You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Could be an interesting development going forward
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/10/15/trans-woman-rachel-mckinnon-cycling-world-championship/
My wife reports outcry on Mumsnet, and how there's a call for boycotts
There is no longer any point in encouraging our daughters to take part in competitive sport.
I remember the days when the Klinefelter syndrome issue came to light. Klinefelter is where the person carries XXY chromosomes. I can't remember the female athlete in the 80/90's who was suspended, and athletes are still being suspended now for it.
I can see why there are calls bans etc as biologically, trans are not their chosen sex, so will need a judgement ruling to close down the arguments.
There is a lot of it out there from recently. Mountain biker in NZ (I think?), Aussie footballer, MMA fighter in USA, track and field in USA schools, weight lifting, American football etc etc.
It needs to be looked at in a fair and consistent manner free from fear of reprisals from those that may be affected.
True, but would Philippa York have raced as Philippa rather than Robert Millar if the world had been like it is now?
apologies for linking to the telegraph but similarities.
In McKinnon’s native Canada, trans students are now able to compete on teams which are consistent with their gender identity, after a governing organisation changed its rules last month.The move means that trans students in 56 third-level institutions in Canada are now allowed to play as the gender that they identify as, without getting hormone therapy.
That's just stupidity, and in that case, I agree with the statement below.
There is no longer any point in encouraging our daughters to take part in competitive sport.
Unless your daughter went through puberty as your son...
Help yourselves...
It's not just sport that's affected. Where do you imprison a rapist born male who identifies as a woman?
Seems some women aren't happy with the direction we are taking.
You have Nathalie van Gogh riding in the dutch ladies elite peleton since a couple of years.
Nothing new, Michelle Dumaresq a trans gender woman won the MTB DH Master world champs in Sun Peaks in 2006, Brit, Petra Wiltshire was 2nd and a bit un-happy.
Where do you imprison a rapist born male who identifies as a woman?
Recent one along those lines https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-45825838
Ubelievable.
It is a difficult subject. and no matter what decisions are made "some" people are going to be upset. The authorities need to make balanced judgments on a case by case basis, while respecting the athlete they are making a judgment on. There is a lot of noise on the subject that is just driven by bigotry, but there are some valid objections also.
Caster Semenya was treated horribly by the authorities, iirc the ausi rules footballer last year who was not allowed to play on female teams actually thanked the authorities for the way they handled the process.
The challenge is, as always simple to ask and much more difficult to answer. The question is - "define "female"".
A conversation made more difficult when those trying to have it need to appeal to be allowed to.
Its horribly difficult to know what's right in these situations. My feeling is that the mens class should be the default open class. The women's group should only include women who can be deemed "medically" women, no advantage should be gained as a result of being transgender. Deciding the criteria for who qualifies as a woman is the problem. Political niceties shouldn't come into it, it should purely be a medical, performance decision.
Sports should be based on sex not what gender you associate with. This shouldn’t really be a hard issue to deal with.
From the interview linked:
"VN: Do you feel like you have an unfair advantage because you are a transgender athlete?
Rachel McKinnon: No, absolutely not. If you look at my results at Canadian nationals, in the 500 I was like eighth place (editor: Dr. McKinnon has always competed in the female category). At masters worlds, for the 500 I was a very disappointing fourth. In the Keirin at Canadian nationals, I was fourth."
So Rachel wouldn't have done very well at all in the male category by the sound of it.
The only way to determine gender is to go curtain shopping.
If you can stand being in the shop more than 5 minutes you are definitely a lady.
Sports should be based on sex not what gender you associate with. This shouldn’t really be a hard issue to deal with.
@poah, that's a fair and understandable statement. So define "sex", or specifically define "female". Trust me when I say it's nowhere near as easy as you may think or hope.
Sports should be based on sex not what gender you associate with. This shouldn’t really be a hard issue to deal with.
+1
Sports should be based on sex not what gender you associate with. This shouldn’t really be a hard issue to deal with.
Agree. Just stream athletes on genetics. If required, rename the events to the "XX" and "XY" categories and maybe an 'other' for people who genetically don't fit into either.
Not perfect, but anything else requires a tight definition of something that can't be tightly defined. (Although zippykona gets close.)
The trouble with that idea is you're telling people who identify as male or female that they're not and they're something that isn't either. I can't see that being a tasty pill to swallow.
An interesting debate and one that will go on for some time. I suspect until everyone can accept these things, there will be those who just won't be able to accept it.
I suspect until everyone can accept these things, there will be those who just won’t be able to accept it.
Hmm, I think you are probably right there bigyinn 😉
It's a really interesting issue and deceptively complicated.
Personally I'd err on the side of utilitarianism and favour the rights of the majority to a potentially fairer contest - an approach which the philosophy professor in question would surely understand.
However I understand some may perceive "transphobia" in that stance, purely because others would say similar things from a position of genuine prejudice.
Just wondering, but even if somebody is artificially limited in their testosterone, would they not still carry the competitive advantage of having previously trained with higher levels? A bit like the claimed residual benefit that reformed dopers retain?
Incredible that as a professor on the subject the best reply to that question she could come up with was basically.. 'no i dont think i have an advantage because sometimes i dont win'.
I dont really believe she doesnt realise her obvious advantage over the other competitors.
Sure Mr Tyson... as long as your test levels hit the target on the day we test you youre grand. Box the face off em and we'll all cheer you on.
And always with the transphobia card!!
Couldnt give a bollox love, fill your boots.. we just want level playing field.
Well, I reckon it’s easy.
Sports should be based on sex not what gender you associate with. This shouldn’t really be a hard issue to deal with.
This + 1
Although I’d qualify that with Sex as born with and for competition as an Athlete.
Tricky, yes. Certainly because now transgender can be applied in Law as being gender you are currently occupying.
But keep it simple, for Athletic competition anyway.
This + 1
Although I’d qualify that with Sex as born with and for competition as an Athlete.
Did you read the story linked at the bottom of the PinkNews piece in the OP?
The trans boy forced to wrestle girls because he was born as one? Is that fair if he's had loads of hormone therapy and wipes the floor with them?
So Rachel wouldn’t have done very well at all in the male category by the sound of it.
I thought that seemed like a spectacularly bad argument to make too. I'm sure I wouldn't beat elite women in any sport, but thanks to straight white male privilege it's not an issue.
Maybe classify it as a disability (is there a more politically correct way of saying that?) and put it into the Paralympics. Or move the para-sport into the main Olympics which makes more sense. The closest example I can think of is wheelchair marathon times aren't compared to the able bodied times and are significantly quicker. Also neatly solves the hormone level issue, trans men/women can compete together, just categorise based on the level either natural or medicated.
So define “sex”, or specifically define “female”. Trust me when I say it’s nowhere near as easy as you may think or hope.
Sex is a biological function of your dna wither you identify as a man or woman. The only issue would be if you have a rare genetic condition.
Sex is a biological function of your dna wither you identify as a man or woman. The only issue would be if you have a rare genetic condition.
Erm - the incidence of intersex conditions is a *lot* higher than you seem to realise. It's almost as prevalent as ginger hair...
Rachel
The trouble with that idea is you’re telling people who identify as male or female that they’re not and they’re something that isn’t either. I can’t see that being a tasty pill to swallow.
I have to agree that whilst I don't consider myself to be anti-trans, the issue of sporting categories is more complex - it's certainly in another league from "what prison do you send someone to" (what prison would you send a woman convicted of sexually assaulting a woman to FFS, not hard to answer) or what bog should someone use (literally WGAF?).
I think in a world where one can live as transgender, and a lot of people do, with significant mental health benefits, it is not right to simply say it has to be genetic based, but there may be arguments against trans athletes in order to have a level playing field.
I'm not sure of the solution, I suspect if wider society had less gender stereotypes then people may find themselves more comfortable with their own gender, but that's not going to happen any time soon.
Erm – the incidence of intersex conditions is a *lot* higher than you seem to realise. It’s almost as prevalent as ginger hair…
That might be true for most people but given my education and the fact my aunt had tuners I would disagree with your preposition. Red hair is 1-2% of the world population but is obviously higher in certain regions. That is significantly more common than XXY for example.
i married a redhead too 😉
Just stream athletes on genetics. If required, rename the events to the “XX” and “XY” categories and maybe an ‘other’ for people who genetically don’t fit into either.
The trouble with that idea is you’re telling people who identify as male or female that they’re not and they’re something that isn’t either.
Assuming you are replying to me, sorry I wasn't clear. I'm saying stop grouping people according to sex/gender all together. Instead group them purely according to their genetics and use the genetic label to describe them. So XX athletes and XY athletes. You're not making any claim about gender or sex whatsoever whilst still grouping people according to their athletic potential. It completely sidesteps the whole problem of having to pigeon hole people in a sex or gender.
People with genetic disorders might cause some head scratching but they probably already do in this context.
Where do you imprison a rapist born male who identifies as a woman?
Recent one along those lines https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-45825838/a >
My example wasn't randomly chosen. 😉
I have to agree that whilst I don’t consider myself to be anti-trans, the issue of sporting categories is more complex – it’s certainly in another league from “what prison do you send someone to” (what prison would you send a woman convicted of sexually assaulting a woman to FFS, not hard to answer)
Genuine question: did you consciously change "rape" in my example to "sexual assault" In your reply?
I wish it was as easy as the experts make out. It isn't. I am father to a gender dysphoric 12 yo, and if anyone thinks athletes choose this path as a way to easy medals, you haven't a clue. What class of sport to play is so far down the list it doesn't register. Certainly nowhere composed to how to deal with the bulliying at school, the nonacceptance by grandparents, the depression, the suicidal thoughts, the cost of counselling because camhs is so underfunded there's a 6mo wait unless they are actually self harming.....
I agree conceptually with the idea that we need to look at a means for all nonbinary athletes to compete on a level basis, but as it stands she ^ competes against women, and works ****ing hard to do so. The undercurrent from some quarters that this is a quick and easy way to success is so far wide of the mark I'm not even angry, just sad.
This + 1
Although I’d qualify that with Sex as born with and for competition as an Athlete.
Did you read the story linked at the bottom of the PinkNews piece in the OP?
The trans boy forced to wrestle girls because he was born as one? Is that fair if he’s had loads of hormone therapy and wipes the floor with them?
No, this is the internet and this is a forum.
Why would I read anything, oh wait.. I read your post and still stand by what I originally posted.
HTHs.
Wait, what do You think..?
Oh, hang on.. I’m not sure I’ll agree with you and you haven’t posted it yet..
Big deal.
So, back to the original point..
“Although I’d qualify that with the Sex a born with and for competition as an Athlete”
Just in case you didn’t understand my original post.
I don't think there ever has or is ever going to be a 'standard version' of a trans person, especially so under self id. That's why the trend for universities and schools allowing anyone to play and compete as the gender they choose (with no other caveats) is the wrong way to go IMHO. It's so wrong in fact, I question the motivations of those campaigning for it and making these decisions, and whether or not they should be allowed anywhere near schols and young people in the first place.
At national and international level sports where they currently have rules about this, what are they going to do when the crop of youngsters come out of the schools and university programmes where they can compete in whatever category they like? The pressure and lobbying will be so great on the governing bodies that I think womens sports will be destroyed within a generation if it isn't halted now to allow for proper non-hysterical debate.
Sorry Bikebuoy, you've lost me there.
Rene59 -
I think womens sports will be destroyed within a generation
What was that about non-hysterical debate?
Aye, but I never said I'd be the one debating!
Sports should be based on sex not what gender you associate with. This shouldn’t really be a hard issue to deal with.
How are you defining "sex"?
Have a wee search on the internet and you'll find some good articles explaining just how complicated this is. Once you get into intersexuality, there are a myriad of different syndromes and conditions where people don't fall into clear gender categories of male and female. There have already been a lot of issues raised in women's athletics because of this, with several top athletes probably falling into the intersex category.
I don't think there is a simple solution to the issue at all. As mentioned above, some athletes are now being required to take medication to lower their natural testosterone levels, but this seems ethically and medically dubious to me. It almost feels like you have to do away with gender classification and compete in classes based on testosterone level, like boxing weight categories.
I suppose the way to see how big a deal it is and how much of a distortion it makes to female sporting results would be to look at it mathematically from a broad picture rather looking at individuals.
Look at the percentage of top athletes (say world top 100) in a range of sports and work out the percentage of them that are transsexual. Compare that to the general populous of the same age demographic and the same nation distribution. If they are appreciably more in the elite sport sample then you have a problem.
Look at the percentage of athletes that make it to the top (say top 100 again) of both male and female sport that are transsexual. If it is appreciably more in female than male sport then you have a problem.
If being transsexual has no benefit in female sport then there should be no relationship between good at sport and being transsexual. Map the world rankings of transsexual athletes and turn into percentiles of participants. If they are randomly distributed through the ability level then no problem but if they cluster near the top of the rankings then you do.
Surely there is an advantage and it only works one way in sports. ie you're not going to get a trans male competing on a level in the mens classes no matter how much testosterone they take as they'll almost certainly still be at a physiological disadvantage in the same way Rachel McKinnon is at a physical advantage. Lets face it she certainly doesn't look like any kind of athlete in that picture and she's significantly bigger (taller/heavier) than either of the others on the podium.
I'd say it's simply not fair but it seems that's not an acceptable reason to stop it happening, because whatever. . .
<div class="bbp-reply-author">legend
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
Recent one along those lines https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-45825838/a >
Honestly I think this one is a pretty simple balance of harm/risk issue. Trans people in prison are subjected to pretty horrendous risks even if not transitioning, whereas the risk to female inmates from rapist trans people is small, and far easier to mitigate (in exactly the same way as you would handle a male rapist of men in a male prison- lots of people in prison are risks to other inmates). Putting someone that identifies as a woman in a male prison is pretty much inhuman imo whereas the reported case there is afaic a failure of prison management and nothing else.
Sport is a bit different I think but.. You know what, it's never an equal playing field, never has been. Some people have physical/mental advantages, some come by them by geneticroulette and I don't personally see that this is any different. Maybe we should have banned Jonah Lomu from men's rugby for being freakishly fast and massive, that wasn't fair on poor old Mike Catt. Let alone puny me who's been denied my fair chance to compete in men's tennis at the top level purely because by an accident of genetics I'm shite at tennis. Some sports have handicaps and weight classes, some have age classes, it's no different imo. Why should I have to race against bloody Crawford Carrick-Anderson just because of age?
But I think gender identification is where it gets truly messy. I mean, I'm alright at bikes but I'm an eternal midpacker in mens'. If I could race as a woman purely by saying "I identify as a woman" then I'd go from also ran to occasional podiumer (well, except for all the other dudes that suddenly identify as women). And that I think isn't OK, it has to be honest at the very least.
The comment "there's no point in women competing" is absolute shite though and I think anyone who supports that comment wants to take a look at themselves. It's not just that it's obviously not true, it's that you can't reasonably believe it's true.
If nothing else it's bloody interesting and it'll get more so. Same with disabled athletes, the legs/blades thing is very interesting as is mental disability. And how does trad sport deal with transhuman/posthuman people? How do you win at chess against a dude with a microchip in his head? People do stuff that's way more complicated than gender.
Maybe we should have banned Jonah Lomu from men’s rugby for being freakishly fast and massive, that wasn’t fair on poor old Mike Catt. Let alone puny me who’s been denied my fair chance to compete in men’s tennis at the top level purely because by an accident of genetics I’m shite at tennis.
I was going to tell you that you were being a bit obvious and simplistic here, but let's be more constructive and take the example of Jonah - only let's imagine he decided mid-career that he should have been born a woman.
So he begins his transition - we're all very supportive and understanding hopefully, admiring his bravery - but hang on, now he says he'd like to continue his playing career in women's rugby. And a lot of the women players seem alarmed - are we still cool with it? I mean it's just genetic difference, they could have been born like him if things had worked out differently.
Look at the percentage of top athletes
I'm not sure if the problem is at the top of the sport, I think the main issue issue is with grass roots contact sports. In my workplace 5pc of the staff are trans women, and men far outnumber women as a whole. If we had a work female rugby team cis-women wouldn't get a look in. Would the cis-women want to be on the team or play against other teams dominated by transwomen? I think that's what the poster who used the word 'destroyed' meant.
It's time to ignore gender and sex which are difficult to define and go on chromosomes which is easy to define. (Although a bit confusing when you have the XX XV and the XY XV.) 😀
How are you defining “sex”?
Without wanting to get drawn into an internet argument, here is my reasoning.
Sex - when born an infant is assigned a Sex based on a string of criteria. This process is well documented for both legal and the infants personal records. It defines what they are.
Legally at that point in time they are either Male or Female. There isn’t an in between nor is there a category “alien” nor “unknown”
That basis for defining Sex has been in place for a century or so, it’s been challenged in courts around the world and yet still forms the basis of identifying a human beings Sex.
At that point in time.
Records are kept, legal status is proven.
In today’s society we have evolved to accept Sex when born as the basis for identifying a human into two groups, male & female.
Society and personal freedom has changed to accept Sex as born with can be changed both medically and psychologically. That’s proven, proven in courts.
That doesn’t take away the fact that at point of birth the person in question was either male or female, and now may have changed or accepted that they no longer want to be the Sex they were born with. That’s their choice, there is proven medical procedure and court approval for the accepted methods of changing Sex.
Medically there are significant differences between male and females, again proven medically and legally for identifying a persons Sex.
Medically Males are genetically different to Females and vice versa.
Those statements underpin my thoughts on identifying Athletes being either Male or Female at point of birth. That forms the selection criteria for defining an Athletes Sex for competition.
I won’t get drawn into any persons life changing choices decision to change from one Sex to Another, that is entirely their choice and the Medical process and legal process is clearly defined for that to both happen and be recognised and recorded.
It doesn’t change the fact that at point of birth the person was either Male or Female, and that’s my selection criteria for identification.
This is an interesting read:
Medically there are significant differences between male and females, again proven medically and legally for identifying a persons Sex...
So how would you classify someone who has both ovaries and testes, genital ambiguity or does not have XX or XY chromosomes? The UNHCR says that intersex individuals "do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies".
We don't have rules that are "proven medically and legally" for assigning gender at birth. We have some simplistic conventions that classify the majority of the population as male or female, and we force intersex people into one of those boxes. Modern science and ethics is revealing that these conventions don't really make sense for everybody.
Sport has not developed a consistent approach to dealing with intersexuality, and transexual people add another layer of complexity to the issue. I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think relying on archaic definitions of birth gender is the solution.
So how would you classify someone who [snip] does not have XX or XY chromosomes?
1 in 1666 people don't have XX or XY chromosomes so you hit that snag far less frequently than with any other definition since 2pc of people are transgender. (if Rachel's numbers are correct, and I'm sure they are.)
Sorting athletes into male/female just doesn't work for all the reasons discussed. Sorting them into XX, XY groups achieves everything that sorting into gender/sex did. It still has flaws but indefinitely fewer flaws, there isn't a better solution.
So how would you classify someone who has both ovaries and testes, genital ambiguity or does not have XX or XY chromosomes?
Turner syndrom is someone who is missing or partially missing an X chromosome. They are sexed as female. There are also people that are XY but because of mutation the genes on the Y chromosome don’t override the female sex genes - we are all female to start with it. Someone who is XXY is male
Tricky innit.
But you have to draw the line somewhere, my proposal is you return to point of origin.
Good discussion topic non the less.
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.
🙄
Rachel
Sorting them into XX, XY groups achieves everything that sorting into gender/sex did.
So, somebody is born female, transitions to male, takes the usual hormones and maybe has some surgery.
This person has XY chromosomes, but with the hormones can recover and train as hard as a typical male. They get to race in the XY group, obviously all hormones are medically approved for their mental health. Can't see a problem at all with this simplification, well done you.
You basically have a far more real problem with differing performance if you do that. You potentially (As per the people saying "yeah I'd say I identified as female to win a women's race." - really?) then end up with women who want to be competitive going to the docs for hormones to make them faster under the guise of being trangender. Those that don't are uncompetitive. How do you deal with that?
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.
That might be more to do with the involvement of blokes in sport in general and this forum in particular than their willingness to express their opinion on things that probably don't directly affect them.
That's the demographic of the forum - mostly blokes - so it's hardly a shock 🙂
And to say that it doesn’t affect them directly so they don’t get an opinion isn’t helpful.
I agree it’s a difficult issue, I don’t have a neatly packaged solution. But if you expect reasonable people who are interested in the debate to stay away, you’ll be left only with the unreasonable ones who have repugnant views and blah them all over the debate because they won’t stay away even if you want them to.
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.
Rachel
Can you see any upside in "a bunch of blokes" having a polite and reasonably open-minded discussion of the issue though?
Do you have anything to add that might offer a different perspective?
The debate is indeed polite and reasonably open-minded, and I'm thankful for that. Doesn't mean there is no irony in debating something of which the vast majority of participants here are unaffected by.
A couple of things have caught my notice:
1) The reference to legally all people are designated male or female at birth. This is no longer true in some countries. Where an ambiguity is evident, some countries are now allowing no sex to be registered until after puberty.
2) The Olympic Committee recently changed their guidelines to not ask for sex but the amount of testosterone in blood. They reduced the limit to (I think) 5 nmol/l. It's very possible for women with XX chromosomes to be around this level of testosterone. People suffering with PCOS are often around this level and that's not even considered an intersex condition.
Rachel
I have a wife and two daughters and I am interested in the arguments around gender recognition on behalf of them. What affects them affects me too.
We "blokes" don't live in a vacuum of "blokeishness", we have wives, mothers, sisters, daughters and nieces, and to suggest that we can have no valuable opinion is actually pretty offensive.
I have to say this discussion is calm and measured compared to the one on Mumsnet, and another one I was unfortunate enough to stumble into.
Yes, it is possible for men to have an opinion on this whether they have wives and daughters or not and/or whether they have any experience direct or otherwise of the issues involved. But having an opinion doesn't necessarily make your opinion right, and we should remember that we don't learn when we are speaking, we learn by listening.
Ok so for me there are three things here:
1. Its track. There are about 5000 medals per meeting as there are so many events. Quadruple that for all the myriad and legion categories at the World Masters, which lets face it, are an income generating event to separate middle-aged people from their cash.
2. Sometimes, in the name of progress in society and moving the discussion along a bit, minor personal sacrifices have to be made, and usually by people who have some innate privilege that isn't their fault. Its a bit like affirmative action in employment.
3. Good for her - and lets hope she isn't being torn apart by trolls on social media.
Think about a similar situation with the genders reversed. Would you insist a trans man on hormone therapy still needs to compete in women's categories? I've heard it gives a noticeable advantage in fitness.
Then there's the women who were born as women but have unusually high testosterone levels or masculine physiques. Are they allowed to compete as women?
It's far too complex a situation to say "trans women need to compete as men" and leave it at that without it coming across as transphobia. It's reasonable to discuss it but there's no one transitioning to win a medal. Perhaps the only real solution is a way of classifying athletes that ignores their gender but I don't know how that would work.
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.
Yes because people can’t form opinions unless they are affected by something. I take it you’ve had issues entering sporting events then.
It needs to be looked at in a fair and consistent manner free from fear of reprisals from those that may be affected.
a quote from way up ....life can be pretty tough already...have a teen daughter who due to bad luck on genetics (1in 100,000 in UK) has an adrenal gland issue that means doesn't naturally produce cortisol - ok but but given the right conditions will produce a stack of testosterone as a last resort byproduct and you can measure this - goes all over the place depending on health and stress and is controlled by taking steroids 3 x a day! good at sport but not big in stature - dwarfism is a consequence avoided by careful dosing/bone density checks - plays state (we currently live in Aus) and has trained with national U21 team - irony is medication requires clearance and have started to get questions - reckon looking at the numbers talked about in athletics then would need to up medication to avoid being possibly labelled a bloke and live with side effects of high doses or just throw in being happy as is doing what she loves without having to argue labels with committees - a bloke with same condition would probably wipe out the competition in many sports and get well paid - he'd be the strong teen giant
This person has XY chromosomes, but with the hormones can recover and train as hard as a typical male. They get to race in the XY group, obviously all hormones are medically approved for their mental health.
That problem already exists. There must already be a process to deal with athletes who need medical treatment with significant performance enhancing side effects - use that process.
Is there irony in pointing out the irony but not expressing an opinion of your own on the matter?
"It doesn’t change the fact that at point of birth the person was either Male or Female, and that’s my selection criteria for identification."
Except that it isn't black or white, and any recent scientific research on this will confirm that. Not only is it possible to be born with both male and female sexual organs, one of the key determinants of male advantage in sport, testosterone levels (and receptiveness to its effects) varies widely across both men and women, let alone anyone with the complications of being born in the grey area.
Most top professional athletes have some kind of genetic advantage compared to the average person. But the difficulty lies in that people who are more genetically male have an advantage in any sports where strength is advantageous vs people who are more genetically female but otherwise very similar. It isn't really an issue in male sports because all genetic advantages are allowed. But in female sport there has to be a point where you deem someone to me non-eligible.
As sport is merely sport, no more, no less, it would seem deeply unfair to all transgender or non-binary people to exclude them from competing in sport in a category that is broadly fair for everyone. Isn't it hard enough not falling into simple male/female categories in life without taking away the fun of sport?
The (ongoing) story behind this powerlifter is an interesting one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janae_Kroc
https://www.instagram.com/janaemariekroc/?hl=en
No-one would choose these hardships, so why should we make it harder for them?
That problem already exists. There must already be a process to deal with athletes who need medical treatment with significant performance enhancing side effects – use that process.
Lionel Messi get's an easy ride over HGH, without treatment he would be 4ft2.
Armstrong (arguable) got a pass for "I only took EPO for my cancer".
Sky (and most of the peleton) and asthma TUE's.
No-one would choose these hardships, so why should we make it harder for them?
Hardship in one area of your life shouldn't entitle you to a free pass in others.
Armstrong (arguable) got a pass for “I only took EPO for my cancer”.
Erm, are we talking about Lance Armstrong? The most-vilified individual in road cycling?
my proposal is you return to point of origin
If you mean gender assigned at birth, Caster Semenya is female, but is currently required to take medication to lower her testosterone levels if she wants to compete. I think you can argue that forcing someone to medically treat their natural state is unfair.
If you do introduce testosterone management for athletes classed as female, why should you not extend that to male competitors? As a "mudguard using pussy" I've almost certainly got lower testosterone than the typical manly STW user. Surely it would be fair for other competitors to dope down to my level in a race?
Totally agree KCR (not about your mudguard use), anyone claiming to have the "right" answer on this should be treated with suspicion - as I'm not sure anyone's sussed it out yet.
Tinkering with people's testosterone levels does seem a bit sinister and re-categorising sport by chromosones isn't really gonna get any traction.
The suggestion made in this thread of having a "women" and an "open" category seems the tidiest solution, though obviously wouldn't please everyone.
Erm, are we talking about Lance Armstrong? The most-vilified individual in road cycling?
Before he was vilified he was a hero.
This issue is nothing to do with intersex people, so I'm not sure why all the debate about various genetic conditions.
It's about whether individuals who are genetically xy and are raised as males with the physical attributes that entails should be allowed to declare themselves female and compete against natal women. Many seem to think that the hardships trans people face mean that women should give up various sex based protections enshrined in law in the name of equality.
Hardship in one area of your life shouldn’t entitle you to a free pass in others.
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.
so I’m not sure why all the debate about various genetic conditions.
possibly: [url] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/04/27/female-athletes-with-naturally-high-testosterone-levels-face-hurdles-under-new-iaaf-rules/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.c0f5777a4bb7 [/url]
some of the debate is very circular problem is dealing with a very wide range of individuals and sort and label so some can win and some can lose
Perhaps the only real solution is a way of classifying athletes that ignores their gender
There is: XX, XY chromosomes. They don't map directly to gender as this thread proves, but they do broadly give a crude assessment of athletic potential which is all separating people into male/female groups ever did.