say the World's top male decathlete transitioning to female...would that extreme example be outside of the realm of possibilities?

Little is out of the realm of the possible. But unless you have an example of that it drags us off course rather than dealing with real life.

24 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

(Caitlyn Jenner by the way, doesn't think it would be fair to allow transgender females in female sports)

On another note, my aunt Cathy does think it is fair. We can probably toss out the opinions of those two though as it isn't really germane. 

26 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Anyone not open to discussing plausibilities, and consider it dishonest discussion...should take no part in setting rules for competitive sports.

Good. If you can get rid of everyone like me you can develop the rules in an echo chamber.

[StringJunky]

13 minutes ago, zapatos said:

My mistake as I didn't realize the 6/3 210 vs 5/6 125 was a real-life example. However I do feel the Mike Tyson and Usain Bolt examples were over the top.

 

Theoretically, that's how fast or hard a transgender female  can be. You can either attempt to predict and proact or you can go down the empirical root and react, after the fact. It's an arbitrary choice  the way you decide to adjudicate.

Edited July 11, 2021 by StringJunky

[zapatos]

2 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Theoretically, that's how fast or hard a transgender female  can be. You can either predict and proact or you can go down the empirical root and react, after the fact. It's an arbitrary choice  the way you decide to adjudicate.

Agreed. But if you want to predict and protect, and you suggest someone like Tyson or Bolt will be competing against your daughters, it is hard to tell the difference between the serious debater and the troll.

[StringJunky]

1 minute ago, zapatos said:

Agreed. But if you want to predict and protect, and you suggest someone like Tyson or Bolt will be competing against your daughters, it is hard to tell the difference between the serious debater and the troll.

But that's the real-life potential difference. I hope you know by now I'm not a troll or anti-LGBTQ.  

[J.C.MacSwell]

25 minutes ago, zapatos said:

 

Little is out of the realm of the possible. But unless you have an example of that it drags us off course rather than dealing with real life.

On another note, my aunt Cathy does think it is fair. We can probably toss out the opinions of those two though as it isn't really germane. 

 

Bruce Jenner was the Worlds top male decathlete, AKA "World's greatest athlete" in 1976;

She is now Caitlyn Jenner. She may have some perspective your future uncle Cathy does not yet have

Edited July 11, 2021 by J.C.MacSwell

[zapatos]

1 minute ago, StringJunky said:

But that's the real-life potential difference. I hope you know by now I'm not a troll or anti-LGBTQ.  

I realize that and also know you well enough to not think you are a troll or anti-LGBTQ.

The real-life potential structural stress for my home is for an earthquake, lightening strike and tornado to hit while my house is on fire. As that is outside the realm of a reasonable expectation, the building codes don't reflect that.

3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Bruce Jenner was the Worlds top male decathlete, AKA "World's greatest athlete" in 1976;

She is now Caitlyn Jenner. 

Yes, I know that. I also know that the "World's top male decathlete" did not transition from male to female. When Caitlyn transitioned she couldn't have competed with a group of 17 year old kids much less in the Olympic Decathlon. 

6 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

She may have some perspective your future uncle Cathy does not yet have

She may also have a perspective on how to win a Republican run for governor.

[J.C.MacSwell]

9 minutes ago, zapatos said:

 

She may also have a perspective on how to win a Republican run for governor.

Right. But if she was a Democrat, and for transgender inclusion at any cost, that could only be honest discussion.

[CharonY]

43 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Theoretically, that's how fast or hard a transgender female  can be. You can either attempt to predict and proact or you can go down the empirical root and react, after the fact. It's an arbitrary choice  the way you decide to adjudicate.

I think that the example is counterproductive as it actually does not necessarily indicate the effects of transition. While they are likely to retain an advantage, I would like to see actual data by how much that declines over a given treatment regimen. Studies haves shown for example that military transwomen retained some performance benefits over their peers, but not all of them. 

See e.g. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102329: 

Quote

Results Participants were 26.2 years old (SD 5.5). Prior to gender affirming hormones, transwomen performed 31% more push-ups and 15% more sit-ups in 1 min and ran 1.5 miles 21% faster than their female counterparts. After 2 years of taking feminising hormones, the push-up and sit-up differences disappeared but transwomen were still 12% faster. Prior to gender affirming hormones, transmen performed 43% fewer push-ups and ran 1.5 miles 15% slower than their male counterparts. After 1 year of taking masculinising hormones, there was no longer a difference in push-ups or run times, and the number of sit-ups performed in 1 min by transmen exceeded the average performance of their male counterparts.

In other words, one needs data rather than opinion or anecdotes to dissect this issue.

[StringJunky]

8 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think that the example is counterproductive as it actually does not necessarily indicate the effects of transition. While they are likely to retain an advantage, I would like to see actual data by how much that declines over a given treatment regimen. Studies haves shown for example that military transwomen retained some performance benefits over their peers, but not all of them. 

See e.g. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102329: 

In other words, one needs data rather than opinion or anecdotes to dissect this issue.

Of course, it gives you a starting point: numbers.

Edited July 11, 2021 by StringJunky

[J.C.MacSwell]

5 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think that the example is counterproductive as it actually does not necessarily indicate the effects of transition. While they are likely to retain an advantage, I would like to see actual data by how much that declines over a given treatment regimen. Studies haves shown for example that military transwomen retained some performance benefits over their peers, but not all of them. 

See e.g. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102329: 

In other words, one needs data rather than opinion or anecdotes to dissect this issue.

So you want to include transgenders in female sports while subjecting them to drug schemes with uncertain results...then see what happens and evaluate further?

[StringJunky]

12 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

So you want to include transgenders in female sports while subjecting them to drug schemes with uncertain results...then see what happens and evaluate further?

They aren't being subjected to anything beyond taking samples, which all high-level athletes do anyway; it's an observation exercise.

Edited July 11, 2021 by StringJunky

[J.C.MacSwell]

12 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

They aren't being subjected to anything beyond taking samples, which all high-level athletes do anyway; it's an observation exercise.

They are required to make testosterone targets. Drug regimes are required to do this in most cases often with unhealthy results.

Edited July 11, 2021 by J.C.MacSwell

[swansont]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

  I offered my example honestly,  as it represented an actual controversy in my state over a trans player on a high school team.

Apologies here, too. Do you have a link?

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Right. But if she was a Democrat, and for transgender inclusion at any cost, that could only be honest discussion.

Give me a fucking break. When have I ever presented my case like that?

[CharonY]

50 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

They are required to make testosterone targets. Drug regimes are required to do this in most cases often with unhealthy results.

Honest question, did you read any of that and if so how do you get to this interpretation. Are you aware what transition entails? I have the feeling that you work under a number of assumptions which are likely to be misunderstandings, but your comments are too cryptic to me to figure out where they are.

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

Honest question, did you read any of that and if so how do you get to this interpretation. Are you aware what transition entails? I have the feeling that you work under a number of assumptions which are likely to be misunderstandings, but your comments are too cryptic to me to figure out where they are.

I have followed this for some time. Which part do you not agree with? I have to leave for a bit but should easily find links to support my interpretation...or misinterpretation.