I know I’m arguing against my own view here…but…suppose a gene is discovered, you know, the r2d3 gene, way down on some non-sex chromosome…maybe it’s somewhat more common in people of Korean descent, but just about anyone might carry it…and it confers some very specific advantage in athletics. Maybe it lets blood hyperoxygenate. We learn that people with this gene are really ripping up the Olympics. They own all the medals…
Do we segregate them? Okay, you guys, you have your own private games, and let someone else have a chance…
(Among a thousand other moral issues: do we implant this gene in everyone we can, neonatally, because it’s that damn good?)
Should we have a special “short” Olympics for people who don’t have runners’ limbs? It’s getting on toward the “Equalizer General” from Kurt Vonnegut. How much “equality” can we preserve…or manufacture?
I don’t believe there are any “good” answers to this. Athletics, like theatrical casting, is exempt from certain laws that guarantee opportunity in most other fields. The NFL doesn’t have to hire the handicapped (and you can legally produce “Wiz,” as an all-black theatrical event.) It’s unfair…but to demand otherwise makes a farce of the games.
You bring up a good point, and let me emphasize one case.
Competition, especially at the higher levels, is almost NEVER fair. Taken Michael Phelps for example. I, a 5’5" transperson could have trained from an earlier age, trained twice as long or just as long at worst, had the best coaches in the world, the best facilities, the most support…and I would still never, ever, have come within a proverbial mile of his performance. Phelps was gifted genetically with his physique, everything from his size to his arm length to his ability to add muscle mass to his basic cardiovascular fitness. So where’s the fairness? Phelps has a “genetic” advantage in that case. To hear some in this thread argue, he should be banned from competition.
Or imagine me in the WNBA or NBA. I’m perhaps a full foot (or more) shorter than the average player. Again, I could have trained harder, better, had more resources…and still I would never get any points other than free-throws. Those folks had a “genetic” advantage in their height and physical strength.
Or take this quote - I’ll post it here with citation, since many of the folks posting against transgender people on this subject are too lazy to click links.
A point being that size and basic body morphology, determined to a large extent by genetics, are unfair from the start.
Genetic advantage is the name of the game in many sports at the higher levels. The question is simply where one draws the line. Some want to draw it at chromosomes and ignore the effects of hormones on muscle mass, stamina, fat reserves, blood hematocrit, etc., etc.
Others would deny anyone who had the wrong chromosomes from playing in any amateur sport, or ignore people like CAIS women who have XY chromosomes but develop taller and with more muscle mass than non-CAIS women.
Again, it all comes back to “what problem are we trying to solve?” No evidence has been presented that this is a problem. Nor that it will be a problem in the near future. A hundred years out, who knows?
That may be the case today given almost every sub 10-second 100m time has been run by a man with west african heritage. But your example is not really illustrative of anything given prohibitions typically follow from outlier performances and not discoveries of genes.
No. Not only is this likely illegal and cost-prohibitive, but it doesn’t really follow from any of the above or jibe with anything ever done.
Has any serious person suggested such a thing? More importantly, sports are not about ensuring equal outcomes, but rather equality of opportunity.
See, this is part of the source of your fundamental misunderstanding of the issue. No one is saying the rules should guarantee equality of outcomes, or ensure across the board fairness. Elite sporting competitions are discriminatory by their nature. The issue is that as a man, Phelps and I in theory have the same possible set of genes, whereas Phelps and some woman don’t generally speaking.
Individual genetic advantage is largely sought after, not prohibited. The issue is you are comparing someone having genetics that predispose them to be good at sports to having genetics based on being a man or a woman, then competing with the other group. They are not the same. You’ve stated as much by not supporting men who want to compete with women in general sporting events.
The problem is men have an unfair advantage against women in sports. People who deliberately or unintentionally leverage that advantage should generally not be able to compete.
See, this is part of the source of your fundamental misunderstanding of the issue. You most certainly do NOT have the same possible set of genes as Phelps. You have (presumably) the same overall gross karyotype. That means less than you may think, as evidenced by the clear genetic advantage Phelps et al have over you, and more than 99.9% of the population.
No, I’m stating that the line has already been arbitrarily drawn by people saying “XY to one side, XX to the other” (which given a larger-than-expected number of karyotype aberrations is not desirable anyhow). But that line can be redrawn. Re: the prior example I gave of boxing.
But as I wrote prior, redrawing the line can lead to absurd micro-classifications, such as “featherweight pole vault” or “super-heavyweight curling.” Redrawing the line can be done but it must be done with care.
What thread are you reading? This thread seems at this juncture to be about the attempt to exclude transitioned transgender persons, assuming that they have unalterable and immutable that advantage and will use it unfairly, and have and will do so. And the burden of proof of that is on those who want to be discriminatory.
If you want to discuss cisgender men versus women in sports, start a new thread.
I want to know why bi-gender people can’t just choose their gender and compete in sports. Why are transgender people allowed to compete, but only if they take drugs and fully transition?
Since Una is an expert on transgenderism, how should bi-genders be treated in sports?
For now there are two buckets in sports - male and female. Or perhaps “male” and “female.” Folks who are genderfluid or non-binary transgender, or consider themselves bi- or demi-gender would need to be sorted into those two buckets based upon the much-mentioned rules established by the IOC et al.
In other words, an XY person who identifies as female but has had no surgery and no hormone treatment, and who has no other underlying intersex condition, would have to compete in the “male” category as the best proxy for where they should be.
It’s unfortunate that it would cause mental distress for them, perhaps. But I’m not going to deny the tremendous physical reality of hormones over an extended time. Again, don’t look to me to defend the indefensible.
My viewpoint puts me at odds with some in the transgender community, who firmly believe that just saying “I’m a woman” and having XY chromosomes and no hormone treatment or intersex condition should allow you to compete as a woman. I believe they are wrong.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanics_of_Oscar_Pistorius’_running_blades
Different sudies came out in different ways and he was allowed to race with them. However you shouldn’t be so disbelieving; they could easily make a springy prosthetic that could out perform a normal leg but they were trying to stay within the rules.
It’s not actually that arbitrary when you recognize the rules are there to cover the 99% of humans. Everyone always brings up various forms of people born with birth defects, mutated genetics or etc, and forgets those people are simply not anywhere close to typical, normal, human beings. Biology is messy and thus we have aberrations like that in our species, but competitive sports should be regulated to handle what creates the fairest, most competitive, and most intriguing match ups.
It’s been done. There were several Eastern Bloc athletes who disappeared from competition when international athletic boards required chromosome tests, and there was Stella Walsh, who won several Olympic medals in the prewar era but always looked masculine and was determine at autopsy to have been intersex.
And there’s Casper Semenya, who is also intersex but identifies as female and has XX chromosomes.
I moused over the link, and I don’t think a Word Press site devoted to the Missouri trans community in which the person who published the article is in this thread is something I need to read. Let me check, did that article get submitted to a peer reviewed scientific journal? If so, which. A research paper isn’t science, it’s you collecting (selectively) citations to make an argument that fits your opinions. That’s more or less what this venue is for, and like I said, not wanting to break those down into specific salient points that address specific salient points here is lazy, and you certainly can’t use your own non-peer reviewed opinion piece as a link that serves to give you “winner of the thread” title as you seemed to think you could do.
Vetted by whom?
If you had cites that were actual scientific literature, and not a biased collection of cites commingled with your personal opinions on transgender issues I’d consider reading it, as long as it was from a reputable source. You did not present that.
But I did make specific contributions, I pointed out for one that transgender doesn’t mean the individual has to have taken hormones or engaged in body modification. An “unmodified” genetic male of athletic quality strength and fitness is simply always going to be stronger than a like female, as Kim Jong-uk being a 133lb guy who is almost as strong as a 300 lb (strongest in the world) female Chinese weightlifter shows. The Iranian guy who holds the super heavyweight lifting records is beyond any strength that I suspect any genetic female could ever display. Since he’s the strongest in the world there is no counter to that of course, other than to wait and see if time proves me wrong, but I suspect it doesn’t.
You don’t really have anything to say to this because there isn’t a rebuttal to what is basically a pretty obvious logical problem with guys competing against girls in Olympic weightlifting.
Also being quite serious, the reality is almost all strength sports athletes of Olympic level use various banned substances. It’s simply fact that these guys and girls know how to get past the monitoring, so I doubt the ability of a HT requirement to counteract any and all advantages because I suspect testing for it is no more effective than for the plethora of hormone altering drugs Olympians already abuse regularly. Plus I think the hormonal profile of most of these people is well removed from natural even if they aren’t on HT (by these people I mean strength athletes at the Olympic level) due to years and years of artificially modifying their hormones for strength gains.
FWIW considering the limited financial compensation of strength athletes (Olly lifters and powerlifters and such essentially make almost no money, top level body builders can, but only like the top 1%) I doubt many men are going to pretend to be transgender to win stuff.
I don’t know anything about the 1960s Olympics but the Eastern Bloc in general were the first and the most vigorous areas in which athletes started using anabolic steroids. They had been isolated and deliberately used on a small scale back to the late 1930s but in the 40s/50s the Soviets really developed a comprehensive program of advancing the science here and doping their athletes.
They didn’t hit widespread usage in the West until the mid-60s, by which time basically all of Western bodybuilding and powerlifting was heavily using steroids (just looking at the transition from 1950s to mid-60s bodybuilders shows an obvious dramatic increase in musculature that is directly linked to widespread adoption of steroids.)
So it’s entirely possible these Eastern Bloc women were not male, just women taking heavy doses of steroids, which make you stronger and a better athlete but for women cause you to develop more masculine characteristics. (There are side effects for men as well, obviously.)
Sure I do. The reality that I don’t because we are different people. The point is that if Michael Phelps were one of a set of triplets (2 boys, 1 girl), the boys have far more possible overlap in their genes that they may find beneficial for sports than the girl would.
That’s your issue though. It’s not arbitrary, it’s biology. We know it’s not arbitrary given the vast differences we see between men and women in competitive sport. Now you can say that the binary system is a lousy means of differentiating men and women, but there is a clear reason why men and women are separated in these arenas.
No, it’s not their burden. Again, almost no prohibition or delineation in sports is made on that basis. Is it the NBA’s burden of proof to justify discrimination against pot smokers? No. It’s a rule, just like the rule is that men play in this league and women play in another. Now some trans person may decide to challenge that rule, and the rationalization may be that they have some immutable advantage, but that doesn’t speak at all to who has the burden of proof. Competitive bodies can exclude people for any number of reasons with almost no justification. Regardless, the fact is that there are many sports where being a genetic male confers immutable advantages over genetic females. HT and other things may mask those advantages, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. By that logic, we could say Phelps can race women so long as he wear a suit to slow him down since that will counterbalance his genetic advantages.
If you want to cite your own irrelevant work and nail yourself to a cross, you should find your own thread. The OP is not strictly about transgender men, and even if it were, you have no right to dictate what is spoken about in this thread.
I consider the fact that they did not want to have their crotches examined is very strong evidence that what was there was not a vagina, no matter how “pumped up” by drugs.
Oh, and add me to the ones who will not use the term “cis” to mean “ignore this prefix”, as in
cismale = male
cisfemale = female.
