You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Considering it is mostly men commenting here, would, anybody actually have any issue with the male category being renamed as an open category?
None at all, but this is about biological males wanting to compete with biological females
I wouldn't call a post-transition trans woman a biological male. There are some key differences.
Calling it an open category still leaves trans woman competing against a gender they don’t identify with, so I don’t really see that as much of a solution imo
it would however be a small step in the right direction, and as you say, disadvantages no one
Doesnt seem fair on the “formerly competetive” women who are now all fighting it out for second place
That doesn't really mean much. Would it be fair if some other woman turned up and dominated? Is it fair if some women are naturally just better at that sport? What about intersex people or women with naturally high testosterone? What about women who are just big and strong on their own?
It's not a simple situation, and I don't have any answers. The people who do seem to rely on the 'but they're not women' statement a lot.
That doesn’t really mean much. Would it be fair if some other woman turned up and dominated?
would it be fair if ,at the next Olympic Games, China turned up with a team with none of their female stars we know and instead had a team of unknowns who, according to all the official state documentation, have transitioned? They win all the medals. It would be like legalised state doping. Would everyone just sit back and say ah that’s fine carry on your within the rules. Then next Olympic cycle North Korea decide they want a bit of that action and do the same. Now there is no such thing as female sport? How is that fair
I think there's a difference between state sponsored/compulsory transitioning and a trans woman putting herself through all that entails who just happens to do sports.
Is it fair if some women are naturally just better at that sport? What about intersex people or women with naturally high testosterone? What about women who are just big and strong on their own?
As it stands:
Q1: yes
Q2: Women with male-patterned chromosomes can compete using testosterone supression drugs
Q3: yes
I wouldn’t call a post-transition trans woman a biological male. There are some key differences.
The key differences being, Molgrips?
Post transition trans women still have male XY chromozomes, even after surgury. Not that surgury or chromozomes have anything to do with gender self-identity. A trans woman is a woman, a woman with XY chromosomes rather than XX. Both trans women and women with XY chromosones have an athletic advantage over XX women hence the need for regulations to level the playing field.
Would it be fair if some other woman turned up and dominated? Is it fair if some women are naturally just better at that sport?
yep.. entirely fair. Obviously
now would it be fair if a bloke who had made zero effort to transition races against the girls. Of course not. That’s why different gender categories exist
trans athletes are somewhere in the middle of that imo. No one knows if they have an advantage
i think most folks appear to agree they may have. Which goes back to the argument about whether inclusivity trumps sporting fairness
Thank you for sticking your neck out @stwhannah it means a lot.
While the Lia Thomas case swings the balance of favour away from women, i supposed in theorey the argument would work the other way if a female to male transitioning person decided they wanted to race in the grand national for example, as they could potentially be much smaller and lighter than other riders?
Meanwhile, Examples of Women kicking ass in "open categories"
I think there are plenty of sports where an "open field" would work fine, and i think in ALL sports it could/should be the default, up until the point where it natually eliminates itself (ie, its an open category but in the end it just turns out that everyone at the top level of the sport is actually male (or female)
The key differences being, Molgrips?
Testosterone I would think.
Which goes back to the argument about whether inclusivity trumps sporting fairness
My point was about what constitutes fairness? A trans woman is not going to be the athlete they were before transition, but they may still have an advantage. Clearly lots of people have advantages, we need to decide what is fair and what isn't. And that decision is the one that can end up loaded with value judgements about being trans i.e. "but you're not a real woman, are you?"
How come that’s never happened?
Slight sidebar, but it sort of already has. Many 80's era athletes talk of the state sanctioned doping of USSR athletes all throughout that period.
I'm not sure the Olympics is quite the geopolitical battleground it once was though.
Slight sidebar, but it sort of already has. Many 80’s era athletes talk of the state sanctioned doping of USSR athletes all throughout that period.
Kind of hasn’t then.
My point was about what constitutes fairness? A trans woman is not going to be the athlete they were before transition
They will be if they've not undertaken any surgical or chemical intervention - or are you already excluding those people?
They will be if they’ve not undertaken any surgical or chemical intervention – or are you already excluding those people?
I meant transition in the sense of operations/hormone therapy. Not sure if that's the correct term or not.
Is that what we are talking about, or are we talking about trans women with no physical changes competing in sport?
I think we should be talking about both, but it seems that some folk, who are otherwise in favour of inclusion, are prepared to sacrifice one category in favour of the other.
It seems to me that a lot of this is arse about front.
It's a non-issue until it becomes one, deal with it upstream if needs be.
Better to trim wings after the fact than remove them beforehand.
vazahaFull Member
It seems to me that a lot of this is arse about front.It’s a non-issue until it becomes one, deal with it upstream if needs be.
Better to trim wings after the fact than remove them beforehand.
and take the medals away/invite everyone back and redo the podium/edit the record book? How many times is enough? there's already evidence of average males transitioning into female sport and winning medals. How many ciswomen need to be beaten and discouraged for a ban to kick in?
No one can take those TDF winning moments away from Lance Armstrong and the 2nd place riders cannot experience those wins - no one cares that the record books have been changed, LA will always have won those races.
For me this should be self policing and rule 1 applies but humans are competitive and will bend fairness to suit themselves. I still, on balance think that a ban is the fairest solution and don't quite get how inclusion trumps that but then again I'm not effected
No one can take those TDF winning moments away from Lance Armstrong and the 2nd place riders cannot experience those wins – no one cares that the record books have been changed, LA will always have won those races.
Not really comparable, as the second placed riders were also implicated in PEDs. Think they to go outside the top 10 to find someone with an unblemished record.
on balance think that a ban is the fairest solution and don’t quite get how inclusion trumps that but then again I’m not effected
And at the risk of having made the same point too many times, we’re not discussing inclusion in the broad sense, ie for everyone.
It’s the inclusion of one group of people into an exclusive category, which those who want to join want to remain exclusive, and the whole reason the category exists in the first place and is exclusive is…inclusion.
I wouldn’t call a post-transition trans woman a biological male. There are some key differences.
The actual comprehensive science posted in this very thread thorougly disagrees with you. No amount of transitioning can eradicate the advantage of growing up male from pre-birth.
It makes this "not simple" topic very simple. This is why we have zealots attacking the science (not with science, mind (because they'd have to manufacture false evidence to back up their position) but instead attacking it with emotional arguments).
Gender <> Sex.
Trans women are women.
Trans women are also men.
Transitioning cannot wipe out the advantage of growing up a biological male. Having your testosterone artificially lowered doesn't reverse your underlying biology.
We all (well most of us) are approaching this from a position of kindness. But kindness shouldn't blind us to facts.
Woah.... emotional arguments from zealots?
You want some 'science'
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/
Now, I'm not arguing that not allowing transwomen to participate in elite sport against cis-women is wholly to blame for that but the big picture of inclusion, othering, loneliness and isolation experienced by TG people, etc., are all contributors.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/psychiatry/sites/psychiatry/files/talen_wright_blog_2020_07_28.pdf
Yes it's an 'emotional' argument but one that is backed up by data.
It's an impossible solution, in fact there isn't one but balancing happiness against fairness in competition is one thing; lives is another.
Not sure what that brings to the argument, people who suffer serious depression are 20 times more likely to commit suicide, it's all just numbers, and transgender people tend to suffer the symptoms of that through life via a whole host of mental health issues.
The whole trans athlete thing isn't a huge thing just now, but decisions made now will have a long term impact, one way or another, you just have to look at recent headline stories about prisoners, public spaces, etc to see there's a bigger battle ongoing.
It makes this “not simple” topic very simple. This is why we have zealots attacking the science (not with science, mind (because they’d have to manufacture false evidence to back up their position) but instead attacking it with emotional arguments)
Not sure what that brings to the argument, people who suffer serious depression are 20 times more likely to commit suicide, it’s all just numbers, and transgender people tend to suffer the symptoms of that through life via a whole host of mental health issues.
I don't think many would argue that banning TG people from participating in their sports and other pastimes is likely to increase feelings of isolation and loneliness (and please let's not do the 'they still can, just join a men's club' again)
I don't think many would argue that increasing feelings of isolation and loneliness plays a part in increasing depression and associated issues including suicide.
There's a strong science argument that there's an advantage that doesn't disappear once transitioned, I accept that. But to dismiss the above as the emotional argument of a zealot. That's what I'm addressing, not introducing.
Isolation and loneliness through depression isn't and doesn't require something like this to occur unfortunately, it can be a small part of a much large issue, both internally and externally for the sufferer.
It's also probably less of an issue at the professional levels, as those issues are prevalent due to the level of training and the level of competitiveness. Amateur and novice levels, where you can have as many mixed classes as you like would cover most as well, i dare say the percentage of trans athletes at the actual professional level would be miniscule in comparison.
I'm not arguing about the prevalence or of potential solutions. I'm trying to address one point, that the argument for exclusion is scientific (it is, I accept) but the argument for inclusion is emotional zealotry, and there is no scientific basis. I strongly dispute that.
The actual comprehensive science posted in this very thread thorougly disagrees with you. No amount of transitioning can eradicate the advantage of growing up male from pre-birth.
Do post-op trans women have the same testosterone levels as they did before the transition? Isn't testosterone a key contributor to performance? Do these people experience a drop in performance after their physical transition?
I think there are plenty of sports where an “open field” would work fine, and i think in ALL sports it could/should be the default, up until the point where it natually eliminates itself (ie, its an open category but in the end it just turns out that everyone at the top level of the sport is actually male (or female)
I want to appreciate the thinking behind it only being an issue if there isn’t female representation at the top level of the sport, can you explain it?
At the various tiers of amateur sports below the top level, it is important to keep building female participation who're still vastly under-represented. For example, providing a podium for females to appreciate and celebrate their attendance is training they put in preparation is one of the positive things we can do to help here. Do you not think that losing those podium opportunities is going to have any detrimental effect on the experience of female participants, and the future of female participation in sports?
Even for mass start sports like cycling sportives/long-distance road running there are lots of people who use the gender/age cat finishing position to give themselves a pat on the back for the training/effort they put in, or motivate their training for the next event.
It seems to me that a lot of this is arse about front.
It’s a non-issue until it becomes one, deal with it upstream if needs be.
Better to trim wings after the fact than remove them beforehand.
That’s the approach they took for the financial sector leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, isn’t it? Has this approach ever worked well?
To me, it seems bonkers to be purely reactive rather than proactive in regulating competition, although perhaps my thinking may be shaped by working with the regulation of safety-critical systems.
It seems to me that a lot of this is arse about front.
It’s a non-issue until it becomes one, deal with it upstream if needs be.
Better to trim wings after the fact than remove them beforehand.
Been a while since we’ve a had a corporate bullshit bingo thread hasn’t it?
Do post-op trans women have the same testosterone levels as they did before the transition? Isn’t testosterone a key contributor to performance? Do these people experience a drop in performance after their physical transition?
I'm not trans but I do have something wrong with my pituitary gland which means my body at some point stopped producing testosterone properly.
I went from being bang on average testosterone level to having a level lower than a 90 year old male. I don't have the numbers to hand but Caster Semenya was in the news at the time and I remember reading the Olympic level limits and I would easily have been within that level where I could compete as a woman.
Anyway long story short, even with that virtually non-existant level of testosterone I lost no noticeable level of performance or strength from when my body was making testosterone normally. What I did lose was the ability to gain muscle over and above what I already had. I feel like recovery was quicker before I lost my T as well.
So my own purely anecdotal opinion is that as a reasonably fit individual prior to losing testosterone, I retained a lot of my male advantage after my t-level dropped.
Hmm, interesting, but you're not a training athlete who is trying to increase performance all the time. I'm not disputing that you might have some advantage having grown up male; however it seems to me that after your transition you would lose a lot of male advantage, putting you somewhere in between your *average* man and woman. However, top athletes are not average people, which is kind of my point.
molgrips
Full MemberHmm, interesting, but you’re not a training athlete who is trying to increase performance all the time. I’m not disputing that you might have some advantage having grown up male; however it seems to me that after your transition you would lose a lot of male advantage, putting you somewhere in between your *average* man and woman. However, top athletes are not average people, which is kind of my point.
Absolutely, at the time I was just a mid-pack, pretty average cyclist but I was at least training using a Wattbike so I did have performance numbers to monitor my performance with, it wasn't just perception.
Also to be 100% clear I grew up and trained with normal level testosterone before losing it.
I applaud Hannah for taking the time and effort to construct a well thought out post.
I haven't as yet popped over to the Ladies forum to see if the topic's been debated there.
I'm pretty conversant with the differences between the terms sex and gender. A degree in Psychology will help there 🙂
I'm also very familiar with the unconscious biases and outright discrimination in the workplace. Being a commercial pilot will expose you to that. I've missed out on jobs and had discriminatory questions asked at interviews because I am female. I identify as a "tomboy" and at 58yo, really don't care what others think. 😀 Passengers do ask me "what's it like being a female pilot?" My reply "I can't really answer, as I have never been a male pilot".
As to the decision by the UCI to restrict trans women from competing in female sanctioned events? As unpopular as it may be, I agree with that decision. I do also hope that the UCI and other bodies continue to review that decision to ensure that the science and experience is still valid.
None at all, but this is about biological males wanting to compete with biological female
This is a not unsurprising misconception of the issue. Mostly a product of fear, but also a product of a lack of consciousness.
The number of male to female transitions is small. The number of those who transition who want to compete is vanishingly small.
The issue of competition also exists for non-binary and female to male.
My youngest identifies as non-binary. They are getting into rowing in a serious way. And already the question of where they compete is on the horizon. So, before they even begin they are worrying about whether they will be allowed to compete. And all because of an ignorant and divisive social and cultural war designed to marginalise.
Rowing has an open category and a female category. Why would your child not be allowed to compete?
Rowing has an open category and a female category. Why would your child not be allowed to compete?
Sparks gave the answer but let me spell it out.
White cisgender middle aged man answer: They can.
Non-binary young person's answer: I can. At the moment. But will I be able to in the future? I don't see why not but I can also see that some sections of LGBTQ+ are starting to be excluded. What will things be like for me in the future, if this becomes politicised rather than based on facts and logic. If i can't keep rowing, or I'm made to feel unwelcome..... what will I do then? I'm worried.
You can argue it's not logical and surely sense will be seen. But will it?
So we both agree that they’re not excluded!
British rowing has made their policy is inclusive as possible whilst maintaining fairness for women, and has issued a welcoming statement for non-binary athletes.
There is really no reason at all to believe that people are going to soon start being excluded from sport because of their sexuality or beliefs.
I’m not cisgender, if that comment was aimed at me. I don’t believe that any objective man (or woman) identity experience exists such that it could be said to align with sex. We’re all too different for that to be true.
Out of curiosity, in what category would a non-binary person compete given that we mostly have men and womens categories at the moment?
There is really no reason at all to believe that people are going to soon start being excluded from sport because of their sexuality or beliefs.
Really? You don't see the increasing divisive politicisation of the LGBTQ+ community? And don't think there's a chance that sport is one of the selected battlegrounds. I'd suggest it already is, where prominent athletes and ex-athletes are vehemently against transathletes ostensibly on the basis of competition but scratch below the surface and there's a nasty smell.
I’m not cisgender, if that comment was aimed at me.
No, it was my answer. I'm a white cisgender middle aged man
Really? You don’t see the increasing divisive politicisation of the LGBTQ+ community?
That’s not quite straightforward to answer, because there are some areas of politicisation but they’re quite specific, such as things rainper has talked about.
But my short answer is no, not in any way that does or could potentially relate to sport (except for what the OP and thread is about).
Sport is a current and convenient battleground right now because it's 'simple' and 'common sense'
But it isn't the only and won't be the last
I disagree that sport has been “selected” as a proxy battle ground for anything else. I think it’s exactly what it purports to be - one part of the broader discussion around women’s rights versus trans women’s rights.
This even extends to within the LBGTQ+ community, where many trans rights activists are strongly opposed to lesbian women meeting at all unless they include ‘male lesbians’. In recent years in some countries, eg Australia and some US states, it’s actually been made illegal for lesbian women to meet in this way. It’s a real and imminent threat to many people.
The one mainstream area of debate where it’s not about women’s rights is the question of child transition. I’ve seen you write a lot about this personally, so I have some small idea of that you’ve been through. All I want to say about this is that I hope it brings your son the happiness he deserves.
*so it turns out I didn’t know what purports means 🙂 I meant exactly what it says it is
OK, understood. And thanks. I always like talking to you even though I often disagree with you.
I’d suggest it already is, where prominent athletes and ex-athletes are vehemently against transathletes ostensibly on the basis of competition but scratch below the surface and there’s a nasty smell.
I think thats an oversimplification. After all its not "transathletes" but mtf transathletes.
Its certainly being exploited by some groups who do see it as an opportunity to if not gain some votes at least persuade some women not to vote but going for the "nasty smell" with regards to those prominent athletes is problematic.
Out of curiosity, in what category would a non-binary person compete given that we mostly have men and womens categories at the moment?
Tell me again about how inclusive we are, about how people should be free to live their lives. The indicators are all in the wrong direction for one section of the community. Is anyone surprised by these survey results.
https://natcen.ac.uk/publications/bsa-40-liberalisation-attitudes
Just 30% think someone should be able to have the sex on their birth certificate altered if they want, down from 53% in 2019.
Nice to see common sense prevailing.
'If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.'
Tell me again about how inclusive we are, about how people should be free to live their lives. The indicators are all in the wrong direction for one section of the community.
You're comparing results of surveys that bear no relation to one another - one has data going back to early 1980s, the other has data going back to 2019. Come back in 34 years time and see where we're at.
It's only in recent years that the Trans debate has come into mainstream media so attitudes are bound to spike.
Back in the 80s the only time any such thing was talked about was when someone chatted a 'bird' up in a nightclub only to be a little surprised later in the evening.
Are they bound to spike? If anything they'd spike the other way wouldn't they?
20-odd percent less acceptance than 4 years ago, that is a big change. Why were so many for and now against? What has changed that opinion?
What has changed that opinion?
Linguistics? I reckon that more folk than ever have become aware of the difference between sex and gender due to the ongoing debates. If that same question was about gender then it may have ellicited a different response.
Are they bound to spike? If anything they’d spike the other way wouldn’t they?
Unless my old grey matter is failing me there wasn't the huge push for acceptance among the gay community during the 80s/90s that there is among the Trans movement now - just a gradual acceptance of gay people among society.
I can easily see why there is a short-term backwards hardening of attitudes. The approach is harder and more forceful so people will harden their attitudes in response - in a "I won't be told what to think" way.
On that graph in the link you can also see there's a drop of approx. 30% by 1987 in peoples attitudes to same-sex relationships. A few years after Aids was first discovered in the UK. It rises gradually after that.
Linguistics? I reckon that more folk than ever have become aware of the difference between sex and gender due to the ongoing debates. If that same question was about gender then it may have ellicited a different response.
I don't think a proportion of the population at least does make such a differentiation - and in any case the report says 'transgender' which despite saying gender doesn't really differentiate
"64% describe themselves as not prejudiced at all against people who are transgender, a decline of 18 percentage points since 2019 (82%)"
In the same spirit as looking like, quacking like - we can try to rationalise by language and methodologies, but the reality is pretty clear to anyone close to it, and being driven further by (RW) <span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">politicians, the mainstream press, and personalities.</span>
Yay to liberalism, empowerment and madness! How on earth is this fair or right?
(apologies for the DM link).
Or one could try this slightly less emotional article that doesn't appear to have an agenda
Strange that this 'madness' with this particular athlete has been going on since 2018 and no one has batted an eyelid.
You'd think people would have noticed the trail of broken bodies in her wake.
entirely possible that she just isn't that good of a boxer, so is not dominant despite allegedly raised testosterone levels. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Strange that this ‘madness’ with this particular athlete has been going on since 2018 and no one has batted an eyelid.You’d think people would have noticed the trail of broken bodies in her wake.
It reads like there's maybe some kind of intersex thing going on, rather than she having been born a man? It's tricky though as the organisation/individual that previously banned her sounds a bit shady, but if I'm reading it correctly the IOC don't test for testosterone at all now, instead relying on the honour system?
It reads like there’s maybe some kind of intersex thing going on, rather than she having been born a man?
I guess it depends on how much you trust the Russians when it comes to sporting fairness and cultural issues related to gender.
I’ve just seen that article. Apparently the female was getting battered. Just not fair at all.
Nice dig, they're both female. Watch the fight and see if you still hold the same opinion.
Well some of us have been concerned for a long time about the erosion of a woman’s right to compete against other women. But we usually get shouted down and called transphobic. Usually by men.
Well, maybe if you didn't seem so desperate to jump to a particular conclusion people wouldn't call you transphobic so often?
Just a thought...
I disagree that sport has been “selected” as a proxy battle ground for anything else. I think it’s exactly what it purports to be – one part of the broader discussion around women’s rights versus trans women’s rights.
This even extends to within the LBGTQ+ community, where many trans rights activists are strongly opposed to lesbian women meeting at all unless they include ‘male lesbians’. In recent years in some countries, eg Australia and some US states, it’s actually been made illegal for lesbian women to meet in this way. It’s a real and imminent threat to many people.
I've recently returned from Germany, where I attended two Pride parades in different cities. What was very noticeable, compared to Pride parades I've attended in the past, was the significant absence of older Lesbian women. So it was mainly Gay men, younger Lesbians, and a significant number of straight women. Pride was once a protest for greater equality and inclusion for Lesbian and Gay people. It seems now to be much more of a corporate 'Pridewashing' type event. Most older Lesbian women I know would not attend a Pride event, for what they see as it being hijacked by those who wish to exclude gender critical women.
I had to escort my wife and a friend to a feminist conference a couple of years ago, after social media reports of a group of 'pro trans' demonstrators threatening women attending the event. When we go to the venue, there was indeed a group of very loud, aggressive young people screaming abuse at any women going in. As a man, I recognise this kind of aggression as very 'male'. Indeed, it was coming from young men.
I can easily see why there is a short-term backwards hardening of attitudes. The approach is harder and more forceful so people will harden their attitudes in response – in a “I won’t be told what to think” way.
'Backwards'? Alternatively, it could be that increasing numbers of people are becoming more aware about the issues, and forming better informed opinions. Thankfully, we are starting to move away from a situation where women have been threatened, attacked, cancelled and sacked for stating their beliefs and facts. In sports, it's good to see that sporting bodies are adopting a more thoughtful and non-destructive approach when it comes to womens' rights. It's good to see more and more female athletes coming forward and speaking out against the injustice of being forced to compete against biological males.
I have a niece who is trans. She wants to be a boy. She presents as very masculine. In the past, she'd have been labelled a Tomboy and had all sorts of abuse. She competes very well in sports, and wins competitions against boys. However, that is all about to come crashing down as she's on the cusp of puberty, and is likely to follow the family trait of a very 'womanly' body type. Such is nature. I hope she grows up into a society where gender isn't an issue, that she can be who she is without prejudice. And that she is happy.
As regards identity; I'm sure many people of colour would like to experience equality and the privilege that having white skin brings. Because no matter how you identify culturally, you will still be judged on the colour of your skin. This is a social reality. And Race, like Gender, is also a social construct.
not much, which is why I said they sounded shady, hence it was trickyI guess it depends on how much you trust the Russians when it comes to sporting fairness and cultural issues related to gender.
I think some folk should really read the RTE article and then put their heads on their desk for a while until they calm down.
How did you know they were straight?
Interesting that in all of the long piece I posted, that's the line you've picked up on.
There's always LOTS of straight women at Pride events. Pride is one event where many women, regardless of sexuality, can feel safe and free from harassment by men. Many straight young women I know, go to Pride events all over the place. Very few straight men I know, go. Having been to countless Pride events since the early 90s, I've developed a sense of this. And I've noticed the significant decline in older Lesbian women attending, over the last few years.
How did you know they were straight?
I’ve developed a sense of this.
Clearly has a gaydar everyone, so no need to question
I have a niece who is trans. She wants to be a boy. She presents as very masculine. In the past, she’d have been labelled a Tomboy and had all sorts of abuse. She competes very well in sports, and wins competitions against boys. However, that is all about to come crashing down as she’s on the cusp of puberty, and is likely to follow the family trait of a very ‘womanly’ body type. Such is nature. I hope she grows up into a society where gender isn’t an issue, that she can be who she is without prejudice. And that she is happy.
Sounds like you have a nephew.
Imane Khelif had no place to be in the ring, to have such a muscle development advantage due to testosterone over another similar weight fighter and to be allowed to compete makes an absolute mockery of the sport
It's interesting watching the forum unanimously condemning the gullibility of people for sharing falsehoods on one thread. And then seeing, in many cases, the same people falling for the exact same thing when it comes to an issue even tangentially related to transgender rights because the narrative they are fed happens to align with their predjudices.
Once again, read the RTE article before giving us your nuclear hot take. It even has this helpful comment from the IBA:
Update: In the hours after this article was first published, the International Boxing Association (IBA) circulated a new public statement to international media. In it, the IBA says the disqualifications of the boxers were based on "recognised testing."
The statement says: "the athletes did not undergo a testosterone examination but were subject to a separate and recognised test, whereby the specifics remain confidential. This test conclusively indicated that both athletes did not meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors."
It said the decisions were ratified by the IBA Board of Directors.
And if you happen to find a source for why these athletes should be banned that is more credible than a corrupt Russian's Telegram post then feel free to share it.
What’s that based on?
They have XY chromosomes and levels of testosterone that are equivalent to a male of similar age/weight/height
Still time to read the RTE article before the edit window expires.
They have XY chromosomes and levels of testosterone that are equivalent to a male of similar age/weight/height
IS that confirmed, do you know? I don't mean to be argumentative, you understand - I know the now-unsanctioned Rusdian federation DQ'd them, but it's not like they haven't been tested here (or in Tokyo).
Princejohn - actually she has differences in sexual development . Female presenting but genetically male in this case.
tjagainFull Member
Princejohn – actually she has differences in sexual development . Female presenting but genetically male in this case.
As Pondo asked earlier, that hasn't actually been confirmed, has it?