You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The justification here is just so wobbly. Remember; she lived for like 3-40 years as a guy.
VN: Do you feel like you have an unfair advantage because you are a transgender athlete?
Rachel McKinnon: I was not successful before and have only been successful in some specific places therefore) there is absolutely no evidence that I have an unfair advantage."
This isn't how advantage works and this isn't how logic works. If I, as a mediocre cat 4 racer take EPO and still haven't made it into the UCI World Tour, does that mean I didn't get an advantage from the EPO?
In a recent study by Stephané Bermon and Pierre Yves Garnier, they tested over 2,000 IAAF world championship track and field athletes and found that 1/6 of the male athletes were in or below the female range of testosterone, so a disproportionate amount of elite males have very low testosterone. This study showed there is absolutely no relationship between testosterone in terms of performance in male
That is not what this proves. All that could possibly be concluded from this is that some men remain competitive below the female range of testosterone. It also, importantly, talks about ALL atheletes. What if these 1/6 were the bottom ranked 1/6 of the group of "atheletes"?
Right, and I’m not denying there is currently a performance gap between elite male and female athletes. But there’s two questions here at the same time that have a complicated interplay. One: Why is there that gap? People like a simple answer. Men have more testosterone, so therefore, it’s because of testosterone. But our bodies aren’t simple; they’re complex and messy and beautiful. We see that 1/6 of elite male track and field athletes have lower than the average female testosterone yet they perform at a higher level, so it’s not just about testosterone.
So even if we DO assume that the claim is correct that it is about "more than just testosterone, but about other factors that revolve around being male" - then surely an individual who experienced all of these factors for 30+ years would have an advantage over their competing group - even if their testosterone was below levels.
It's a logically ****ed up: Either testosterone is important, and then having it for 30 years and remining high on the number means she has an advantage, or testosterone is NOT important and then you can't say that she can compete as a woman based upon her low testosterone.
Michael Phelps, his joint structure and body proportion, make him a like a fish, which is awesome. But we shouldn’t say that he has an unfair competitive advantage
Another ludicrous argument that is begging the question. Why do we have separate male and female categories in sport? Because we recognise that some advantages are unfair. Either being a man is an unfair competitive advantage (and so she should not compete) or being a man is not an unfair competitive advantage (in which case she should compete with everyone else - but will shortly find out that she has a long way to go to podium against men).
I can't get my head around any of these justifications. Can someone pro-her explain?
Caster Semenya is female, but is currently required to take medication to lower her testosterone levels if she wants to compete.
That's mad. Anyone at the top of international sport is going to be a genetic freak. If you have high testosterone that's just the luck of the draw in the same way that a swimmer having large hands is.
Why do we have separate male and female categories in sport?
Ah yes - this is the solution in our gender confused times - do not separate male & female sport. Jobs a good'un.
Ah yes – this is the solution in our gender confused times – do not separate male & female sport. Jobs a good’un.
Hard to logically argue against that but the point was made over on mums net that that would mean women would never get anywhere near the top of a wide range of sports.
I quite like the idea that my daughter could get to the top of a sport if she wanted. It's unlikely but it's possible. Not so nice to tell her she can ride as a hobby but will never compete seriously at a very high level.
Of course that might be the only solution that everyone agrees to.
"Hardship in one area of your life shouldn’t entitle you to a free pass in others."
It isn't a free pass - it's not excluding a whole load of people because they, through no fault of their own, don't fit gender norms. The amount of negative press around intersex and transgender athletes shows that even if there were no limitations imposed (such as testosterone limits) it's far from a "free pass' financially because much of a professional athletes earnings are linked to sponsorship. And in all other respects, it's merely making a challenging social scenario a bit less tough.
I find it somewhat ironic that this thread is almost entirely dominated by (apparently) blokes. Basically, a bunch of blokes saying “what’s right” about a situation they are not affected by in any way.
It's almost like they are objectively detached. A good thing. Ignorant of the correct terminology yes and probably factually inaccurate in places too, but also able to reflect on the situation without being influenced by impact on self.
It’s not a free pass. I couldn’t suddenly declare myself transgender and start winning World Championships as a woman, even if I didn’t have to do all the hormone blocking / replacement stuff. I’d roll up on the start line and finish dead last. These are supremely dedicated and hard working athletes that happen to not fit y/our old ideas of gender.
Noone is saying they don't have to work hard. But I think it's fair to say with the equivalent amount of training, I would place far higher in a female race than a male one. And I would have to train less than a genetic female to achieve the same position in the race. So of course I'd have an advantage.
Ignorant of the correct terminology yes
That is blatantly untrue
It isn’t a free pass – it’s not excluding a whole load of people because they, through no fault of their own, don’t fit gender norms. The amount of negative press around intersex and transgender athletes shows that even if there were no limitations imposed (such as testosterone limits) it’s far from a “free pass’ financially because much of a professional athletes earnings are linked to sponsorship. And in all other respects, it’s merely making a challenging social scenario a bit less tough.
Ok, not a free pass, it's a CRC 10% off BC voucher?
How about if it was the other way around, and someone born a girl wanted to grow up as a man? How much should they be helped with that? Do you stop the HGH, Testosterone etc when their voice drops but they're a lanky beanpole, if we accept that peoples body should match their identity, do you keep giving them treatment until you have a world class athlete if that's what they want?
Noone is saying they don’t have to work hard.
The phrase used was 'a free pass' and there is in some quarters a perception that Dr McKinnon and others are going down this route to be competitive, rather than any attempt at understanding the deep issues faced by non-binary/TG individuals who happen to also be dedicated to / good at sport.
And I would have to train less than a genetic female to achieve the same position in the race. So of course I’d have an advantage.
Conversely, some studies suggest that the effect of the treatments is more detrimental than the past benefits of growing up male, so in some sports you'd have to actually train harder to achieve an equivalent standard when graded against athletes of the same gender and age. Of course there are exceptions (if you're a 6'6" male you won't stand out particularly against a peer group in the same way you would if you then became a 6'6" tall TG women's basketballer, for example) but then many outstanding athletes are already physiological outliers.
How about if it was the other way around, and someone born a girl wanted to grow up as a man? How much should they be helped with that? Do you stop the HGH, Testosterone etc when their voice drops but they’re a lanky beanpole, if we accept that peoples body should match their identity, do you keep giving them treatment until you have a world class athlete if that’s what they want?
If it was your daughter how would you want it to be dealt with? I suspect you wouldn't even be considering it against all the other crap you would have to deal with, and again if people think TG individuals are doing this as a means to 'easy' medals, they're wired to the moon.
and again if people think TG individuals are doing this as a means to ‘easy’ medals, they’re wired to the moon.
I don't think anyone on here has indicated that have they?
I think the consideration to trans athletes needs to be weighed up against the considerations of their competitors. This is not life or death, its sport, so with that in mind I'm inclined to go with what least negatively impacts the majority.
that would mean women would never get anywhere near the top of a wide range of sports.
EXACTLY the point!
Because.. men. have. a. natural. advantage
[i]s...someone born a girl wanted to grow up as a man[/i]... and compete in top level athletics...? Would there be as much of an outcry?
I don’t think anyone on here has indicated that have they?
Not overtly but I detect an undercurrent from some (but I am somewhat sensitive to this right now so if my detector is overtwitchy I apologise)
But there is clear opinion of this sort on other forums and channels.
.
Not overtly but I detect an undercurrent from some (but I am somewhat sensitive to this right now so if my detector is overtwitchy I apologise)
If you're referring to me, you're being over twitchy.
If it was your daughter how would you want it to be dealt with? I suspect you wouldn’t even be considering it against all the other crap you would have to deal with, and again if people think TG individuals are doing this as a means to ‘easy’ medals, they’re wired to the moon.
Pragmatically and hypothetically, I'd want her to compete on an even playing field. But that (IMO) does mean there needs to be rules and classifications.
David Weir is obviously a fantastically dedicated athlete, and would have done well at whatever he put his talent into legs or no legs. But we don't expect able bodied athletes to be able to compete against him, his "disability" clearly gives him an advantage when it comes to getting round a marathon course quickly.
The phrase used was ‘a free pass’ and there is in some quarters a perception that Dr McKinnon and others are going down this route to be competitive, rather than any attempt at understanding the deep issues faced by non-binary/TG individuals who happen to also be dedicated to / good at sport.
Free pass was just a turn of phrase, it doesn't have to mean a couch potato who was trans would win. I thought my meaning would be clear enough.
Either all the examples mentioned simply sucked at sport whilst living as men and (I'm being really quite facetious in order to make my point, I apologise for that) suddenly during/after transitioning improved all the external factors that influence performance (I'll grant you an improved mental state may be a factor) to become world class athletes, or the act of transitioning conferred a benefit to their athletic performance.
It's like the Lance Armstrong example I gave earlier, no one buys the "cancer changed my body shape, made me more determined and made me faster" line.
It's an emotive subject because even right on liberals are trying to reconcile the notions that gender is a social construct and men/women should be able to do what they want, with the fact that there's clearly more to gender than that otherwise people wouldn't feel the need to transition, with the fact that sport delineates competitors based on a very binary view of gender in order to create what's considered a fair playing field for those that fit that.
FWIW I actually do actually compete against a trans woman in sailing, although that's a bit different as there's more factors than physical athleticism.
Either all the examples mentioned simply sucked at sport whilst living as men and (I’m being really quite facetious in order to make my point, I apologise for that) suddenly during/after transitioning improved all the external factors that influence performance (I’ll grant you an improved mental state may be a factor) to become world class athletes, or the act of transitioning conferred a benefit to their athletic performance.
That doesn't square with the WP article. Post transition hormones, and exceptions noted, most athletes fit into the same percentile as a TG woman as they did a man.
Was not accusing anyone on here (although i do have a feeling some are just clever words away from it) - but there are definitely some horribly overt anti- comments elsewhere.
But that (IMO) does mean there needs to be rules and classifications.
I don't disagree, and it is clear to me too that the current system isn't set right, but as of now it is the system, the TG individuals in competition today are working to that rule set and are not 'playing it' as means of cheating. I realise and agree (to an extent) with what you say, that you could game the system if you wanted to to gain a benefit but compared to what that means you have to do, I don't know if it is even likely (I suppose some people will always cheat to the extreme)
To use the LA analogy; it'd almost be like deliberately getting cancer (as if that's possible) just so you can get the (perceived) benefits of legitimised EPO usage.
Its really not that complicated.. certainly not in Rachels case. Its clear cut. Its cheating.
Life is not fair.. that doesnt mean its okay to cheat.
To use the LA analogy; it’d almost be like deliberately getting cancer (as if that’s possible) just so you can get the (perceived) benefits of legitimised EPO usage.
Careful, you'll trip over your own argument there.
No one* chooses to get cancer, no one* chooses to be transgender. My point was that you can't say "Lance armstrong was a cheat who exploited his cancer treatment", then say that someone undergoing gender reassignment would not do the same. Not all will, but some people will always be dicks (pun intended).
*there are probably exceptions
Clearly, once you suppress testosterone, males are left with no physical advantage at all
"This is not life or death, its sport, so with that in mind I’m inclined to go with what least negatively impacts the majority."
That's what we used to do. Marginalise the non-whites, the mentally and physically disabled, the homosexual, the transgender, the intersex, etc.
This is not life or death, it's sport, so with that in mind I'm inclined to go with what makes people's lives better.
Ah yes – this is the solution in our gender confused times – do not separate male & female sport. Jobs a good’un.
Times have always been gender confused. It's just that recently we are talking about the subject seriously, instead of ignoring the subject and pretending it's a simple male/female world.
One possibility, as I suggested earlier, is that you could do away with male/female classification and have classes based on testosterone level. The high T class would effectively replace our current "male" category. There could be additional lower T categories which would group athletes with similar T levels, regardless of the birth or assumed gender of the athlete. Testosterone would not be a foolproof measure of base athletic ability, but it would be better than the current simple male/female classification, which doesn't seem to be fit for purpose. Classification by physiological characteristics is already accepted in Paralympic and martial sports, so there's already a precedent. There are lots of potential problems, of course, including the admin and logistical headache of introducing an additional set of categories into existing competitions, more athlete testing, and the potential stigma for athletes who end up in the "specialised" T classifications.
It's not an issue that is going to go away, however. I've read stories about transexual, transgender and intersex athletes in wrestling, road cycling, track cycling, XC, downhill, athletics, etc. It's great that people are doing sport, but I think the authorities are playing catch up with some complicated questions!
you can’t say “Lance armstrong was a cheat who exploited his cancer treatment”
Armstrong was taking EPO before he got cancer. Of course he didn't "exploit his cancer", he'd already been cheating for years!
The high T class would effectively replace our current “male” category. There could be additional lower T categories which would group athletes with similar T levels, regardless of the birth or assumed gender of the athlete.
But as already said T levels are a poor definition of male or female. The high T level class would be dominated by men, the low T level classes would be dominated by men with low T levels. Its everything about being a man that imparts performance advantage, T levels are just a part of it.
That’s what we used to do. Marginalise the non-whites, the mentally and physically disabled, the homosexual, the transgender, the intersex, etc.
I don't really think the 2 are comparable to be honest ... But I'm not going to argue with you if you honesty do.
This is not life or death, it’s sport, so with that in mind I’m inclined to go with what makes people’s lives better
Whose life does it make better, the one trans athlete in the field or the 20 that lose out because of her? This is professional sport were talking about, the very basis of which hinges on a level played field. It's not school sports day where winning doesn't really matter as long as it's inclusive.
If a m-f trans competitor want to compete they can, against men. They probably won't win but that's one person at a disadvantage, rather than the other way round where the whole field is at a disadvantage. You however seem to think their rights and feelings take precedent over everyone else's, in the interests of political correctness. A stance I don't agree with.
And before you say she doesn't have an advantage.. Look closely at the pic of her on the podium and tell me with a straight face that she's not going to have a massive power and strength advantage.
Please excuse my lack of the correct terminology (and knowledge), but i was at my folks house last weekend and my mum loves watching the athletics. There was a race (800m) and a man was running against women. My mum mentioned he was actually a woman but looking at her, it was a man. The other ladies were built like a typical 800m runner - i.e thin. This girl was built like a male 200m runner and destroyed the field. The runners-up did the usual congratulatory kiss on the cheeks but you could tell they weren't impressed. It didn't seem fair. Not one bit. They appear to do a decent job in the Para Olympics of categorising athletes into bands which seem fairer for the competitors - would this approach work with the different types of transgender folk?
p.s. I once joked on a forum when i first got into MTB, that i was saving up for a sex change OP after watching the womens 4X final at the some championship or other. Despite not riding a bike for many years i think i could have beat them all. Hardly fair.
Testosterone classes 🤣
Or what about wang length and girth classes.. thatd be just as good as testosterone classes.
I just cant believe how stupid people can be. I cant.
So, if she has a testosterone level lower than that of most women that would suggest that testosterone alone is not a massive advantage in sports.
If someone is born a woman, but just so happens to have a high testosterone level, and this is deamed an advantage, then fair play I say. As long as its totally natural then that's just lucky genetics (as far as athletics goes). No different than Michael Phelps being born with big hands and fish like abilities..
That's not in my mind the same as a man becoming a woman, then competing as a female. One is a beneficiary of natural genetics, the other the beneciary of unnatural modification. (Im not saying trans folks are 'unnatural' before someone picks up on that comment and tries to pick an argument for the sake of it.)
One possibility, as I suggested earlier, is that you could do away with male/female classification and have classes based on testosterone level.
How can you implement this at grassroots level? At top level of a sport there might be enough money to cover it, but at school level I doubt it.
Careful, you’ll trip over your own argument there.
No one* chooses to get cancer, no one* chooses to be transgender. My point was that you can’t say “Lance armstrong was a cheat who exploited his cancer treatment”, then say that someone undergoing gender reassignment would not do the same.
Point taken and Armstrong's the wrong example, because he clearly was a cheat who took drugs before and after the ones he needed to treat his condition. But i didn't mean to use him as THE example, I meant 'someone else'.
Choosing to be TG so you can benefit from growing up as a man but then swap to being a woman and dominate the event is as unrealistic to me as deliberately contracting cancer (as if that's possible) so you can longer term 'benefit' from the treatment.
If you 'accidentally' get cancer AND AS A RESULT it then boosts your athletic ability, is that cheating? In the same way if you are TG through no choice of your own (if you see what i mean) and as a result you then compete as your new gender and gain a benefit - I can admit that isn't right and needs to be addressed, but based on the rules as they stand it's not cheating.
Taking aside whether it really does benefit to the extent some seem to think (and there are cases where it clearly does, and others where it doesn't) - it would be cheating if someone chooses to be TG BECAUSE it will boost their chances of winning medals.
How you enforce that though - haven't the foggiest.
How can you implement this at grassroots level?
As I said, a huge logistical and admin problem, and probably impossible at grassroots level.
I find it somewhat ironic that this thread is almost entirely dominated by (apparently) blokes.
So an accurate representation of the population of the forum then? Untwist thine knickers dear.
Basically, a bunch of blokes saying “what’s right” about a situation they are not affected by in any way.
You can always pop over to Mumsnet if you fancy the female perspective, though you might not like what you find...
It's not cheating if it's within the rules. I don't think any less of the girl for winning, as things stand she hasn't broken the rules. I just think the rules need amending.
There is clearly a big difference between benefiting from a side affect of her transition, and deliberately plying yourself with drugs with sole intention of going faster. Which let's be honest, cancer or not, is what Lance did.
Let's not get the issue of cheating and the issue of fairness mixed up.
I just cant believe how stupid people can be. I cant.
It's a tricky problem, and I'm not suggesting T classification is a magic bullet. Interested to hear of alternative suggestions.
Life is not fair
We have a winner!
It's a great shame that some people aren't born right (and I am one of them) but disadvantaging the majority is never the answer.
The issue of PEDs is cycling is clearly troubling and obviously has significant implications for those cheating and those cheated. However, in cycling PED abuse doesn't physically affect those who are cheated, i.e. they are physically unharmed.
PED use in contact sports like boxing, MMA and to a lesser extent rugby, ice hockey etc. Have an additional consequence that an athlete abusing PEDs to make them faster/stronger are likely to hit harder, therefore not only cheating an opponent, but potentially increasing the risk of harm.
I raise this because if you were to have equality of participation across sport, where inclusion in male or female events was based on indentification as apposed to sex, how can you apply a consistent approach? Males who have transitioned are likely to be significantly stronger than females who have not. Testosterone has a huge bearing on muscular performance, female athletes from a number of countries in the 80s and 90s were proof of this, and testosterone is still regularly used by both male and female athletes today.
A person who has, at some point, been subjected to a level of testosterone will benefit from that exposure indefinitely. Lowering levels of testosterone does not reverse previous effects entirely. Things like bone density, size, muscular structure are all affected.
Males who have transitioned or identified as females should be exluded from participation in female competition. A solution would be the creation of another category so competition can occur. Many sports have weight, age, height catagories, would a transitioned catagory be so bad?
Maybe in the near future esports will take over from sports sports, rendering the issue obsolete.
Interested to hear of alternative suggestions.
So far STW has suggested:
1) Stop categorizing athletes into two groups. Athletes are just athletes.
2) Stop categorizing people on sex/gender and categorize people in to two groups based solely on XX/XY chormosones.
3) Categorize people on their current testosterone levels.
4) Categorize people based on sex/gender.
5) Categorize people as male/female, but based on birth sex.
I like 1 & 2 best.
It’s not cheating if it’s within the rules. I don’t think any less of the girl for winning, as things stand she hasn’t broken the rules. I just think the rules need amending.
Yep. Apologies if I'm snippy on this but as alluded, my youngest is struggling with TG/ID issues right now and it is too easy to touch a nerve. Other places are far less tolerant than here and I am at times conflating the two; mixing what might be slightly insensitive phrasing with willful comment.
Males who have transitioned are likely to be significantly stronger than females who have not. Testosterone has a huge bearing on muscular performance, female athletes from a number of countries in the 80s and 90s were proof of this, and testosterone is still regularly used by both male and female athletes today.
You do need to go and do some more reading on this (even just this thread in detail / the links therein). This is not necessarily the case, and some studies suggest the effect is minimal if not actually negative, once hormone blockers and replacements are taken. And you do know you can't suddenly declare as a woman and then compete, so by the time you are competing your testosterone levels will be substantially lower than your pre- levels, and also lower than many of the people you compete against.
It also depends of course what is meant by stronger - and that can be sport dependent too. As the picture above, blockers won't shrink your skeleton (may weaken it) so height will be retained which may be a benefit in eg: basketball; actual strength (however you define that but amount a muscle can do) may not be in which case sports where power to weight are important, the TG woman may actually be disadvantaged. And then in between - the Jonah Lomu type example, where 'ability' is partly related to momentum. A TG Lomu-type wouldn't be as fast or muscularly strong as a pre-TG but will still be carrying a chunk of momentum as a result of body size.
I personally find this whole situation unappealing.
I will defend the right for people to do what they want as long as it doesn’t negatively impact others. However this is doing just that. To me I see athletes as role models for our young. Something to say look if you put all this hard work in you can compete against someone just like you and you too could win. It’s a good thing to encourage people as well as admiring the dedication and sacrifice these people have made.
The reason we have men and women competitions is that there is a clear difference in the general makeup of them. Many many different reasons for this. This is not new and doesn’t change.
I think its good that someone who is trans has the ability to change and be themselves and accepted in the society they live in. That’s fantastic. However competing at a high level such as this then I do think that it is unfair on the others competing. One person holds a clear genetic advantage over the rest that you could argue has been “engineered” It gives the signal out that if you are a boy and cant compete then you could change sex and beat all those feeble girls. This I don’t like. We are in an age of very advanced cheating and it wont be long, unless this is controlled, before we see people having a sex change so they can compete.
I personally think we should have a “clean” sport and then have a free for all version where you can use any method of performance enhancement you like.
I'm the same as you AndyBrad - anyone who grew up a man has a growth and development genetic advantage, even if they later transition to a woman and reduce the levels of hormones to the same as a typical woman. It's like taking steroids to develop, then staying off them for a couple of years but building on your development to go and win at strength sports.
It's all a load of bollocks. Sport should be classified on sex not gender, you can't change your sex.
"Sport should be classified on sex not gender, you can’t change your sex."
What about everyone that is intersex? Sex isn't simply male or female, hence the Caster Semenya issue.
Well I think there should be a new category, as has been done for differently-abled people, like the Invictus games, paralympics etc.
Otherwise women sports especially is going to nose dive in interest, just when feminism was actually achieving a decent catch up, not only in regulations but in actual interest.
Many people (esp men) love women's DH, cycling, tennis, rugby, wendyball etc. If you fill them all up with men who have changed gender then we are all going to lose interest.
Everyone deserves a chance to compete - however it is unfair and wrong to assume that someone who was once a man are competitive with women. And it has proven by the results that they are not.
And you do know you can’t suddenly declare as a woman and then compete
Are you sure about that? Look at the schools and universities who allow anyone to compete as the gender they identify as with no other requirements on surgery, hormone levels etc.
"Many people (esp men) love women’s DH, cycling, tennis, rugby, wendyball etc. If you fill them all up with men who have changed gender then we are all going to lose interest."
I think you're overestimating the numbers of transgender and intersex people. And how advantaged they are.
"Everyone deserves a chance to compete – however it is unfair and wrong to assume that someone who was once a man are competitive with women. And it has proven by the results that they are not."
Where has it been proven? There's been a transgender DH MTBer competing in World Cups this year and she's been miles behind the top riders - and it's well established that even Rachel Atherton at her best is much slower than even the junior men.
Sport should be classified on sex not gender, you can’t change your sex.
What about everyone that is intersex? Sex isn’t simply male or female, hence the Caster Semenya issue.
5plusn8 doesn't define sex but I assume he means chromosomes or birth gender, in which case 0.06% of people won't fit neatly in. (and many of them are quite easy to assign as discussed above.) In the current system 2% of people are tricky to qualify. You're concerned about tricky exceptions and you're right to be - 5plusn8's system throws up far fewer.
And you do know you can’t suddenly declare as a woman and then compete
I don't think this is always true, but if it were true don't you think people *should* be able to compete as the sex/gender they identify as? That's the beauty of a system that ignores sex/gender all together. Any male can identify as a woman and compete as a woman. They'll just be competing against people who happen to have the same chromosomes as them, or in an event where no distinction is made on gender. Job done, everyone happy.
Where has it been proven? There’s been a transgender DH MTBer competing in World Cups this year and she’s been miles behind the top riders – and it’s well established that even Rachel Atherton at her best is much slower than even the junior men.
I don't expect you're claiming that this proves anything either - but I thought it was worth just stressing the point.
DH is a bad example really as skill is such a huge factor and Rachel is regularly quicker than guys who are bigger and stronger than her.
People advocating the categorisation of mainstream sport by testosterone levels or chromosones are being highly unrealistic IMO, it's just not going to fly with the general public. Simplicity is the key.
And to answer the "it's only sport" point someone made, that's true but - to be pragmatic - it's more important to the participants than somebody else's journey of self-discovery is.
Where has it been proven?
Ok, I accept hyperbole on my part. And anecdotes don't make science, all of the current examples, winners and losers, are just anecdotal. However look at:
Dr Rachel McKinnon
Laurel Hubbard
If you look at drugs cheats, on average taking drugs makes you perform better
If you look at men vs women on average being male makes you perform better.
Hubbard has been beaten by women, as has McKinnon, but how much has their success been down to their previous sex and how much down to training performance etc. To me this is like asking how much of Armstrong's success was down to drugs and how much was training performance etc.
Frankly who cares, drugs make you better, as does being male. Its just a fact of life.
Many successful sports people it is really hard to tease out what makes them good, for some there are certain physical genetic traits which obviously contribute - Phelps has some dolphin in him. If you are genetically male then you have an advantage over genetic females.
If we want to have sports with scientifically augmented humans then lets start a new class.
5plusn8 doesn’t define sex but I assume he means chromosomes or birth gender
I think just chromosomes, as you say this leads to a very small percentage of people. They can have their own classification just like in the paralympics.
“Sport should be classified on sex not gender, you can’t change your sex.”
What about everyone that is intersex? Sex isn’t simply male or female, hence the Caster Semenya issue.
But how many Caster Semenya are there and how many have there ever been? It's almost statistically irrelevant. She is a genetic anomaly as much as Michael Phelps is and as such should be allowed to compete on level terms with other women. History will record the facts.
...and Caster Semenya doesn't fit smoothly into the existing system either, so arguing against another system on the basis she won't smoothly fit in makes no sense.
Just looking at the nmol for women and it has to be lower than 10 - that's 5-6x the 'normal maximum range for a woman. If over 10 that's well the range of a bloke. But if she's not had a sex change, and doesn't have nuts, then that's how it is.
The other thing that needs checking is the hematocrit / hemoglobin as Pro cyclists are limited to 50nmol. Testosterone dramatically increases this, which is your ability to carry oxygen, so anyone with high levels will be higher, although endurance sport does lower this compared to the average person.
Ah yes – this is the solution in our gender confused times – do not separate male & female sport. Jobs a good’un.
Hard to logically argue against that but the point was made over on mums net that that would mean women would never get anywhere near the top of a wide range of sports.
I quite like the idea that my daughter could get to the top of a sport if she wanted. It’s unlikely but it’s possible. Not so nice to tell her she can ride as a hobby but will never compete seriously at a very high level.
Of course that might be the only solution that everyone agrees to.
I can't get pregnant or breast feed a baby. Modern medical science might be able to alter my hormones to sort the latter, but the former is just a fact. I have to accept it. There are some differences between men and women (or, if you like, between people). Maybe on that basis it'd be alright to just not have gendered sports.
But then you could argue against age categories etc. too. I think it's a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
I think it’s a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Yup. Just have a new category.
It is a funny one, because used to accept that men and women are different physically and mentally, this is what lead to non equality prejudice in the first place. (Some social science crazies and other mentalists try to argue that men and women are no different in any way)
At work and public life etc we are working towards eradicating these prejudices thankfully, but in a strict measurement system such as sport where peoples performance is examined so closely, we kind of need the current "prejudice" - ie male and female, age etc. Otherwise youthful males will just be best at most stuff and equality elsewhere in life will go backwards.
Personally I love women, I love the differences. I currently admire Serena Williams as probably the No1 sports person ever, despite the fact that she could not even beat the no100 seed male, she is "better" for all her achievements.
Where has it been proven? There’s been a transgender DH MTBer competing in World Cups this year and she’s been miles behind the top riders – and it’s well established that even Rachel Atherton at her best is much slower than even the junior men.
Well for a start noone is saying its a formula for instant success. I could turn up tomorrow, compete against the woman at the wc dh, and I'd come last by a long long way. Training, skill and dedication are still required, however all things being equal woman are at a disadvantage. As shown by your point that rach is on a par with the junior men times wise, despite being I imagine technically far superior.
There's an interested article on Velo news
Sarah Fader, the defending masters world champion in the event, and faster qualifier, declined to race against McKinnon in the final.
From the article
“I’m not blaming Rachel for competing. A lot of people are calling her a cheater, and she’s not a cheater because the current rules allow her to do it legally,” Fader said. “I just don’t believe the current rules.”
Fader says her opinion was upheld by what she saw in the qualifying rounds. In Fader’s eyes, Dr. McKinnon dominated the other riders at the competition. Her power on the bicycle was simply too great for tactics and strategy to overcome, Fader said. And when Fader learned that Dr. McKinnon had switched from road cycling to track racing less than two years ago, she also questioned her inclusion. Fader is a cycling coach, and she believes Dr. McKinnon’s rapid rise from track newbie to world champion is a sign of an unfair advantage.
“It’s taken some women five to eight years to get that fast and [Dr. McKinnon] made these leaps and bounds in a few years,” Fader said. “For her being such a beginner and being able to hit these times that took us years to hit how do you even measure that progression?”
Other female competitors shared her opinion, Fader said, however, they were scared to speak out publicly against Dr. McKinnon. These riders feared being labeled discriminatory and insensitive, and thus kept their opinions to themselves. Indeed, one other rider from the race reached out to me to share a similar opinion to Fader’s. This rider wished to remain anonymous.
“There’s a lot of sensitivity here. I’ve spoken with women who are afraid to give their opinion because they think they will be deemed to be discriminating against transgender people, or that people will think they hate [transgender people],” Fader said. “I don’t think it’s about discrimination, I think it’s about looking logically at the rules.”
And you do know you can’t suddenly declare as a woman and then compete
But that's exactly what happened in the USA. Two junior transgender athletes (Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood) wiped the floor with their opposition in the Conneticut State Championships.
Transitioning in so far as presenting and living as girls but due to their age, they had not undergone ANY hormone treatment and were racing with all the advantages that male puberty brings.
apologies, I was talking about senior / world level. It's an ethical minefield for sure - do you bring the same rules into junior level and force people to undergo TG treatment to enable them to compete as their identified gender, but in doing so push people down a path that seems right at the time but longer term might not be?
And I'm not saying the current situation even for senior/world class athletes is right, it needs refining and sorting and I don't know what the answer is, the point i am making is that IMHO I don't think 'good but in the grand scheme of things not great' athletes are suddenly declaring themselves TG as a means of winning medals.
Maybe I'm not cynical enough and I suppose if there are ways to cheat then someone will always try to exploit them...... but weighed against the challenge of being accepted as TG in general, you'd have to really want that medal so bad.
I'm sure nobody's doing it solely to "cheat", it's just internet ****ers saying that.
It's just whether a fair system has been arrived at yet, I predict there will be changes.
To me the issue is that whenever a TG athlete wins, people call unfair advantage. I'm sure the governing bodies have done what they can to balance the interests of everyone involved, on a number of levels.
Similar to the TUE thing, can't we just trust that the governing bodies will achieve a reasonably level playing field?
I'd go with the XX/XY distinction in elite level sports, and anyone intersex that doesn't fit into that categorisation can choose where they want to compete. From what I've seen they've got enough shit already in their day-to-day life that giving them this choice is only fair.
Below elite (ie professional) levels just go with whatever people identify with. Again, some people might get an advantage over others but I find it hard to believe it's actually going to be a huge issue, and if there's no money involved the worse than can happen is to hurt the loser's feelings. And of course anyone ambitious enough to be thinking about getting into elite sports would know about the chromosone test, and would train accordingly.
Below elite (ie professional) levels just go with whatever people identify with. Again, some people might get an advantage over others but I find it hard to believe it’s actually going to be a huge issue, and if there’s no money involved the worse than can happen is to hurt the loser’s feelings.
Hurt feelings? What about something like university Rugby? I think serious injury is more likely.
I’m sure nobody’s doing it solely to “cheat”
I agree, but its not fair under the current rules.
I’d go with the XX/XY distinction in elite level sports, and anyone intersex that doesn’t fit into that categorisation can choose where they want to compete. From what I’ve seen they’ve got enough shit already in their day-to-day life that giving them this choice is only fair.
Below elite (ie professional) levels just go with whatever people identify with. Again, some people might get an advantage over others but I find it hard to believe it’s actually going to be a huge issue, and if there’s no money involved the worse than can happen is to hurt the loser’s feelings.
Broadly agree, expect you have to apply it to grass roots level as well, for safety reasons and because literally 98pc of Female entrants will be disadvantaged and those hurt feels will result directly into people giving up the sport which would be a shame. I'm sure you'd hardly ever need to test anyone at grass roots level, but in the unlikely event a 6ft4 girl with a long reach turned up at a 6th form boxing match it would be nice for her opponent to be able to decline without being labelled a bigot.
What about something like university Rugby? I think serious injury is more likely.
Possibly, equally rugby's a sport where bigs and littles often come into unequal contact. I guess you could have an even bigger big but by the same token, should rugby put a limit on size irrespective of sex/gender.
I agree, but its not fair under the current rules.
Define 'fair' - because if fair means 'within' the rules then of course it's fair. You think the rules are wrong (and I don't disagree) but that's a different thing.
A few facts might not go amiss. In elite athletes the incidence of XY is about 140 times the general population. That lifts it to about the same as ginger hair. This publication was used to try and define thresholds for testosterone levels, apecifically for XY and notably Casta. The quality of the analysis is questionable, but incidence is not
https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/99/11/4328/2836760
What do I think about competition as trans? Well it appears that a lifetime of doping on testosterone may confer some performance advantage, even after medical castration. This should not come as a surprise. One would see the same with other abuses such as EPO and HGH. I therefore have difficulty with the masters result I would have no difficulty with a competition of trans vs. other medical castrations (prostate cancer is a good example), and no issue with a prepubescent male to female trans taking hormone blockade since they have not experienced the benefits of testosterone during puberty (and vice versa but less likely). physiologically, a long period of testosterone abuse in a biologically female athlete would be frowned upon in just the same way.
in road racing competition there is an age adjustment for gender, such that women can race a category down to men they race for different points I’ve seen that as a 50-yo Cat 2, I’m competitive with Cat 1 women of all ages, but probably at or below an Elite. In time trialling there are standard adjustments for age and gender, but the endpoint is objective (unassisted speed). For track I’d look at the road racing option instead
The issue of safety is not one I'd considered but in reality is actually far more important than 'fairness' if I think about it.
Imagine a boxing match. Sure the weight categories would even things out but it would still be a concern. Worst case scenario would be at heavy weight where weight limit does not even come into it.
I think only solution is categorise by sex at birth, and if need be a separate category(s) for those that don't feel they can compete in those categories. Classed in same way as para sports perhaps.
I'm sure people will shout discrimination etc etc but ultimately it's not life or death, just sport, and the key underpinning of sport is that it should be fair. Banning trans from competing in certain categories isn't great, in an ideal world it wouldn't be required, but let's face it its not as if its imposing Rosa parks levels of injustice on members of society.
What about something like university Rugby? I think serious injury is more likely.
There's already a difference between forwards and backs, and i'm not sure that size is a deciding factor when it comes to injury. But what's the alternative? How can you identify trans people with a 100% success rate? What about intersex? Are you going to make them take a chromosome test before they can compete? What if she's just a big woman? Seems pretty insulting and open to a lot of problems TBH...
Elite level there's money involved, and that changes everything.
Imagine a boxing match.
How about MMA?
Google Fallon Fox.
I played women's rugby at university. At 5'8' and (back then) about 11 stone, I was one of the taller/larger players and played in the second row. The front line of the scrum was filled by larger women but, to be blunt, they were fat, not muscular.
Hannah Mouncey, the transgender Aussie rules football player is 6 feet tall and 100kg (so almost 16 stone).
There’s already a difference between forwards and backs, and i’m not sure that size is a deciding factor when it comes to injury. But what’s the alternative? How can you identify trans people with a 100% success rate? What about intersex? Are you going to make them take a chromosome test before they can compete? What if she’s just a big woman? Seems pretty insulting and open to a lot of problems TBH…
Elite level there’s money involved, and that changes everything.
Agree that this level here of (elite) amateur sport is where it doesn't really matter too much at the end of the day, the rules should err on the side of maximum inclusivity. This current example is pretty polarising, in an already severely polarised debate, but most will be more reasonable. UCI women's masters track sprint - everyone's a grown up, it's a high level but still racing for themselves really, and is well-equipped to deal - witness Sarah Fader's untoppable response to the bogosity of Mckinnon's win.
Kids sports, though, that's a different story and I don't think you can just say leave it as there's no money involved and it's just children legging it round a bit of grass or whatever. That is self-evidently the future of women's sport and young kids aren't equipped to reason their way round the fact a MtF boy just crushed the race. Some more forthright regulation will be needed but God knows what that will be and how it can attempt to be even-handed.
witness Sarah Fader’s untoppable response to the bogosity of Mckinnon’s win
You know McKinnon has grassed up Fader* and Wagner to USA cycling?
https://twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1053089859894689793
Dr. Rachel McKinnon
@rachelvmckinnon
Follow Follow @rachelvmckinnon
More
I'm not sure how @usacycling could NOT treat their behavior as violating this policy."All cycling participants are entitled to respectful treatment at all times during any sport oriented activity."
Withdrawing in protest over my being trans is inherently DISrespectful.
*Fader, who has dedicated her life to the sport.
It seems McKinnon want's subservience, not respect.
Doubt she's going to win many friends with that approach. She is entitled to compete however her fellow competitors are equally entitled to not like it.
If I'd trained all my life only to miss out on being a world champ in such circumstances I'd be miffed as well. Probably wouldn't have withdrawn however, but I do feel for the girl who got silver.
Some of the responses are pretty brutal but not sure she should be surprised by that
She is entitled
Damn right she is. Not doing the bigger cause any favours at all IMO.
Define ‘fair’ – because if fair means ‘within’ the rules then of course it’s fair
Fair means a contest on an even footing, of course its fair within the rules, the rules are wrong, and not fair.
Ps I have read her twitter feed, jeepers, she ain't helping no-one and is very entitled.
The world is ****ed, it is developments like this that are driving the right wing, Trump, brexit the rest, Breitbart is loving this. If it cannot be discussed without people being vilified for their opinions then those people will become entrenched.
It might be nice and fluffy and good for the psychology of people with gender dysphoria to be accepted as the gender they feel they should be, but its not reality for everyone else to pretend she is female. She may well be woman gender, but she is not a member of the female sex. We need to be sensible about this.
People should have the right to decide their gender, the right of anyone to marry or have sex with whoever consents, the right for people to wear and do as they please as long as it harms no on else.
The workplace needs to be equalised.
All of these things are about actually ignoring peoples sex and gender, which aside from personal relationships is something I have always aspired to do, despite being programmed not to (and hence failing often).
But as someone else said, this does harm other people, people who have trained long to get to their position. Her crowing about her victory and trying to take down those who don't feel right about it does not feel like equality to me, and there is a certain amount of hubris.
It seems McKinnon want’s subservience, not respect.
And a dollop of attention on top.
Apologies if I've missed it, but did McKinnon have any sort of comparable results (hopefully avoided the ''track record" pun) before starting racing as a woman?
Whilst I don't imagine anyone would go through everything involved for a tinpot medal or two it would seem all that is stopping me (or many other middlemarkers) in Time Trials from winning the fastest woman prize is 'self identifying' as such...... although if I did I'd like to think I'd be a bit less of a bad winner than appears the case here.
No answers, but can't see how equality at all costs can be good for anyone
RM: My sport background is in badminton. I moved to Charleston, South Carolina, to take up my job at the College of Charleston and there isn’t any elite badminton down here. I needed a new sport. I wasn’t good at running and I took spin classes and really fell in love with cycling and decided on a whim to buy a bike. I started racing on the road and turned out I was actually good at it, much better than I was at badminton. I raced on the road for three years, raced all over America and in Canada.
...
I was a road for three years and have raced on the track for the last year.
She doesn't mention whether this was before or after identifying as or becoming a woman though.
Right now she's just acting like a bully and is doing her cause no favours whatsoever.
Is there anyone that supports her point of view?
Is there anyone that supports her point of view?
Yes, no one knows really how many they are, but they are very loud and vocal and have policy makers listening to them all over the place. Speak against them at your peril.