Ok, and so we should exclude all trans girls from sports just to avoid this possibility?
A more athletic cis girl could come in from out of state and knock another girl from 5th to 6th place, should we prevent girls who just moved to the state last year from participating in the state finals too?
The request that I was working on was for actual numbers rather than pure speculation, but sure let’s speculate that there are as a result of all the races that these two girls competed in there were several hundred cisgirls possibly displaced from 4th to 5th or such. Yes a potential harm to several hundred being down one space and such. There are roughly 200,000 girl High School students in that state. Do you believe that the harm imposed on the roughly 2000 of them that are transgirls by categorical exclusion is less than the harms imposed on even that speculative several hundred being one place down in some limited number of competitions?
A cis girl going through puberty could compete against a trans girl who may be suppressing male puberty or not. Just hard to see the equitable comparison as athletes
I’m honestly not sure what the best solution is. Excluding transgender athletes from participation doesn’t exactly sit well with me but neither does the idea of cis gender girls having an unfair disadvantage. I guess I’ll just have to accept that whatever best solution we find is going to leave someone out in the cold.
That’s a disingenuous argument.
I’m not familiar with the laws enough to quote anything on this matter, but saying “all women can participate as long as they perform in the range of genetically XX women” sounds an awful like the racist voting laws created to prevent black people from voting which said something like “anyone can vote as long as their grandfather was allowed to vote”. By creating requirements that would require medical intervention to meet and would essentially only apply to trans athletes, that seems like something which is explicitly discriminatory against trans athletes. It seems like that could only stand if cis athletes also had to engage in a similar amount of medical modification to participate. And it seems like it would be even more discriminatory here since it’s actually diminishing the athlete’s natural attributes which contribute to success in the sport.
There is something unspoken here, which is that a tremendous amount of athletic competition comes down to unearned advantages. A huge amount of these advantages are biological: a competitor whose genetic makeup is better suited for a particular sport has an advantage. The child whose parents are both 6’6" is straight up likelier to win basketball games than the child whose parents are both 5’0".
Another huge category of unearned advantages is socioeconomic: a child whose parents can afford expensive lessons with one-on-one coaches and can take a child to all the meets has a ridiculous advantage over a child whose parents can’t afford such luxuries.
We want to pretend that sports offer a pure competition, in which the person who most purely dedicates themselves to the craft will win. But that’s not the case. The race is often won by the kid from the richer family, or the kid with the better genes for the sport.
Even if it turns out that transgirls have overwhelming biological advantages over cisgirls, is this actually a problem? Is it any more of a real problem than the fact that tallgirls have overwhelming biological advantages over shortgirls?
I still want to see evidence that these overwhelming biological advantages are statistically significant in girls’ sports. But even if they are, I’m unconvinced that they suffice to render an EO like the one the OP mentions problematic.
I can’t answer that question. And I’m not even sure if such a utilitarian calculation is the best way to make this kind of decision. We segregate sports by sex because the vast majority of girls cannot compete against boys. It strikes me that allowing a trans girl who has not undergone any hormone adjustments to compete against cis girls defeats the purpose of segregating sports.
I don’t agree. I don’t think any advantage inherent to being trans, if one exists, is any more or less fair or unfair than any other advantage caused by a quirk of biology. It WOULD be more unfair for a cis boy to pretend to be a trans girl to capitalize on a relative advantage, but if someone is genuinely trans, why should their XY chromosome be considered any more unfair than any of a thousand and one other genetic advantages or disadvantages that could affect athletic performance? And I simply haven’t been convinced that the “boy pretends to be trans” situation is one that would actually happen in the real world on any relevant scale.
I’m not at all worried about that. If someone tells me they’re a trans girl I’m going to believe them.
I’d say it’s a problem. We segregate sports on the basis of sex because it’s generally acknowledged that males have an overwhelming advantage against females when it comes to athletics. If that’s not a problem, why not just get rid of girl’s sports altogether? After all, any advantages a male might have isn’t any different than a girl being taller.
I’m not quite convinced either and I suspect it’ll be a while before we have a large enough sample size to make a reasonable conclusion.
We’re getting a bit far afield here, but yeah: sports are fundamentally broken for what we pretend they are. It’s possible that the inclusion of transgender athletes is making those fundamental flaws obvious, rather than introducing new flaws. If we’re going to accept all those other flaws, I’m unconvinced we need to draw the line at any disparity introduced by allowing trans athletes to compete alongside cis athletes. The EO definitely removes a flaw in society, though, so that beneficial effect far outweighs any hypothetical deleterious effect.
I don’t see any way forward other than the utilitarian calculation to make this kind of decision.
One side of the scale is a speculative harm of maybe a loss from fifth to sixth place as you say to a very small number of athletes. On the other side very real harms associated with marginalization stigmatization and lack of access to the clear physical and socioemotional benefits of sports participation to many at risk children and teens.
I cannot see arguing against the least harms to the least number when the balance is so clear. Categorical exclusions instead select for a most harms choice.
That does not however require defense of a no gate position. And the Executive Order mandates no such thing. Strict application of adult elite level guidelines regarding length of time for what level of testosterone suppression may not appropriately apply but least harms likely also includes some gating criteria gradually approaching that as kids go farther into male pubertal development and elite levels of competition, which may vary by specific sport.
If placement in athletic competition is of negligible importance and if being bumped to a place or two lower is of negligible consequence and if the opportunity to compete is all that mattered than the alternative argument of competing with biological males instead of females is equally compelling.
Now, I’d be for leagues of different tiers of athletes where it’s completely irrelevant what gender one is. We could have an A - however many letters we need leagues and everyone could compete at their particular level.
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face… 
It is not. No one, least of all I, have claimed it is.
A relative very few possibly coming in a place lower though, as non-negligible as it may be, is not of as much harm as many times more being completely excluded.
So what’s wrong with more leagues so everyone can participate at their appropriate level?
Several things, mostly practical.
On the practical side we are talking about kids grade schools on up. Most of these schools, even many fairly large High Schools just don’t have the ability to have many more levels “however many levels we need” of teams.
But also few are making the argument that there is no reasonable concern regarding a harm from a trans girl who has gone through male puberty, and not testosterone suppressed for some period of time, to the relative success of cisgirl athletes. We argue instead against categirical bans, and that the greater harms of completely excluding a complete class of students from sports is a far greater concern. Your proposal would increase harms without any offsetting benefits.
I disagree. Currently, your implication is there is a fixed amount of slots for athletes to compete in. Your proposal does nothing but transfer harm. I don’t think it’s just to transfer conjectured harm from one set of humans to another in an arbitrary fashion. My proposal is inclusive. If you wish to compete you can compete and it will be against near peers.
Transathlete.com has a short document that is a must-read for this discussion:
They do NOT recommend that students should be allowed to casually self-identify as a different gender to compete in sport.
Students must have a serious, full-time commitment to that gender, as determined by a committee established to consider such applications.
The Gender Identity Eligibility Committee will be comprised of a minimum of three of the following persons, one of whom must be from the physician or mental health profession category:
- Physician with experience working with youth whose gender identity
different than the sex they were assigned at birth, and familiar with the World
Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Standards of Care and
other standard-setting documents.- Licensed mental health provider with experience working with youth whose
gender identity different than the sex they were assigned at birth, and familiar
with the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH)
Standards of Care and other standard-setting documents.- School administrator from a non-appealing school.
- [State athletic association] staff member.
- A gender-affirming advocate familiar with issues affecting youth whose
gender identity different than the sex they were assigned at birth.
This document is essential reading to understand what trans advocates are actually suggesting.
Missed edit window:
Also, once an application has been approved, gender can’t be casually changed back again for purposes of sport. Students are officially registered in their state to play sport as a certain gender, and this must remain consistent.