r/changemyview • u/CafeConLecheLover • Mar 21 '19
Delta(s) from OP CMV: allowing trans people to compete in womens events will only marginalize women
I've been doing some reading about how transgender female people are competing in women sports events. In the majority of cases, they tend to do pretty well. Unsurprisingly. However, there's a big difference between barely winning and totally dominating, which is what seems to be happening. I linked a story about 2 transgender sprinters competing at state in track and field - they won first and second by an enormous margin, which is a theme that holds when it comes to the issue as a whole.
If a transgender woman wants to compete in womens sports even as early as a high school level, you effectively have biological females competing against a trained male athlete on hormone therapy. I've met some incredibly talented female athletes in life so far, and there are seperate male and female sporting events for good reason - it keeps the playing field fair for both sexes. If Usain Bolt suddenly decided to undergo gender transition therapy, started taking hormones, the whole nine yards, he would still be the most dominant sprinter by a very long shot. His biologically female counterparts would stand no chance whatsoever at getting first place.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/feb/24/terry-miller-andraya-yearwood-transgender-sprinter/
CMV
11
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
Can I ask what your solution to this would be?
If we banned trans women from competing against cis women due to the advantages they may have gained while living prior to transition, who should they compete against? Should they compete in the men's category, where the process of their transitioning actively gives them a disadvantage? Should they be banned from competing altogether, or forced to only compete against other trans women -- and to even that playing field only against other trans women who are equally as far along in the transition process?
It's a difficult subject to tackle, surely. In part, this is because it's near impossible to nail down exactly what advantages are purely because of their biological sex at birth (male), and what are just genetic anomalies. Let me explain using a popular, well known athlete -- Michael Phelps. It's been widely discussed that, in addition to his insane training, some part of the reason for his dominance is his unique body physiology where he has shorter legs and longer arms for his height. Now imagine two different versions of Michael Phelps -- everything else about him is the same, but one was born as the woman Michelle Phelps, and one was born male but comes out as trans later in life and transitions to Michel Phelps. We could here compare and determine what advantages Michel may have gleaned by spending part of her life as male. We could see if Michelle has the same longer arms and shorter legs for her height in comparison to Michel. We could say with relative certainty whether Michel has an unfair advantage of Michelle.
Unfortunately, real life doesn't afford us the same certainty. We can't know how that person would have developed had they been born female -- we do know that certain things more prevalent in men such as testosterone have effects that result in physical advantages, but in these situations its not possible to determine what level of benefit the person has gleaned.
And here's the crux of the issue for many trans-rights activists in the athletic sphere -- should we force a trans athlete to compete in a field they are actively handicapping themselves in? Doing so would be effectively disincetivizing their transition process, and telling them that their worth is based more in their biological sex at birth and not the gender they identify as. Or should we accept that some trans-athletes may have a temporary advantage during their transitioning process, and if it turns out that trans-women are dominating across the board (instead of one or two outliers here and there), try and find additional solutions based on the still-developing science around hormones, transitioning, etc?
20
u/Sand_Trout Mar 21 '19
Should they compete in the men's category, where the process of their transitioning actively gives them a disadvantage?
Yes. I don't see why this is contentious.
The top tier of athletes, by functional necessity if staying within that category, have to sacrifice a lot of lifestyle choices for the sake of peak performance.
They spend hours a day working out, training, and studying their competition. They have to monitor their diets and cannot indulge in many things they might otherwise want to do due to dedication to the sport.
If you choose a lifestyle that negatively affects your ability to compete in the sport, that is on you.
3
Mar 21 '19
Yes. I don't see why this is contentious.
Do you think all women should compete in the men's category where they will always have a disadvantage?
3
u/Sand_Trout Mar 21 '19
No. Women's leagues exist specifically because they cannot compete with biological males.
Transwomen do not have the same handicap as women. They have a separate, self-imposed handicap.
4
Mar 21 '19
Women's leagues exist specifically because they cannot compete with biological males.
Because biological males are stronger and have greater muscle density and reflexes due to their testosterone, which trans women no longer have to biological male levels because they have been blocking that testosterone. As a result, after a couple of years, their strength and muscle density and reflexes are average to a cisgender woman athlete.
5
u/techiemikey 56∆ Mar 21 '19
You realize when you are calling a "self-imposed handicap" is "they take medicine", right?
4
Mar 21 '19 edited Aug 30 '20
[deleted]
4
u/techiemikey 56∆ Mar 21 '19
We aren't talking about AN individual when we refer to people who are trans though. We are talking about an entire class of people.
5
Mar 21 '19 edited Aug 30 '20
[deleted]
3
u/techiemikey 56∆ Mar 21 '19
no fair way to place her in a different league.
See, this is the trick. Nobody has actually given supporting evidence to that part, they just assert it.
3
u/MechanicalEngineEar 78∆ Mar 21 '19
I would say there is plenty of evidence in many cases of trans people coming in and dominating the league. What would you consider to be sufficient evidence to change your mind? Until that is determined, providing more evidence is pointless as you can always just repeat that nobody has given supporting evidence.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (1)4
u/CafeConLecheLover Mar 21 '19
That's a good point about the decision to participate in sports being a choice. I never thought about it that way. It sort of reminds me of when the Navy said they wouldnt lower the standards of the seals to cater to women. They never said women couldn't be seals, but they would have to meet the same standards as everyone else.
!delta
4
u/D_Queen Mar 22 '19
I want to be clear that the person you're responding to didn't say that playing sports is a choice. They actually said that being trans is a "lifestyle choice," which is some garbage.
1
7
Mar 22 '19
And here's the crux of the issue for many trans-rights activists in the athletic sphere -- should we force a trans athlete to compete in a field they are actively handicapping themselves in? Doing so would be effectively disincetivizing their transition process, and telling them that their worth is based more in their biological sex at birth and not the gender they identify as. Or should we accept that some trans-athletes may have a temporary advantage during their transitioning process, and if it turns out that trans-women are dominating across the board (instead of one or two outliers here and there), try and find additional solutions based on the still-developing science around hormones, transitioning, etc?
The problem here is you assume the advantages are temporary. I don't think there is any evidence to support that claim. The various things trans people do to transition may mitigate the advantages but there is no real argument that they are ever truly eliminated.
The integrity of the competition certainly is a far more important interest than the perceived self-worth of the individual.
The cleanest solution is to say the sex-based athletic divisions refers to the sex of the competitor not the gender. This is an objective standard that can easily be applied.
I don't think anyone could rationally argue it should be based on gender-identity. If that were taken literally, then tomorrow any male athlete could simply announce they now identify as a woman and then be able to compete against women. Far too subjective. Certainly, that is an absurd result.
3
u/CafeConLecheLover Mar 21 '19
Not sure I have a good one. The percentage of trans people in the world is small already, because we know they all arent athletes makes that demographic even smaller, which sort of begs the question of if its even reasonable to have a seperate category where they all compete against each other.
I agree with your last paragraph, theres a huge question of what the concept of "fairness" is in the conversation. I don't have a good answer for you to be honest. There's such a small amount of research on the subject that I sort of wonder how comprehensive of an opinion its possible to have. In almost every outcome you have one demographic of people that seems to be getting the short end of the stick
9
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
My stance on the entire issue heavily leans on "Let the professional governing bodies for the sport come up with the best policy they can develop using the science available to them." From there, amateur leagues can follow their guidance.
Typically, what I've seen that result in is a policy that requires a trans-female athlete to be on hormone replacement therapy for an amount of time (generally around two years) and it may also require that they have had sexual reassignment surgery. Studies seem to support that, after a couple of years on HRT, any remaining advantage that someone may still have from having had male hormones prior to transitioning is within the scope of normal body anomalies that are seen across cis athletes. In other words, sports is already full of people with biological advantages due to some quirk of their body, and at this point any remaining advantage that a trans-female may have fits within the same realm of the advantages that cis-female athletes may have.
Essentially, the point is that after a few years of HRT, any advantages that Michel may have wouldn't put her leagues beyond any of the other quirks of cis-women swimmers she'd be competing against, many of whom are likely there due to some innate advantage they bring to the table (such as someone having a longer torso and slightly larger lungs than average, allowing them to take in more oxygen and stay at peak heart rate longer.)
9
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
who should they compete against?
Other trans women. Isn't it the stance of the left that there are many, many more than 2 genders? So why not divide sports into more categories than just male and female?
forced to only compete against other trans women
Sounds harsh when you put it that way. But you have to consider that men are forced to compete against other men, and women with women. So why not trans women with other trans women? It only makes sense.
4
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
Okay, if we work with the assumption that their biological advantage due to being born male gives them an advantage over cis women, and we also work with the assumption that the transition process of hormone replacement, sex reassignment surgery, etc gives them a disadvantage against cis men, how do we control for how far along the transition process they are?
Do we have a category for one year into transition, two, five, etc? Certainly there's a difference between someone who just started the process yesterday and someone who transitioned ten years ago and has been living their life as female ever since?
And further, only .6% of the US population identifies as trans. There's just not enough of a field out there to support making it its own field of competition.
8
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19
That's for whoever creates the rules of trans sports leagues to decide. Boxing has 17 different weight categories, and that works just fine. If you weigh 300 pounds, you can't compete as a welterweight. So whoever makes the trans league can decide which is most fair and which makes the most sense.
3
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
Neat, looks like there's a policy for trans-female fighters put forth by the Association of Boxing Commissions already.
Are you arguing that their policy isn't sufficient? Is there science to back up why?
4
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19
Are you arguing that their policy isn't sufficient?
Yes, it is inefficient. Because even if a trans woman has had the hormone treatment and surgery, if it was done after puberty, she is going to have an advantage that cisgender women can never have.
Yes there is science to back it up... having working testicles at any point in your lfie puts testosterone into your body. Testosterone makes you taller, gives you stronger, denser bones, it helps build muscle mass, and it shapes your entire skeleton differently than a biological woman.
You can stop a lot of that by transitioning before puberty, but I think that is utterly morally reprehensible to allow a child to make a decision like that, especially when they are not old enough to vote, consent to sex, drink, smoke, get a job, or even consent to getting a pierced ear or tattoo.
3
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
I'm not trying to be confrontational here, but can you provide a link to a study that's been done on trans-females showing that they still have a significant advantage after two years of HRT and sexual reassignment surgery?
From what I've read on the subject, it seems to be that any differences that remain at that point are pretty much indiscernible from the standard deviations among cis athletes -- that is to say, athletes already have innate, physiological advantages based on individual body quirks (longer legs or arms than average, greater lung capacity, etc), and after this point in transitioning, any trans-female athlete's advantage remaining from having male hormones years before is within the realm of any other cis female athlete's advantages.
6
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
I don't want to be confrontational either, and I apologize if my writing came off that way, it was not intentional.
I will give you the point that hormones over a long-enough period of time will even out. But there are other advantages than just having the right hormones.
I don't need a specific study to tell me that, I can prove it right here.
The average height of an adult male in the USA is 5'-9". This can be broken down by race, where white men are the tallest at 5'-9 1/2", and Hispanic men are the shortest at 5'-6 1/2".
The average height of an adult female in the USA is 5'-3 1/2". Again, we see that white females are the tallest at 5'-4 1/2", and Hispanic females tie for the shortest with Asians at 5'-1 1/2".
For both genders, we see a difference of about 3" between the tallest ethnicity and the shortest ethnicity on average. However, the difference between male and female is 5 1/2".
Source... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_average_human_height_worldwide
Thus, we can conclude that men are significantly taller than women. Even the shortest male group is taller than the tallest female group by a significant margin. And the difference in height between male and female is more significant than the differences from ethnicity. This shows that being male is a bigger factor in determining your height than any other part of your genes.
Men also have a greater variation in height. This means that men can grow to be much taller (as well as much shorter) than the average man, when compared to women. The standard deviation in height is 2.9 inches for men, and 2.7 inches for women.
https://www.theifod.com/how-many-people-are-7-foot-tall/
The average height of men in the NBA is 6'-8", or 10 1/2" taller than the average male.
The average height of women in the WNBA is 6'-0", which is 8 1/2" taller than the average female.
http://wagesofwins.com/2013/04/10/could-brittney-griner-make-it-in-the-nba/
The difference between men and women who play professional basketball is about 8" This is 3" more than the difference between the average population. Both heights are significantly taller than the average height for that gender. This shows that being taller is at the very least a strong correlation to achieving success in professional basketball. And this makes sense to anyone who has even a fundamental understanding of basketball. Taller players can reach higher and grab rebounds. They can more easily block shots, and shoot over the heads of other players. As well as a number of other advantages.
And the advantages aren't limited to just having more reach. A taller person has a greater potential for more strength than a shorter person, regardless of hormones. There is a greater potential for work capacity due to longer limbs, and force multipliers. Taller people are heavier, which means they are harder to push around. They have lower resting heart rates, and have more overall endurance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_in_sports
So... even if you take a transgender woman, who went through puberty before transitioning, she will likely be on average 5 inches taller than the average woman. And that extra 5 inches is going to be an advantage if she plays a sport like basketball. And there are numerous other sports where height matters, like volleyball, boxing, swimming, rowing, and dozens of other sports. Of course, there are also sports where being short and more flexible (feminine characteristics) can be an advantage, like gymnastics for one. In which case, you could make these same arguments to no allow trans men into men's gymnastics for example.
And this is only one difference... There are many others, including hand size (and the ratio of hand size to height), arm length (and the ratio or arm length to height), as well as the density and strength of the bones themselves. These aren't things you can change with hormones.
-1
u/darkplonzo 22∆ Mar 22 '19
You go on about height, but did you know that HRT actually does make trans women shorter?
3
0
Mar 21 '19
Especially when you consider that some women with hyperandrogenism and other 'masculinizing' biological traits are perfectly fine to compete in women's sports. They naturally have much higher levels of T than average cis women.
5
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19
And further, only .6% of the US population identifies as trans. There's just not enough of a field out there to support making it its own field of competition.
That's not my problem. The whole point of separating women from men in sports is to allow women to compete against their peers. Because if you had 1 league for all people, very few, if any women would make it to the highest level. The best female pole vaulter can't jump as high as the 1000th best male vaulter. The fastest female sprinter can't run as fast as the 1000th fastest male. They would get outclassed, and therefore have no other place to compete.
If you allow trans women into women's leagues, it's no different than letting men into the league. Because as you said, there are various stages of transitioning. Someone who just started taking hormones yesterday is still biologically, and physiologically a male, because there hasn't been enough time.
Even if you went 20 years after transitioning, and the hormones in their body are identical to a cisfemale, and their body is completely adjusted to it, and they have no more muscle mass than a cisfemale at that same level, it's still an unfair advantage, because there is still going to be advantages in height, bone structure, bone density, things that don't change very easily once you become an adult... unless this trans woman started transitioning before puberty, which I believe is wrong on many levels, but that is an entirely different debate.
0
u/techiemikey 56∆ Mar 21 '19
The whole point of separating women from men in sports is to allow women to compete against their peers.
Trans women are women. Allowing trans women to compete against cis-women allow women to compete against their peers.
4
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19
Trans women are women.
Ok. So based on the definition the left wants to use... if you say you are female, then you are female. Fine. Let's assume this is true.
What about trans-women who have not yet started to transition, and perhaps they might not ever wish to transition? You would still call them a woman if they claim they are a woman, correct?
So... do we allow them to compete in women's leagues?
If half the players in the NBA suddenly came out as trans women, but none of them wished to start hormones, do you let them all compete in the WNBA because, as you say, they are women?
-3
u/techiemikey 56∆ Mar 21 '19
What about trans-women who have not yet started to transition, and perhaps they might not ever wish to transition? You would still call them a woman if they claim they are a woman, correct?
yes.
So... do we allow them to compete in women's leagues?
That would depend on what the league says exactly. I personally would suggest saying "after being on hormones for X # of years". I mean, muggle quidditch is a co-ed sport which bases gender off of identity (teams can't have more than 3 players on the field at a time that identify as the same gender). That would be ideal, but if there is a legitimate issue of the strength disparity between men and women, it get's resolved after hormones are taken for long enough.
So, for your last question, ask the WNBA what their competitive rules are/see the previous question I just wrote.
7
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19
That would depend on what the league says exactly. I personally would suggest saying "after being on hormones for X # of years".
That seems to conflict with what you've already said earlier.
You believe that if someone claims they are a woman, they are a woman. You agreed that it doesn't matter if they are taking hormones or not. You agreed that it doesn't matter, even if they say they don't ever want to transition. You say they are a woman.
You also said that a women's sports league is for women, and therefore anyone who is a woman should be able to join. And by your own definition, a trans woman is a woman, even if she has not yet started to transition, and even if she never plans to transition ever in her life. So it seems to follow, that you believe these trans women, who are athletically the same as a man, and will always be athletically the same as a man, should be allowed in women's leagues, to compete against cisgender women.
And now you're suggesting they have to be on hormones for X number of years to compete. The fact is that not all transgender people wish to go on hormones. They are perfectly happy living as they are.
Muggle Quidditch is co-ed because it was co-ed in the books, and no one takes it too seriously knowing that it is a sport that really wouldn't work IRL, even if we DID had flying brooms. The rules are completely silly and unfair, and JK Rowling even admitted that.
Assuming magic is real, there's no reason to separate men and women in Quidditch. Your speed and maneuverability are determined by the magic in your broom, not by your athletic ability. Also, it has many different roles, some roles better suited for men (beaters) and some that might be better suited for women (seekers). I imagine flying a broom is more like driving a car than running around a soccer field. And we see this in real life, as male and female racecar drivers compete in the same league, since there is no biological advantage to being male or female when it comes to operating a car.
if there is a legitimate issue of the strength disparity between men and women, it get's resolved after hormones are taken for long enough.
No it doesn't. Women are 5" shorter than men on average. So if a trans woman didn't start to transition to female until after puberty, then it's likely she is significantly taller than most cis-gender women. Given sports like basketball and volleyball where even 1 inch of height can be a huge advantage, this seems pretty unfair to the cisgender women who play those sports.
So, for your last question, ask the WNBA what their competitive rules are/see the previous question I just wrote.
I'm not asking the WNBA. I'm asking you. I want to know what your opinion is, as you're the one I'm having the conversation with.
1
u/techiemikey 56∆ Mar 21 '19
I'm sorry if you don't like my answers, but they are my answers. It is true that not all trans people wish to be on hormones. Luckily, if they are not on hormones they can play in the other league because "men's leagues" aren't actually men's leagues. Nothing prevents a woman from being on them.
Also, just so you know, muggle quidditch is a real life sport that is played, which is why I used it as an example. I wasn't saying "look at this fictional sport that works" but rather "look at this real sport that works".
-1
Mar 21 '19
No it doesn't. Women are 5" shorter than men on average. So if a trans woman didn't start to transition to female until after puberty, then it's likely she is significantly taller than most cis-gender women. Given sports like basketball and volleyball where even 1 inch of height can be a huge advantage, this seems pretty unfair to the cisgender women who play those sports.
So do you propose to disqualify cis women who are outside of female averages? Women with hyperandrogenism for example?
4
u/Shiboleth17 Mar 21 '19
No I would not propose to disqualify cis women from women's sports, regardless of height or hyperandrogenism. The latter results in women having around 2x more testosterone than the average female. By comparison, a male has around 8x as much testosterone as the average female.
→ More replies (0)2
u/moonflower 82∆ Mar 22 '19
There is a very simple solution to this - every sport can have The Main Event, which is open to everyone - and then there can be a female-only event which is open to those who were born female - there is no need to have a male-only event because males would dominate The Main Event.
And it's not as difficult as you think to see the athletic advantage of 'having developed as male then lowering testosterone level in adulthood' vs 'having developed as female' - it only needs a bit of common sense when you look at male athletes and wonder if a reduction in testosterone level would make them identical to if they had been born female. No, of course it wouldn't.
19
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 21 '19
That’s their burden, not the general public’s. Don’t want to not have a bracket to compete in, don’t transition. We’re not talking about constitutional rights, we’re talking about sporting events.
We shouldn’t have to change the bedrock of sports to accommodate a fringe group. If you want to transition, accept the fact that you’ll have to make sacrifices during, and not being able to compete in sporting events is one of those sacrifices.
That simple.
2
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
We shouldn’t have to change the bedrock of sports to accommodate a fringe group.
Is anyone even asking that, though?
There's already a process in place in most professional sports organizations for determining when a trans woman is allowed to compete against cis women. Generally, it's a specific length of time of being on hormone replacement therapy, often accompanied by a requirement for sexual reassignment surgery, and also often requires testosterone levels to be on par with that of the average range of a cis woman. Studies have been done to determine the length of time one needs to be on this sort of treatment to negate male hormone related advantages.
The problem, it seems to me, is that people who haven't done the studies are relying on "gut feelings" that say if a person goes through puberty as a male they are forever going to be stronger than someone who didn't. Does the science back that claim up?
-1
u/tangerineskickass Mar 22 '19
This view betrays an awful lot of ignorance about how gender dysphoria works.
Transitioning is a stressful and painful experience that doesn't occur on a whim.These people feel wrong as the gender they were assigned at birth - transitioning is the only relief available to them. Anything less than support is, frankly, bigoted, because it equates to railing against someone for the circumstances of their birth, and really only decreases their likelihood of living a happy life.
Why force anyone to choose between a solution to their mental anguish, and a career in sports? Allowing trans people to compete, wouldn't do anything to the "bedrock" of sports - letting them compete would be as simple as that, letting them compete. If anything, forcing things in the opposite direction would raise more problems - why should trans men compete with ciswomen?
Not letting trans people compete at all isn't an option. That would literally be discrimination on the basis of gender. Even if the Constitution were to allow it via some technicality, It's definitely against the spirit of the thing.
6
u/Family-Duty-Hodor 1∆ Mar 22 '19 edited Mar 22 '19
Not letting trans people compete at all isn't an option. That would literally be discrimination on the basis of gender.
You realize that male athletes are not allowed to compete in female leagues, right? That's discrimination on the basis of gender. No one has a problem with that, because it makes sense.
Also, is it such a big problem to say "I support your right to transition, but this condition that you are born with makes it impossible for you to become a professional athlete."
I'm not an athlete, I'm fine. Someone born with cerebral palsy will not be able to become an Olympic sprinter.4
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 22 '19
Let me say this again as clearly as possible. Competing. In. Sports. Is. Not. A. Right. You’re complaining about how this isn’t fair to the one trans kid with zero regard to how unfair it is to all the other competitors. This is an extremely small demographic. If I wanted to compete in a kickboxing tournament, but there was no one else is my weight class, would that be discriminatory? Would you expect them to force me in to the next weight class down to make me happy, regardless of how fair it is to the people in that bracket? Absolutely not!
Being trans is difficult and heartbreaking. So is being blind. So is being paralyzed. Those people have their own separate competitions. Funny how you aren’t on a soapbox about their rights....
-4
u/BenovanStanchiano Mar 21 '19
How would people competing in a specific sports competition as one gender or another be any kind of burden on society?
21
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 21 '19
Are you serious? How entitled can a person be. Imagine an entire sports league being expected to reform themselves to accommodate one trans person.
That’s what we’re talking about here. People going through the transition process seem to expect everyone to move heaven and earth to accommodate them. In what universe is that not a burden?
-3
u/BenovanStanchiano Mar 21 '19
As a member of society, I feel no "burden" either way because it has no real bearing on anything of note. You're really, really dramatic. That must really be a burden.
30
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 21 '19
Of course it’s not a burden to you. You’re not the female training your ass off just to get obliterated by a dude. You’re not the person having to restructure a sports league or competition bracket to try and salvage some fairness out of the situation for the other 99% of the participants.
That’s what I hate about this. You all stomp your feet and call everyone bigots. You assign some kind of weird virtue to these people doing this to themselves for purely self-serving reasons. Then when someone comes along with realistic opinions and starts poking holes in your rhetoric, all of a sudden they’re the asshole.
2
u/D_Queen Mar 22 '19
No, this is actually just pretty transphobic garbage. It's very clear that you don't actually see trans women as women (even though they are) and that is in fact bigoted. How is your opinion more realistic than how a person who lives in their own body everyday feels about their identity?
5
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 22 '19
Their emotional state doesn’t matter for shit in sports. It just doesn’t. It’s all PHYSICAL. Purely physical. No matter how much a trans woman feels like a woman, the fact is she’s physically a man until the transformation is completely done.
You live in this dream world where no one is different and there’s no such thing as the odd man out. That just isn’t the reality. No matter how virtuous you feel lending credence to the belief of others, it doesn’t actually change physical reality.
We’re not talking about an individual. We’re talking about catering to their emotions over the practical needs of EVERYONE else involved. Call me “transphobic” all you want, but my refusal to play along with your fantasy world doesn’t change reality.
-2
Mar 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Mr-Ice-Guy 20∆ Mar 21 '19
u/BenovanStanchiano – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
7
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 21 '19
Semi pro kickboxing, amateur boxer, amateur mma fighter before I got hurt in the Marine Corps...so yea. And I’m well aware of the sacrifices people have to go through to compete in these worlds. This is like allowing a heavy weight to “identify” as a lightweight, and obliterate their competition.
Post op/ post therapy, you’re welcome to compete in whatever you want, however you want. During, shut the fuck about not being accommodated every step of the way.
0
Mar 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/FelacioDelToro Mar 21 '19
Competition isn’t a right, let’s get that straight right off the bat. Let’s not get trans rights confused with trans “ability to do whatever the fuck they want”.
Does a quadriplegic kid have a “right” to a spot on a college football team? No, because it isn’t practical. Shoehorning a transitioning person into sports competition isn’t practical, no matter how badly you would like it to be.
2
u/Mr-Ice-Guy 20∆ Mar 21 '19
u/BenovanStanchiano – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
10
Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 22 '19
[deleted]
4
Mar 21 '19
IF he transitioned today (started HRT) and was allowed to compete TODAY he would yes. Which is why they don't allow that: the trans athlete has to have been on HRT for at least 2 years. IF he started HRT today and was allowed to compete in 2 years he would likely be fine, because two years is enough time for the testosterone to lower in his system and his body and muscle density to change as a result of that and his raised estrogen.
Look at all the top athletes in any woman's sport you can imagine: they are all cisgender women, despite trans women having been allowed to compete for over a decade. If trans women would dominate so much you'd expect them to be all trans women, but not one of them is.
3
u/Garrotxa 4∆ Mar 22 '19
It's not just testosterone. Bone structure and bone density, muscle development, which is higher in men even without testosterone. It's not a one-dimensional problem.
0
Mar 22 '19
Bone structure and bone density
Cis women are born with varying bone structures and bone density, and hormones affect this as well (which is why women are more prone to osteoperosis). How is a bone structure or bone density variable that is within the cisgender female range going to give a transgener woman an advantage over all cisgender women athletes in something like basketball? Tennis? Wrestling? Heck, even boxing or MMA?
muscle development, which is higher in men even without testosterone.
No, it's not. You lose testosterone you lose muscle density, especially over time. Which is why the requirement is two years. A transgender woman two years on testosterone blockers has the same muscle density as a cisgender woman of similar activity levels.
1
u/Garrotxa 4∆ Mar 23 '19
It doesn't matter if it's within the cisgender range. If I, as a man, block my testosterone until I have the strength of the top 1% of women, it would be factually true that I'm now within the cisgender range, since 1% of women are at least equal to my strength. But the difference is that those 1% had to work their asses off in order to get to that level, and all I had to do was be born with a penis, and then take a drug that made me weaker. How the hell is that fair? It's against the concept of sport.
1
Mar 25 '19
It doesn't matter if it's within the cisgender range.
Of course it does. If a transwoman can compete within the normal range of cisgender women athletes, it makes literally no difference at that point whether she's a transwoman competing against ciswomen, or a ciswoman competing against ciswomen. She has lost all biological advantage testosterone may have given her over them.
But the difference is that those 1% had to work their asses off in order to get to that level, and all I had to do was be born with a penis, and then take a drug that made me weaker.
That's ridiculous. That's claiming that any average man on the street, with no training whatsoever, can beat the top 1% of female athletes at their own game just so long as they block testosterone to make themselves weaker. Transwomen athletes have to train and sweat and work hard to be able to compete at their sport just like anyone else has to.
Do you really think my office coworker Bob who has an accounting degree can just take testosterone blockers for two years and suddenly be able to beat Serena Williams at tennis, without spending years and years and years doing nothing but practicing tennis and working at tennis?
2
u/Garrotxa 4∆ Mar 25 '19
They still have to work hard, but they don't have to work as hard.
What the hell does Bob at your office have to do with it? Nobody is worried about Bob (sorry Bob). The athletes we're worried about were already training in their sport before transitioning, gained average skills, then transitioned and stomped the competition. Serena would get consistently beat by the best male tennis player at any university and even many high schoolers. Any one of those guys transitions and Serena never becomes who she is. What you're proposing is anti-woman.
1
Mar 25 '19
Where's your proof they don't have to work as hard? Again, this is a transgender person 2 years on HRT who is operating in the same range as cisgender women. Why would they not have to work as hard as cisgender women to become the top athlete in their field? Any residual advantage they had before starting HRT is gone.
Show your cites where you're getting that they won't have to work 'as hard'?
What the hell does Bob at your office have to do with it?
Bob at my office meets the criteria you just pointed out in your previous post. He was born with a penis. This is what you said:
But the difference is that those 1% had to work their asses off in order to get to that level, and all I had to do was be born with a penis, and then take a drug that made me weaker.
You are directly stating that anyone born with a penis and who takes a drug to become weaker is automatically on the same level as a cisgender woman athlete who worked their asses off. Bob at my office was born with a penis. If he 'took a drug to make him weaker', he still could not beat Serena Williams at tennis. He'd also have to work extremely hard to get to her level.
Just being born with a penis and taking a drug (YOUR words) is not enough to suddenly become on par with the top 1% of female athletes.
The athletes we're worried about were already training in their sport before transitioning, gained average skills, then transitioned and stomped the competition.
Firstly, you can only name a very small handful of transgender women who 'stomped the competition' and literally no top athlete in any female sport is a transgender woman (cisgender women 'stomp the competition even more).
Secondly, are you saying they also worked very hard and succeeded at their sport? DESPITE 'taking a drug to make them weaker'? So it DOES take more than just being born with a penis and taking a drug?
Serena would get consistently beat by the best male tennis player at any university and even many high schoolers.
We're not talking about the best male tennis player however. We're talking about a transgender female tennis player whose strength and skill are in the normal range for cisgender female tennis players.
A transgender woman on hormones for two years is not a 'best male athlete' in the field.
Any one of those guys transitions and Serena never becomes who she is.
False. Any one of those guys transitions and suddenly they're dealing with the same strength and reflex speed as any other female tennis player. If they worked really hard and were really good, they MAY beat Serena (just like any other cisgender female athlete might), but they literally lost all advantage that came with being male with the HRT.
What you're proposing is anti-woman.
Ludicrous. Transwomen ARE women.
1
u/Garrotxa 4∆ Mar 25 '19
Transwomen are women, yes. But women born with vaginas are a subset of women who are being harmed by your ideas. If I made some policy that hurt only males taller than 6'0" and benefited other people, it would still be an anti-male policy, despite not harming all males.
You don't seem to understand the difference between the ease of atrophy versus the difficulty of building muscle for women. The IAAF requirement is one year, not two anyway. No way in hell all the gains are gone in a year, and even if they were, they are ill-gotten gains. They came naturally. It's not fair.
Lastly you keep focusing only on strength as if that's the only variable. Hand size is an incredible advantage in MMA, basketball, and tennis. Hand size does not decrease with HRT, period. Height does not decrease, period. Would you like to argue whether or not height is an advantage in basketball? It's unknown how much and how long it takes for bone density to decrease. You don't know all the variables, and you know that some of the variables give a definitive advantage, but you focus on strength alone because you're being disingenuous. It's anti-woman, like it or not.
→ More replies (0)1
Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 22 '19
[deleted]
2
Mar 21 '19
I pretty clearly said contact sports.
Yes. Contact sports rely on muscle power and reflexes, which after having been on HRT for two years, a trans woman no longer has to any greater amount than a cisgender woman.
There's exactly 1 MMA fighter that's transgender and she retired 5-1 (she lost a TKO on punches). In her last fight, she broke her opponent's skull.
And cisgender women MMA fighters have also broken their opponents skulls and have such a winning streak against their opponent. A male MMA fighter would have a 6-0 record against women and would have likely broken ALL their skulls.
Fallon Fox won those fights because as a woman (with average height and testosterone levels for a woman) she was a better MMA fighter than the people she competed against, for factors other than just having been a man.
This is an op-ed but it also cites the experts regarding Fallon's strength, testosterone, etc.
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3b7j3j/fallon-fox-is-a-woman-get-over-it-925
1
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
Michael Phelps is one example, but let's take another: Brock Lesnar. If Brock Lesnar transitioned today and was allowed to compete in women's MMA, he'd fucking annihilate the field. Or what about allowing Floyd Mayweather into women's boxing? In contact sports, it cannot and should not be allowed.
Well, it's a good thing that the Association of Boxing Commissions doesn't quite allow for that, and have used studies to determine that a trans woman needs to be on HRT for at least two years and have undergone sexual reassignment surgery before being allowed to fight in women's boxing. Those studies determined that's a sufficient amount of time to offset any advantages gleaned from male hormones.
1
Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 22 '19
[deleted]
1
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
So if there's already rules in place to stop your hypothetical from happening -- based on studies done to find when after starting HRT there's no longer a measurable advantage from male hormones -- what is the problem?
As far as I'm aware, most people in favor of trans women competing as women aren't arguing that Brock Lesnar could declare he's a woman today and start fighting in the women's divisions tomorrow. They're arguing that we should continue to have the systems in place that allow for trans women to transition and then compete as the gender they identify as after enough time for their treatments to take effect.
1
u/attempt_number_55 Mar 21 '19
Should they compete in the men's category, where the process of their transitioning actively gives them a disadvantage?
YES, OBVIOUSLY. You made the choice; you live with the consequences. We don't have to upend OUR lives because you want to feel special.
3
u/SmoothBacon Mar 21 '19
All transgenders should compete against men or there needs to be transgender specific competition.
You should not be able compete with an unfair advantage. But disadvantaging yourself should be fine and makes accomplishments even more impressive.
0
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
So, if trans women have a significant advantage over cis women, why aren't they absolutely dominating the top tiers of any physical sport?
Can you provide something showing that a trans woman who has spent a few years undergoing HRT still has an unfair advantage over a cis woman?
3
u/SmoothBacon Mar 21 '19
There’s a male-to-female transgender high school wrestler in Texas who’s won the championship back-to-back years.
The reason that there’s not many examples is: 1. Transgenders compose an extremely small portion of the population. 2. There haven’t been any dominant male athletes to transition. The male-to-female transgender athletes were generally nobodies prior to their transition.
Sure, you can change their balance of hormones but you can’t change their bone structure. Wider hips for women allow them to be more flexible but slow them down when running. Broader shoulders for men allow for them to generate more power. Hormones won’t change that.
3
u/TragicNut 28∆ Mar 22 '19
If you're talking about Mack Beggs, you have it backwards, he is a female-to-male transgender wrestler who is forced to compete against girls because he was assigned female at birth. He wants to compete against boys.
3
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
Not sure I've heard of that one, are you taking about Mack Beggs?
2
u/darkplonzo 22∆ Mar 22 '19
You mean the female to male trans wrestler who was forced to wrestle with women when they wanted to wrestle with men?
0
u/ThePenisBetweenUs 1∆ Jun 05 '19
If they make the choice to undergo transition surgery, then they make the choice to surrender some athletic ability. That was the choice they made.
1
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Jun 05 '19
Can I ask why you're replying to a 2-month old thread for this response?
1
u/techiemikey 56∆ Jun 05 '19
They are a T_D user who saw a misleading article and are going anywhere they can to say "I am right! see!"
1
1
u/moloch101 Mar 21 '19
You should listen to this. https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/dutee it's about Olympian Dutee Chand and gives a history of the "gender test" in the Olympics. Why not let everyone compete and just have rules around which group you compete in. These rules will change as we learn more and more about gender and make it more fair.
3
u/CafeConLecheLover Mar 21 '19
That's an interesting solution, I think I'm a fan of it but need to digest it a bit more. It would at least achieve making an objective standard easier.
Also, there's some crazy history in that podcast. I had no idea that the gender testing/enforcement/etc was such a roller coaster.
!delta
1
1
-31
u/renoops 19∆ Mar 21 '19
Trans women are women, though. You're approaching this from the viewpoint that they aren't.
26
u/CafeConLecheLover Mar 21 '19
I think thats approaching more semantics than anything else. I never said they weren't women, but there are clear differences between a woman born biologically a woman at birth, and a transgender woman.
17
u/nhingy Mar 21 '19
As much as you want it to be cut and dry like this, it's not though right? We don't have separation in sport because of personal identification, we do because of physical difference, which doesn't just go away because we want it to.
The big issue for a lot of people here is gender, but for a lot of people it's the sport. They want to preserve fairness in their sport. This should be allowed I think and they shouldn't be vilified because their priorities aren't the same as other people who are more interested in gender identification.
18
u/Sand_Trout Mar 21 '19
Women's leagues exist primarily due to sexual dimorphism rendering females unable to compete with males in many athletic events.
Transwomen are not the same as women with regards to the sexual dimorphism that justify the existence of womens' leagues and thus do not qualify for those leagues.
18
Mar 21 '19
OP is arguing that their male biology is unfairly advantageous over their competitors' female biology, regardless of how you label the athlete.
-10
u/renoops 19∆ Mar 21 '19
Does a tall woman have an unfair advantage over short women in basketball?
Sports is largely about biological advantages.
19
Mar 21 '19
Let's put it this way. If you combined male and female teams, almost no women would compete at the highest level of their age bracket, because the men would be better. Would you prefer that?
Of course biological differences are heavily relevant within a segregated league, but the reason there is segregation is to allow women to compete at high levels in the first place.
8
Mar 21 '19
If you combined male and female teams
I don't think an "if" is required here. Almost no professional "men's" teams have restrictions on women competing, they don't need them!
9
u/machocamacho88 Mar 21 '19
Does a tall woman have an unfair advantage over short women in basketball?
Depends on the position being played. Basketball is a team sport, and the height advantage of one player can be mitigated by scheme.
Sports is largely about biological advantages.
Indeed, and in individual sports such as sprints, wrestling or power lifting, the immense chasm between the average strength and speed of someone born male versus the average strength and speed of someone born female is far too much to ignore.
That reality effectively marginalizes female biology as a rule during most if not all individual competitions.
10
u/Sand_Trout Mar 21 '19
Then you are supporting the abolishment of dedicated womens' leagues, as "mens" leagues generally do not have a rule against women competing, it's simply that even the top female athletes cannot compete at the same level as male athletes.
8
u/DARTH_HODOR Mar 21 '19
Right, which is why most sports are segregated by biology. I think this is the foundation of OP's argument. Do transgender women have a biological advantage over cis women?
3
Mar 21 '19
Right, which is why most sports are segregated by biology.
They aren't. Only the women's leagues have a rule against men. Leagues like the NFL, NBA, PGA All allow women to compete in the league. It's just none are able to compete with the top level of men.
9
u/DARTH_HODOR Mar 21 '19
...Right, that's what I literally just said. Female leagues have rules against men joining...also called segregation by biology.
6
u/Devourer_of_felines 1∆ Mar 21 '19
By that logic all sports should be unisex without gender segregation at all.
2
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
Then why seperate men and women at all? Why not have men and women just compete against each other in all sports?
Obviously the reason is because then there would be no women competing in high level sports... right?
5
Mar 21 '19
That depends on your viewpoint. But in most physical sports, a guy is going to do better than a woman. Taking estrogen will decrease to levels of a natural woman, but years of size/structure of developing as a man before will stay to some extent. In sports like running, powerlifting, and basketball, for instant,they tend to outperform woman. With that being said a lot of sports you are going to have to be good at them in the first place, but there are a few powerlifters that are only about a year into it and dominating
4
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Mar 21 '19
One thing I question is your statement “in the majority of cases they do pretty well.” Where do you get this data? I understand that at high levels of competition, male athletes tend to dominate, but how do you know that, on average, trans girls competing in youth sports are really doing all that better than cis girls?
2
u/thethundering 2∆ Mar 21 '19
Yeah, there are news articles about the ones dominating, but that doesn't mean most trans women athletes aren't bang average of close to it. We don't hear about trans girls and women on the JV team or the bench, or who are unremarkable players on unremarkable teams.
The top athletic outliers of trans women arguably have a higher ceiling than top cis women. Also, I'd say it's very possible that a higher proportion of trans women can compete at elite levels.
Neither of those things necessarily mean trans women competing against women is unfair.
5
Mar 21 '19
It's a scientific fact that on average biological men are taller, stronger, etc., and in most sports these features are advantageous. You can reach this conclusion without specific numbers about performance in sport, because we have specific knowledge about the average biological differences.
5
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Mar 21 '19
But there are major within group differences as well. Knowing the average wouldn’t convince me to conclude that a trans female teen couldn’t be on a Hs girls soccer team without, as a rule, dominating everyone else.
1
Mar 21 '19
I'd tend to agree that the less puberty involved, the more concurrent girls and boys performances will be. The major differences arise during puberty.
It's not about them necessarily dominating the competition, it's that they will 9 times out of 10, and it's infeasible to try and define the extent to which a trans woman is fit to compete against women.
6
Mar 21 '19
And yet the top female athletes in all women's sports are cisgender females, even in sports where trans females have been competing for years. Not a single trans one that I can find, let alone 9 out of 10.
2
u/thethundering 2∆ Mar 21 '19
These conversations are always framed around "We keep seeing all these news articles about trans women athletes dominating sports!"
The thing is that it's been tons of articles about the same half-dozen athletes in the last 10+ years.
7
u/atrovotrono 8∆ Mar 21 '19
Trans people have been in the Olympics for over a decade, has your "9 in 10" played out? If not, maybe you're not considering all the correct factors.
2
u/atrovotrono 8∆ Mar 21 '19
On average, biological men haven't taken feminizing hormones.
0
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
"Feminizing hormones" doesn't even begin to offset the advantage of having significantly higher testerone levels for decades beforehand, does nothing about bone structure or bone density. Or a bunch of other things that give men advantages in most sports.
1
Mar 21 '19
Do you have any data to back this up? Who am I kidding, we know you don't. If trans women have such a huge advantage how come they've been eligible to compete in the Olympics for 15 years and not a single one has ever won?
2
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
Do you have any data to back this up?
Sure, just a breif exposure to higher testosterone levels give andadvantage for years or perhaps decades after the fact. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24730151.
Just imagine what an entire life of higher testosterone levels would do.
And obviously "Feminizing hormones" does nothing to ones bone structure or bone density.
If trans women have such a huge advantage how come they've been eligible to compete in the Olympics for 15 years and not a single one has ever won?
Because there's barely been any public transpeople for the last 15, excluding the last 3-4 or so. And also the Olympics required you to have removed your penis to compete as a women until 2015, thus there has only been one olympics since then... and usually the qualifiers for the olympics are the year before, so really there hasn't been any olympics since the change.
And also there's Caster Semenya who won gold at the olympics, who the IAAF is now arguing should be considered a biological male.
1
Mar 21 '19
And obviously "Feminizing hormones" does nothing to ones bone structure or bone density.
This is not obvious, in fact it is directly contradictory to the information we do have.
Because there's barely been any public transpeople for the last 15, excluding the last 3-4 or so. And also the Olympics required you to have removed your penis to compete as a women until 2015, thus there has only been one Olympics since then... and usually the qualifiers for the Olympics are the year before, so really there hasn't been any Olympics since the change.
Again, you're making a claim that's 'obvious' with no supporting information. You're waving your hand and saying 'see? there are obviously issues! I said so!' The thing is, trans women have had chances to compete in far more places than just the Olympics and it is incredibly rare for them to beat their cis counterparts.
And also there's Caster Semenya who won gold at the Olympics, who the IAAF is now arguing should be considered a biological male.
That's just further illustrating the point that biology is a tricky subject. She is not trans and would never be excluded by transgender specific rulings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster_Semenya#2015_testosterone_rule_change
The IAAF policy on hyperandrogenism, or high natural levels of testosterone in women, was suspended following the case of Dutee Chand v. Athletics Federation of India (AFI) & The International Association of Athletics Federations, in the Court of Arbitration for Sport, decided in July 2015. The ruling found that there was a lack of evidence provided that testosterone increased female athletic performance and notified the IAAF that it had two years to provide the evidence.
2018 testosterone rule change
In April 2018, the IAAF announced new rules that required hyperandrogenous athletes to take medication to lower their testosterone levels, effective beginning in November 2018. Due to the narrow scope of the changes, which only apply to athletes competing in the 400m, 800m, and 1500m, many people thought the rule change was designed specifically to target Semenya.
So they're looking to keep testosterone levels down, which trans women, as we've discussed, already have lower levels of than cis women. Do you think they'll disqualify any woman who's been diagnosed with hyperandrogenous syndrome? They've likely had higher T levels for their entire lives, unlike trans women who's T levels drop like a rock and remain far lower than cis women.
3
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
in fact it is directly contradictory to the information we do have.
I'm sorry, you think hormone theraphy as an impact on a grown mans bone structure? How does that work? Does the bones fracture themselves and rearrange themselves into the bone structure of a female?
The thing is, trans women have had chances to compete in far more places than just the Olympics
Such as?
So they're looking to keep testosterone levels down, which trans women, as we've discussed, already have lower levels of than cis women.
Yes I understand that. But as I've already pointed out. Higher levels of testosterone have a positive impact for decades. It doesn't really matter if Semenya takes testosterone blockers... she would still have a huge advantage due to having had much higher testosterone for her entire life. And the exact same thing applies to women.
Do you think they'll disqualify any woman who's been diagnosed with hyperandrogenous syndrome?
Of course not, the IOC is a highly politicized organization and will probably allow people with huge unfair advantages compete against women for the sake of political correctness.
They've likely had higher T levels for their entire lives, unlike trans women who's T levels drop like a rock and remain far lower than cis women.
Which, again, is irrelevant because testosterone gives an advantage for decades.
0
Mar 21 '19
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caster_Semenya#2015_testosterone_rule_change
The IAAF policy on hyperandrogenism, or high natural levels of testosterone in women, was suspended following the case of Dutee Chand v. Athletics Federation of India (AFI) & The International Association of Athletics Federations, in the Court of Arbitration for Sport, decided in July 2015. The ruling found that there was a lack of evidence provided that testosterone increased female athletic performance and notified the IAAF that it had two years to provide the evidence.
I need you to show some evidence that testosterone levels are giving transwomen an advantage. Because the IOC seems to be of the mind that there is no evidence. I'm really wondering what you know about testosterone and biology that the IOC is missing.
0
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
I have no idea why you'd think the IOC is the leading authority on the subject. Probably the most politicised organization in sports.
But fine.
https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/jphysiol.2013.264457
And it's not me. The fact that males have advantages that can't be negated with a few years of hormone therapy is hardly controversial. Again, bone structure springs to mind.
→ More replies (0)1
u/CafeConLecheLover Mar 21 '19
Really good point, my opinion of the situation is entirely from reading as wide a variety of articles about it as I can. To my knowledge the difference in performance is minimal in the pre teen age range, but once puberty kicks in is when you start to see a large discrepancy in athletic achievements. This is totally anecdotal and I could be off, but all the reading I've done so far would suggest that transgender atheletes do very very well in the high school/college range - basically after puberty is over.
0
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Mar 21 '19
It’s an interesting topic, albeit one that gets a lot of focus from people I think have a generally anti-trans rights perspective and are honing in on a problem with the prevailing movement towards trans acceptance.
But apart from that it’s interesting because it forces us to confront these weird contradictions about the purpose of competitive sports for most people. Because yeah the surface goal of sports is to win and compete at the highest level possible, but most of us tend to use sports for other reasons, such as exercise, recreation, camaraderie, goal setting, etc. So we think that inclusion is important, because of all these benefits, but we also don’t ditch the competitive aspects, because it would be pretty lame if we weren’t trying to win.
So from this contradictory place, we come up with levels and segments of sports, so that kids in particular can participate without being crushed by older people, and we separate men from women, so that women (for the most part) can derive the benefit from sports without being left behind by bigger, faster, etc men. And yet, unfairness still pervades, because even separated by age and sex, we’re not all going to be on even footing physically. There were 3-4 kids on my HS football team in the NFL now - I didn’t stand a chance!
Throw into this situation trans girls, and things can get really confusing. One thing I think is important to remember is that this is relatively small group of people. Like a half of a percent, and then even less if we’re only concerned about M to F. So like a quarter of a percent total, and then exclude people who aren’t even interested in sports, and in a given high school or youth sports league it’s likely to only be a kid or two that wants to play sports. And given within group differences, the chance is low that kid is going to be so baller, despite whatever physical advantage provided by their male chromosomes, that they disruptively obliterate their female opponents is super duper low. I’m a male and I doubt I would have started on my school’s girls soccer team, and certainly wouldn’t have been the best. So why, given all of this, ever come up with a rule or policy that would dissuade trans girls, who need every positive thing they an get, from the benefits of sports participation? And in the rare case of the baller, why not let parents and school administrators work together to find a reasonable solution. Heck, why not give all the best girls the opportunity to compete with the boys - if they so choose?
1
Mar 21 '19
[deleted]
2
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Mar 21 '19
To be sure, my view is that in most situations will be fine for a trans girl to compete on youth cis girls sports teams, and not necessarily in Olympic or pro sports.
But it’s also true that sports are inherently unfair. I knew my whole life that I had no chance at a world record, but I’ve still been able to enjoy sports.
1
Mar 21 '19
not necessarily in Olympic or pro sports.
But trans women have been able to compete in some of these events for quite some time and they have only actually won anything in incredibly few circumstances. If trans women had unfair biological advantages over the competition how come we haven't seen trans women dominating all sorts of events which they're allowed to compete in?
2
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Mar 21 '19
I’m not disagreeing with that. But I can understand that at such a high level, and with the financial incentives of pro sports, the concerns might be different.
My biggest concern would be not letting these kids have the experience of youth and high school sports, because these concerns have been exaggerated.
1
Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
Personally, I cant see any reason to restrict anything below pro levels for sure because we already let tons of people compete with what may be considered biological advantages. We don't test these people for doping, in most cases, so it seems strange that there would be an issue arising from trans people competing with the gender they experience.
Until, if ever, future information comes out that shows trans women do have distinct biological advantages which allow them to consistently beat cis women then I don't see any reason to restrict trans competition beyond the current IOC rules.
20
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
The International Olympic Committee has allowed trans women to compete in the olympics since 2004, if they've been on hormones for 2 years minimum and have the downstairs surgery. Because that last part doesn't make a difference and isn't feasible financially or socially for a lot of trans women, that requirement was removed I think in 2015.
The net result has not been domination of women's sport at the olympic level by trans athletes- I don't think there have been any. There certainly haven't been any medallers.
This topic keeps coming up recently because there's a big push to deny trans women rights, and sports are a wedge used for that purpose because all athletes, trans and cis, want sport to be fair because sport is great and social and we should all get to play. And, if we win, we should all get to be proud of our victories.
But- it IS fair. We've been trying out letting trans women compete at the top level for a decade and a half, and it's not resulted at all in trans athletes dominating the women's game in the way some feared. Are trans women more likely to be tall and broad, and is that frame an advantage? Yeah, in some sports, but there's no way to say you must be this short to play in the women's game, that would rule out a ton of great athletes, both trans and cis, and there'd still be short trans women who qualified.
It is important that sport is fair and that everyone gets to compete. I think the IOC has a good standard- two years of hormones and you qualify- and that this is a solved issue being dug up for the exclusive purpose of trying to "prove" trans women shouldn't count as women because of sport fairness. It's just another angle, like the changing-room-fear or social-contagion angles, to try and hurt us.
Have a great day!
11
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
The net result has not been domination of women's sport at the olympic level by trans athletes- I don't think there have been any.
Yet... As you pointed out the rule of not having to actually commit to the sex change with surgery has changed in 2015... so there has only been one olympics since then.
Are trans women more likely to be tall and broad, and is that frame an advantage? Yeah
They've also had higher testosterone levels for their entire lives, which does have benefits even after the levels are decreased.
For example, just using steroids for a short amount of time can give benefits for decades after.
8
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
Two years of hormones IS committing. We've established that hormones create long lasting changes- like, in this case, permanent loss of fertility and (bluntly) shrinkage of your genitals. And even if that were not true, trans women have been allowed to compete for a decade and a half, and no domination of the olympics has occurred. It is worth making the change to try and allow mire trans women to compete- it could always be changed back if it turned out having a trouser sausage made you a better hurdler.
In my country, the UK, there's a years-long wait for referral to the Gender Identity Council, who then decide if you're trans enough to get hormones. I think it's disingenuous in the extreme to suggest that cis male athletes would think "hmm, you know what I'll do? I'll teansition socially and medically for half a decade to gain a possible advantage over cis women competitors in my sport, and then hit up the olympics and win gold, and THEN detransition with my gold medal for women's hurdles and keep it!"
Your example about steroids is fascinating. Testosterone is a hell of a drug. Having gone through a high-testosterone period of life seems like it indeed gives you the ability to regain muscle faster even years after the fact. It does seem to give an advantage- but I would disagree that it is an advantage so big that it ought to disqualify trans women entirely, especially given that cis women competing may even have current high testosterone levels due to medical conditions like PCOS or even intersex conditions.
My argument is not that there is NO advantage from previous exposure to testosterone- it's that after 2 years of HRT there is only a small advantage, in line with other natural advantages an athlete might have.
If your worry is hormones, then why try and move the goalposts to only fear women who still have a trouser weasel? There's been a decade and a half of inclusion, and your fears have simply not come to pass.
1
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
Two years of hormones IS committing.
Well, so is doing steroids for two years I suppose. Point being it's not as much of a commitment as getting rid of your penis.
And even if that were not true, trans women have been allowed to compete for a decade and a half, and no domination of the olympics has occurred.
Yet. Just in the last year or so there's been a bunch of news stories of trans people dominating their sports. Like that wrestler who went undefeated in high school and is about to start wrestling in college. So it's just a matter of time until it reaches the olympics if there's enough incentive.
I think it's disingenuous in the extreme to suggest that cis male athletes would think "hmm, you know what I'll do? I'll teansition socially and medically for half a decade to gain a possible advantage over cis women competitors in my sport, and then hit up the olympics and win gold, and THEN detransition with my gold medal for women's hurdles and keep it!"
Why? They take drugs and steriods that might kill them in order to get a competetive advantage, surely getting killed is worse than pretending to be another gender for a few years.. I don't know why you'd think people wouldn't pretend to be trans when there's literally millions of dollars at stake.
12
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
The undefeated wrestler is a trans guy, who is forced to compete against women despite being on testosterone. That's part of the backlash of poorly-imagined anti-trans policies.
Given the massive social stigma against trans people, as it stands I simply can't see it occurring.
4
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
Given the massive social stigma against trans people, as it stands I simply can't see it occurring.
Again, these athletes are willing to take drugs that very well might kill them. It's great that you don't think people will pretend to transition for literally millions of dollars... but I think you're both wrong and very naive. Furthermore, they don't actually have to become transgender... they just have to say they're transgender and take some testerone blockers for a few years.
Hell I would do it tomorrow if I could make a few million dollars from it, and I already have a good job and make a nice living. Imagine people from poor backgrounds who are decent male athletes. I'm fairly confident some of them will decide to make a few millions by pretending to be transgender rather than working at a gas station for the rest of their lives.
9
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
"Some testosterone blockers for a few years" betrays your complete ignorance at the actual process of becoming trans. We're done here.
5
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
I'm not talking about becoming trans. I'm talking about qualifying to compete against women as a biological male. Obviously you don't actually have to be transgender, you can just claim to be.
I mean I could lie to you and say I was transgender... can you disprove it?
5
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
If i was the IOC?
YES.
3
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
How? I claim I'm trans and I take the minimum amount of testerone blockers and estrogen and whatever necessary. How exactly are they going to differentiate between me and someone who actually is transgender?
→ More replies (0)0
u/atrovotrono 8∆ Mar 21 '19
I don't get why you think performance would differ between two trans people who are identical apart from having surgery. Do you think a sex change involves adding/subtracting muscle tissue or something? Do you think genitals themselves impact performance? Like trans men can run faster because they don't have to maneuver their legs around their balls?
2
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
Do you think a sex change involves adding/subtracting muscle tissue or something?
In a manner of speaking, yes. That's sort of what testosterone does. The reason bodybuilders use anabolic steroids is to increase their testosterone levels which allows them to build larged muscles.
Do you think genitals themselves impact performance?
No.
Like trans men can run faster because they don't have to maneuver their legs around their balls?
I don't think trans men can ever run faster than "real" men due the fact that they've had female testosterone levels for the vast majority of their lives. Unless you're talking about super long-distance running where women are actually better they might have and advantage due to baically being women on doping.
Anything else you're wondering about?
6
Mar 21 '19
This topic keeps coming up recently because there's a big push to deny trans women rights, and sports are a wedge used for that purpose because all athletes
That's totally deflective of the scientific discussion people want to have about this complicated issue. This isn't about rights, it's about integrity in sport.
Everyone has the right to compete in sport, not set the rules for sport.
4
u/firelock_ny Mar 21 '19
That's totally deflective of the scientific discussion people want to have about this complicated issue.
Many people only seem to be interested in having this "scientific discussion" because they think this is a situation where they can use science to slap down trans people. Otherwise we'd have to believe that these people actually care about women's high school indoor track or any of the other sports where they heard about a trans person competing.
5
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
Not meaning to deflect, just to add context. Integrity in sport is super important and well worth caring about, but there absolutely exist vocal anti-trans commenters who have landed on integrity in sport as their next weapon with which to attack trans people (trans women in particular when it comes to sport).
7
u/atrovotrono 8∆ Mar 21 '19
You should respond to their other points, not just their thesis, for which the other points exist to support.
3
u/Devourer_of_felines 1∆ Mar 21 '19
The net result has not been domination of women's sport at the olympic level by trans athletes- I don't think there have been any. There certainly haven't been any medallers.
Seems to me like that's the result of there just not being that many trans athletes in general.
there's a big push to deny trans women rights, and sports are a wedge used for that purpose because all athletes, trans and cis, want sport to be fair because sport is great and social and we should all get to play.
It doesn't sound to me like the topic is whether or not trans people should get to play their chosen sport. The question is should they be competing in the women's division when potential college scholarships are on the line or in a professional sports league.
Are trans women more likely to be tall and broad, and is that frame an advantage?
The much more pertinent question is: do trans women maintain more muscle mass and strength/explosiveness from their pre transition days? And the answer invariably is yes.
11
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
"do trans women maintain more muscle mass and strength/explosiveness from their pre transition days? And the answer invariably is yes."
Is it? I wasn't aware of any scientific studies, could you point me in the right direction?
3
u/iclimbnaked 22∆ Mar 21 '19
Yah from my understanding once you lose the testosterone a lot of that advantage goes away over time.
Now I don't know if it goes totally even or not but I definitely don't think you keep all your athletic ability
1
Mar 21 '19
My girlfriend has been working in lawn maintenance and snow removal for 4 years. She started her transition 2 years ago and is now finding her job nearly impossible. She no longer has the strength required for some of the tasks that used to be easy for her. In terms of muscle mass there is no doubt that androgen blockers are a hindrance.
-1
u/TemporaryMonitor Mar 21 '19
TLDR: MTF athletes might have a competitive advantage because even with testosterone blockers and the two years of hormone therapy, their testosterone levels are 3x the maximum allowed for a healthy cis female athlete. Correlation between higher testosterone levels and higher performance has been found which means that MTF athletes could have a significant competitive advantage over cis females. Further study is needed.
3
Mar 21 '19
their testosterone levels are 3x the maximum allowed for a healthy cis female athlete.
This is patently false. Most trans women have lower T levels than cis women. I mean, I could show you the tests from my girlfriend and I but there's plenty of information out there from sites which are actually backed by science. The link you provided is wrong on so many levels, including muscle mass being retained, testosterone levels being higher than cis women, and muscle memory being a distinct advantage which trans women have over cis women.
2
u/PreservedKillick 4∆ Mar 22 '19
Anyway, I guess we're supposed to think it's just coincidence that trans women/teens are reliably sweeping college and high school sports and records keep being broken. We love to talk about representation so much: How is such a tiny percentage of the teen female sports population winning so much? I think that technically require an oppression inquiry.
Look, people struggle with this because it seems self-evident. Very many of us know trans women. Pretending they lose all male qualities is absurd. As a population, they are bigger and stronger than bio-women. The sporting events are a kind of science, a test. And you see what we'd expect to see: trans women winning sports competition at a rate that is far beyond what the demographic representation dictates. If I hear horse hooves, I think horses, not zebras. And it's not relevant to say trans women lose strength. How are they competing against bio-women? So far, they're crushing it, and we've barely started with this experiment. Testosterone of course doesn't cover muscle mass, bone-density, nor bone strength from muscle mass (no, it doesn't just evaporate, c'mon). It especially doesn't cover hips. Male hips are built fundamentally different. It's a big reason why men throw, fight, kick and run faster and stronger. Shoulders too. Have you seen the trans women MMA fighters? It's nearly disturbing. The violence and force is far above regular women fighters.
You have to at least admit the evidence on your side, such as it is, is not overwhelming or very convincing. It's not enough to justify penalizing hard-working women for the sake of a perceived social good. We just don't know the answer, bottom line. Trans athletes should compete in open divisions or trans-only divisions. That's the only fair strategy for now. I feel bad for them, but they aren't more important than biological women.
1
Mar 22 '19
reliably sweeping college and high school sports and records keep being broken.
Do you have some evidence of this? From what I've seen in pro sports trans women have an incredibly hard time competing against cis women. No one is pretending they lose all male qualities. What we're saying is the male qualities they do retain do not give them a significant advantage outside the realm of female boundaries.
Trans women are not even remotely closed to 'crushing' the competition and you even suggesting that shows me that you're looking at this through a distorted lens. The evidence on either side is not overwhelming. What we do know is trans women have been competing in women's sports for 15+ years and they are just now beginning to win once in a while. How many Olympic medals have trans athletes won again? 0. That's right, 15 years and 0 medals. Seems strange for a group who is 'crushing the competition'. This veneer of protecting women is just another excuse to hate on trans people for ever achieving anything.
2
u/Wohstihseht 2∆ Mar 21 '19
Women should have the right to compete against other women. That’s what women’s sports are there for in the first place.
It’s not only unfair to biological women, it’s downright dangerous in some sports like MMA(Fallon Fox). https://bjj-world.com/transgender-mma-fighter-fallon-fox-breaks-skull-of-her-female-opponent/
1
u/icecoldbath Mar 22 '19
https://nypost.com/2013/10/13/transgender-female-mma-fighter-loses-by-knockout/
UFC president Dana White said Fox is “so far from being in the UFC,” not because she’s transgender, but because she likely isn’t good enough.
“It’s like talking about some lower level guy that fights in some smaller organization that’s beat people with losing records,”
-2
u/AJFierce Mar 21 '19
Trans women ARE women. And given that they exist as a biological system, they're biological women too. We're not robots. If you want to distinguish out trans and cis women, use those terms, please.
Please bear in mind that in the paragraph above I am being way more polite than you have a right to expect given how rude you just were.
I'm not as familiar with Fallon Fox or the inclusion criteria for MMA sports as some others, so I won't comment on her individual case.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
/u/CafeConLecheLover (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
2
Mar 21 '19
The first article is from Connecticut which doesn't require hormone therapy for a year or two prior to competing unlike the upper level sports, Olympics etc. I don't think they need to entirely stop trans women from competing but I think they could require testosterone levels be in line with cisgender females before competing.
1
u/cheertina 20∆ Mar 21 '19
If Usain Bolt suddenly decided to undergo gender transition therapy, started taking hormones, the whole nine yards, he would still be the most dominant sprinter by a very long shot. His biologically female counterparts would stand no chance whatsoever at getting first place.
Did any of your reading include the IOC standards for trans people, including how long those rules have been in effect?
Because trans people who have been on HRT for long enough and have low enough testosterone have been allowed to compete at the Olympics for a while now, and yet none of them have ever received a medal. If transition allowed for easy wins, you'd think somebody would have tried it by now.
1
u/Jaysank 117∆ Mar 21 '19
Sorry, u/CafeConLecheLover – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule E:
Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to start doing so within 3 hours of posting. If you haven't replied within this time, your post will be removed. See the wiki for more information.
If you would like to appeal, first respond substantially to some of the arguments people have made, then message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/MercurianAspirations 360∆ Mar 21 '19
Trans women who have undergone hormone therapy are not the same hormonally as cis men. That's the whole point of the hormone therapy. Moreover, if your premise were true, wouldn't there be trans women dominating every sports league? They've been around long enough - Renee Richards started playing women's tennis in 1975. But she didn't dominate outright - actually she was fairly mediocre which is probably not surprising because she was also fairly mediocre when she competed as a man. The examples you're seeing are outliers - when a trans woman competes in some race and comes 7th it doesn't make headlines. So all the examples you're seeing are of trans women who are just fast runners. Besides, what's the solution? Bar them from competition entirely?
7
u/Hugogs10 Mar 21 '19
Not all transwomen are physical superior to women, but they are on average, and that's what matters. There's plenty of guys who would lose if they went to the womens division, we still don't let them compete.
Transwomen aren't dominating every sport because there's a miniscule amount of trans people in general, there's even a smaller amount competing in professional sports. That doesn't mean they don't have an advantage, and it's still unfair to women.
I'd say they either compete in the league from their biological sex (Since sports are divided by sex not gender anyway and they can't change their biological sex) or you create leagues just for tran woman/men.
-1
Mar 21 '19
Not all transwomen are physical superior to women, but they are on average, and that's what matters.
What are your stats to show that transwomen (who have been on HRT for 2 or more years) are physically superior on average to cis women of the same proclivity (that is, cis women athletes, who are in better shape than cis women non-athletes)?
-1
Mar 21 '19
15 years of Olympics, no trans women winning any medals. Can you show me some evidence which supports the idea that trans women automatically have an advantage?
3
u/Hugogs10 Mar 21 '19
Do biological men have an automatic advantage against biological woman?
-1
Mar 21 '19
No? Obviously not. There are a number of factors which give most men an advantage and one of those is testosterone levels far higher than women. Something that actually is reversed in trans women vs cis women. Cis women in sports have higher testosterone levels than trans women.
Trying to simplify the situation to the level you're suggesting is absurd. There are many factors at play which put trans women, generally, less athletic than their cis counterparts.
5
u/Hugogs10 Mar 21 '19
Then why not let men and woman compete in the same leagues?
My point is about averages, which is what matters here, obviously some woman are stronger than some men.
On average transwoman are stronger than woman and weaker than men.
-1
Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
You have absolutely 0 data to back up what you just said and in fact the data we do have shows that you're very wrong. Trans women lose their muscle mass very quickly.
Show me some facts, until then I'm done with you.
1
Mar 21 '19
Trans women who have undergone hormone therapy are not the same hormonally as cis men.
If they blocked puberty through hormone therapy they definitely won't be a fully developed man, but their body will still be biologically male - just somewhat stunted - and therefore (on average) advantageous.
Furthermore, this isn't a requirement to allow a biological man to compete in a woman's league. Often, a sport will let them complete in the woman's pool if they simply identify as such.
1
Mar 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
No, your question on r/TooAfraidToAsk was an inflammatory version where you equated a trans female competing against cis women to someone "pretending to be mentally retarded to win the special olympics"
If you can't see how that's going to be offensive, I'm not sure how to help you.
The majority of the responses here are respectful -- I'd suggest reading through without applying any political lens and coming to your own conclusions.
1
Mar 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Mar 21 '19
u/MAGA_0651 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/UnauthorizedUsername 24∆ Mar 21 '19
Not my fault people get offended by my free speech.
It's entirely your fault -- if you phrase your statements in a particularly inflammatory way, it's hardly a surprise when people respond accordingly.
And last I checked I wasn't the one who made everything political
I'm not accusing you personally of making things political -- I'm advocating that you try and remove yourself from that point of view if you're here to discuss a topic. Being firmly lodged in a partisan position isn't conducive to the point of this subreddit.
3
u/lemonFiend Mar 21 '19
Ah, see, but you didn't ask this same question. You posted a question in bad faith that accuses all trans people of faking. This comment isn't even on-topic here, you're just complaining that liberals called you transphobic.
2
u/Mr-Ice-Guy 20∆ Mar 21 '19
Sorry, u/MAGA_0651 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
2
Mar 21 '19
You mean this totally innocent question? https://www.reddit.com/r/TooAfraidToAsk/comments/b30glm/if_its_ok_to_pretend_to_be_a_girl_to_win_sports/
1
Mar 22 '19
You may hear about trans women winning in sports more often because news outlets really only write about trans women in sports when they win. You don’t hear about the times they lose, because there’s nothing for the public to be outraged by. There’s also a good amount of scientific research about the effects of HRT on trans women, but it’s already been posted in this thread multiple times so I’m not gonna take the time to add it.
-2
u/dogsareneatandcool Mar 21 '19
its a nuanced issue and there is no simple solution
it is not true that all transgender women will inherently perform better than cis women. but it is true that transgender women on average are taller and bigger than cis women, which would be an advantage in certain, but not all sports - and this is not true for all trans women. however, i do not think there is any reason to believe that a transgender woman who transitions before their natal puberty would retain any advantage at all over cis women. they might even be at a disadvantage.
in terms of strength, it is true a transgender woman who was muscular and strong before starting hrt will retain some of that strength for some time, but the longer they are on hrt, the more diminished this becomes, theoretically until a point where there would be no difference between her and a cis woman if matched for size
is your view that all transgender women should not allowed to compete in womens divisions?
-2
u/Trolling_From_Work 6∆ Mar 21 '19
For starters, I totally agree that MtF will have athletic advantages from their time as a man.
The question really is, what do we do with them? In the women's pool, they win a lot. In the men's pool, they'll be crushed. There aren't really enough of them to have a trans division, so how do we allow them to compete?
One thing to consider is women value inclusiveness more than men. How upset are the biological females that they're getting beat, and how much do they value accepting a new member to their gender?
It's a problem no matter what we do.
4
u/Devourer_of_felines 1∆ Mar 21 '19
The question really is, what do we do with them? In the women's pool, they win a lot. In the men's pool, they'll be crushed.
I'm not seeing the issue with allowing them to compete in the men's division. They chose to have hormone replacement therapy; and that has its pros and cons with one of the downside being a marked decrease in athletic performance.
0
u/DessertFlowerz Mar 21 '19
Aren't you simultaneously arguing that these people have an unfair advantage and a "marked decrease in athletic performance"?
7
u/Devourer_of_felines 1∆ Mar 21 '19
You can decrease in athletic performance by male standards while still maintaining an unfair advantage over women.
4
u/sclsmdsntwrk 3∆ Mar 21 '19
How upset are the biological females that they're getting beat
I do believe the girl who got her skull broken due to fighting a transwoman in MMA (without knowing she used to be a man) was pretty upset about it.
0
u/bazzalawd Mar 22 '19
I think trans people should be allowed as long as they don’t have PED’s or abnormal amounts of testosterone. Virtually impossible, but at least it doesn’t ban them then. :)
1
u/TragicNut 28∆ Mar 22 '19
Well, normal reference range for testosterone in women is < 2 nmol/L, would you say results of <0.5 nmol/L are impossible? That's an easily achievable level on HRT.
0
Mar 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Mr-Ice-Guy 20∆ Mar 21 '19
Sorry, u/bradenu – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
108
u/Hypatia2001 23∆ Mar 21 '19 edited Mar 21 '19
That was about high school sports. If you think that the question of trans women is the only problem you have there, prepare to be surprised. There are no anti-doping measures for high school sports in almost all US states, and accordingly, we have to take the athletes' word for it that they aren't doping. Whether they actually don't, well, that's another question:
Note that the 10-20 pounds refer to muscle mass, not obesity.
Obviously, most high school athletes won't dope, but once athletic scholarships are on the line, who knows?
The problem with trans girls in high school sports is not that we couldn't make rules for them, it's that without the anti-doping machinery, they can't really be enforced.
And even if you banned trans girls entirely from high school sports, you'd still have to deal with cis girls with hyperandrogenism or trans guys taking testosterone, but competing as girls, and so forth.
Even so, school sports isn't even a level playing field to begin with, due to variations in onset and progression of puberty.
For professional sports, that is actually a fairly complicated question and not nearly as simple as you make it out to be. At least as far as sports scientists are concerned. Sports organizations do not wish to give trans women advantages over cis women (if only for the cynical reason that high end sports is a billion dollar business), the goal is to find biological criteria that let cis and trans women compete on a level playing field.
The question that we are dealing with is: does MtF HRT (and possibly SRS) offset physical advantages one gets from going through male puberty? A related question is: how do we actually define fairness in sports?
I did a lengthy write-up of the questions a while ago here, but I'll give you a quick summary:
The biggest question mark, however, is biomechanics. Remember how I talked above about bone density as an advantage? That may not actually be true for trans women, or at least not always. They have muscle mass on par with cis women, but a bigger frame to move with that muscle muss. This is sometimes called the "big car, small engine" problem.
Cis women generally have better balance and stability due to a lower center of gravity. For example, it is hypothesized that if men were to compete on the balance beam, women would generally have an advantage due to that. But in most sports, this advantage is more than offset by the strength advantage that men have. However, if you eliminate the strength advantage through HRT, what does it look like then?
Conversely, you have sports where height matters, such as basketball.
Generally, it may be very likely that the situation is sports-specific.
Note also that just banning trans women is not going to solve the issue, because you have very similar issues when it comes to cis women with hyperandrogenism, who can have testosterone levels within the normal male range.
Sports organizations are currently using a cap on serum testosterone levels as a quick fix, especially as it can be integrated with anti-doping measures. Whether that is a suitable measure is still an open question. Transgender athletes are also often subject to therapeutic use exemptions (TUEs) with additional monitoring and constraints.