Support NeoGAF

[CrimsonSquall]

Making the men's division open to all genders creates.......... a men's division.

Shouldn't even be a hard pill to swallow

 

[Keri]

Besides the fact that the entire world of sports is "tough shit, you lost the genetic lottery", the amount of trans people that exist is minimal and the amount of trans people within those minimal numbers that care about sport is even smaller.

Like I said before, there was NOT EVEN A SINGLE TRANS WOMAN in the 2016 Olympics.
People are making it a bigger problem than can ever be.

There were more cases of people with random genetic lottery like higher blood cells, bigger tendons and whatever phelps has than trans woman winning in the olympics.
...because the only Trans Woman who actualy won the olympics that I know is Caitlyn Jenner =P

But it's still the case that if and when a trans woman competes, they will have an advantage over other competitors. This may mean that any year a trans woman competes, cis women have no possibility of winning, because they were born biologically female.

I get that your position is: This will be so rare, that those cis-women, for those years, can just suck it up for the greater good. I don't know if that's the right answer, because I think, since cis-women are the majority, this may end up harming more people. But, I don't know what the right answer is.

Just, please stop using "genetic lottery" in this context. It comes across...weird.

 

[CrimsonSquall]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=232571273&postcount=528

To be fair, I am using this comparison to explain how shitty is to say that someone who has any advantage must be excluded because of such advantage

That's a great study. But I don't think u can use that in regards to trans. Kenyans win 1 sport, males win all against women genetically.

 

[Platy]

But it's still the case that if and when a trans woman competes, they will have an advantage over other competitors. This may mean that any year a trans woman competes, cis women have no possibility of winning, because they were born biologically female.

I get that your position is: This will be so rare, that those cis-women, for those years, can just suck it up for the greater good. I don't know if that's the right answer, because I think, since cis-women are the majority, this may end up harming more people. But, I don't know what the right answer is.

Just, please stop using "genetic lottery" in this context. It comes across...weird.

Because it IS a genetic lottery.

Being born with a genetic anomaly that makes you receive more blood cells will probably bring you problems in your daily life, but will make you own everyone in sports that require it.

Cis women will have to suck it in the same way cis or trans women will have to suck it if a cis woman appears with an insane genetic mutation that makes her be able to lift way more.

 

[mckmas8808]

It's fine for trans women to compete, as long as they never actually win.

This does sorta feel like what some people are getting at. I'd love to see more research done on this first, before I can get close to a conclusion.

 

[Majmun]

Dunno what to think about this.

Trans mtf still means you're biologically a man. And men are physically stronger than female.

I can't think of a solution, though.

 

[PdotMichael]

Any attempts of getting rid of men and women divisions only mean that men will dominate the field. The Olympic Games would be a sausage festival.

 

[Keri]

Because it IS a genetic lottery

Being born with a genetic anomaly that makes you receive more blood cells will probably bring you problems in your daily life, but will make you own everyone in sports that require it.

Cis women will have to suck it in the same way cis or trans women will have to suck it if a cis woman appears with an insane genetic mutation that makes her be able to lift way more.

...so your actual position is that being born with a vagina is losing the genetic lottery? And being born with biologically male traits is winning the genetic lottery?

I assumed you didn't mean to imply that, before.

 

[Platy]

...so your actual position is that being born with a vagina is losing the genetic lottery? And being born with biologically male traits is winning the genetic lottery?

FOR THIS THREAD, yes.

More like
Being born with some crazy genetic mutation > Being born a trans woman > Being born cis woman.

Like I said, the dude with more blood cells is probably FUCKED medically in later life, in the same way trans people are FUCKED in the society we live, specially in some less rich countries.

But like more blood cells, it is an insanly rare "genetic diference" that if makes you better IN SPORTS than people who don't have any genetic diference than ... tough luck.
Most trans women are not using this advantage for sports anyway =P

...and we don't even have actual good evidence that this advantage even exists

 

[CrimsonSquall]

Dunno what to think about this.

Trans mtf still means you're biologically a man. And men are physically stronger than female.

I can't think of a solution, though.

Significantly too. World bench press record is a +250lb difference between men and women.

 

[NekoFever]

Don't watch tennis, I take it?

Haha, I did a double take on that one too.

There's a HUGE difference between men's and women's tennis.

 

[Curufinwe]

The gap between men and women is just as big in golf and tennis

Top female tennis players practice with and lose to men ranked 600+ in the world. Chris Evert, one of the greatest of all time, used to have very tough practice matches and lose more often than not against her brother who had been a good NCAA player but never a pro.

Cricket's another non-contact sport with a massive gap between men and women.

 

[PdotMichael]

Haha, I did a double take on that one too.

There's a HUGE difference between men's and women's tennis.

I think it's quite crazy how naive some people are. Once boys hit puppetry they gain such a physical advantage over girls that both competing together would be a pointless exercise. Top women athletes often compete against youth male athletes for training purpose and although the results aren't often communicated to the public for all kind of reasons, it's reality that they are losing often quite badly.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

That's a great study. But I don't think u can use that in regards to trans. Kenyans win 1 sport, males win all against women genetically.

Is this a fact?

 

[CrimsonSquall]

Is this a fact?

Nah idk. But if u find one let me know

 

[alexthekid]

Is this a fact?

Depends on where you draw the line between sports and games, but yes.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Testosterone makes this unworkable.



In most sports it's top 400+ and can reach in the thousands. The differences are just too large.



Are you including the removal of Male/Female divisions? This would be catastrophic to women in sports.

Is there a requirement that you have to take a specific level of hormones to compete

 

[hydrophilic attack]

Making the men's division open to all genders creates.......... a men's division.

And that is a problem because?

Sounds like you're saying that it would be unfair for women to compete against genetic males..

 

[Sunster]

Is there a requirement that you have to take a specific level of hormones to compete

yes there are many many many requirements but posters here act like trans women are roid monsters and nothing is regulated because political correctness. and also trans women win 100% of the time. poor cis women stand no chance. :,(

 

[CrimsonSquall]

And that is a problem because?

Sounds like you're saying that it would be unfair for women to compete against genetic males..

It would be unfair. Women would lose

 

[PdotMichael]

And that is a problem because?

Sounds like you're saying that it would be unfair for women to compete against genetic males..

Of course it would be unfair. We have classes, divisions and leagues for a reason to group athletes of a similar level together, otherwise competition wouldn't make sense.

A large gender less competition would only give women thbottom of the barrel to compete.

 

[Keri]

FOR THIS THREAD, yes....

Eh, I don't know how I feel about this. I mean, I understand the point you're making, but I think your phrasing is still bad...Obviously, you mean the comment to have limitations, but if a statement can be interpreted as: "Being born biologically male means you're better" than I can't get on board. Maybe say "sports lottery," instead? Since then it's clear you mean FOR THE LIMITED purpose of competing in sports.

 

[Platy]

Eh, I don't know how I feel about this. I mean, I understand the point you're making, but I think your phrasing is still bad...Obviously, you mean the comment to have limitations, but if a statement can be interpreted as: "Being born biologically male means you're better" than I can't get on board. Maybe say "sports lottery," instead? Since then it's clear you mean FOR THE LIMITED purpose of competing in sports.

To be fair being born male, cis, white, straight and able bodied and etc IS winning the genetic lottery for our society so I can understand the problem with the wording

 

[hydrophilic attack]

It would be unfair. Women would lose

Yes that was my point.

Apparently making the male bracket open for all genders would be unfair because trans women would have to compete against genetic males

But making genetically female athletes have to compete against (genetically male) trans women would be totally fair. For reasons.

 

[Jenov]

Yes that was my point.

Apparently making the male bracket open for all genders would be unfair because trans women would have to compete against genetic males

But making genetically female athletes have to compete against (genetically male) trans women would be totally fair. For reasons.

Bingo. Be consistent in fairness. Saying it's okay for genetic woman to have to "suck it up" but not trans woman is not progressive.

Making as close to a fair playing field for everyone is what would be best. BUT, to be honest, unless there's actually a sudden surge of trans woman athletes taking all the records/awards then it may not be that big of a problem. May need more of a wait and see approach.

 

[Ketkat]

Bingo. Be consistent in fairness. Saying it's okay for genetic woman to have to "suck it up" but not trans woman is not progressive.

Making as close to a fair playing field for everyone is what would be best. BUT, to be honest, unless there's actually a sudden surge of trans woman athletes taking all the records/awards then it may not be that big of a problem. May need more of a wait and see approach.

Cut the "genetic women" bullshit already.

There is not a sudden surge of trans women atheletes.

 

[Michael F. Assbender]

https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...runners-a-story-of-genes-and-cultures/256015/



This article has more about kenyans owning races than was ever posted here saying trans women have actual advantage in sports

And what we do about this ?
we DEAL WITH IT because high level sports is actually GENETIC LOTTERY

Even if your article chalked the Kenyan advantage fully up to genetics (it doesn't, as culture and environment seem to place at least some role), Kenyans don't dominate every display of footspeed out there.

The current world and Olympic record holders for the 100m are a Jamaican male and an American female.

For the 200m it's the same Jamaican male and American female.

For the 400m, it's a South African male and both a German female (World Record) and a French female (Olympic Record).

So being born in Kenya doesn't seem to offer that much of an advantage if you want to be the best in the world.

Meanwhile, check the times for the runners in those links. Biological males are faster, often by several seconds (which is a massive advantage in a sport where winners and losers are often dictated by fractions of a second).

And weightlifting? Literally every single record for weightlifting is held by biological males. Hell, looking at the current list of record holders, the top ranked males often dominate their female counterparts, often by dozens of kg.

This isn't transphobia or some social construct shit. It's reality. I 100% agree that a trans woman is a woman and should be treated as such by society at large. However, this does not change the fact that a person born with XY chromosomes has a distinct muscular advantage over a person with XX chromosomes.

This isn't some "yeah but Kenya" bullshit where the "advantage" is in dispute and can be overcome. An average person born XY (barring any random mutation or debilitation) will hold a strength and endurance advantage over an average person born XX every single time.

 

[highrider]

The " there aren't many of them " stance seems like a pretty common one, the argument being it isn't worth changing based on such small numbers which I'm kind of in agreement with.

But to be fair, their aren't that many power lifters either, and I think the opinions of the people competing probably matter the most.

 

[Ketkat]

This isn't transphobia or some social construct shit. It's reality. I 100% agree that a trans woman is a woman and should be treated as such by society at large. However, this does not change the fact that a person born with XY chromosomes has a distinct muscular advantage over a person with XX chromosomes.

This isn't some "yeah but Kenya" bullshit where the "advantage" is in dispute and can be overcome. An average person born XY (barring any random mutation or debilitation) will hold a strength and endurance advantage over an average person born XX every single time.

Then why is it you think that all these medical and Olympic level groups are saying that trans women should compete with cis women? Do you really think that the medical community is doing this for inclusion, and not because they have studies that literally show there is no real advantage?

The " there aren't many of them " stance seems like a pretty common one, the argument being it isn't worth changing based on such small numbers which I'm kind of in agreement with.

But to be fair, their aren't that many power lifters either, and I think the opinions of the people competing probably matter the most.

Why would their opinions matter? People can be sore losers and look for any reason why they lost. It should be up the people who actually run the competitions, and they've said its fine.

 

[Sunster]

Even if your article chalked the Kenyan advantage fully up to genetics (it doesn't, as culture and environment seem to place at least some role), Kenyans don't dominate every display of footspeed out there.

The current world and Olympic record holders for the 100m are a Jamaican male and an American female.

For the 200m it's the same Jamaican male and American female.

For the 400m, it's a South African male and both a German female (World Record) and a French female (Olympic Record).

So being born in Kenya doesn't seem to offer that much of an advantage if you want to be the best in the world.

Meanwhile, check the times for the runners in those links. Biological males are faster, often by several seconds (which is a massive advantage in a sport where winners and losers are often dictated by fractions of a second).

And weightlifting? Literally every single record for weightlifting is held by biological males. Hell, looking at the current list of record holders, the top ranked males often dominate their female counterparts, often by dozens of kg.

This isn't transphobia or some social construct shit. It's reality. I 100% agree that a trans woman is a woman and should be treated as such by society at large. However, this does not change the fact that a person born with XY chromosomes has a distinct muscular advantage over a person with XX chromosomes.

This isn't some "yeah but Kenya" bullshit where the "advantage" is in dispute and can be overcome. An average person born XY (barring any random mutation or debilitation) will hold a strength and endurance advantage over an average person born XX every single time.

but where are the stats for trans athletes showing they win 100% of the time?

 

[CrimsonSquall]

The " there aren't many of them " stance seems like a pretty common one, the argument being it isn't worth changing based on such small numbers which I'm kind of in agreement with.

But to be fair, their aren't that many power lifters either, and I think the opinions of the people competing probably matter the most.

But the "there aren't that many so why change it anyway" stance is not progressive at all.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Then why is it you think that all these medical and Olympic level groups are saying that trans women should compete with cis women? Do you really think that the medical community is doing this for inclusion, and not because they have studies that literally show there is no real advantage?


Why would their opinions matter? People can be sore losers and look for any reason why they lost. It should be up the people who actually run the competitions, and they've said its fine.

Because they have to let them compete somewhere, and the gap in physical ability between a transexual woman and biological women is smaller than the gap between a transexual woman and men. offers

That doesn't necessarily mean that it's a level playing field, just that it's a more level playing field than the alternative.

Someone already explained this to you based off a link you posted.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

There is not a sudden surge of trans women atheletes.

This may have something to do with the fact that the current rules (which require trans women to have had female-level testosterone levels for a year before competing in the female bracket) have only been around for JUST over a year

Edit: Sorry, this was incorrect, please ignore

 

[Ketkat]

Because they have to let them compete somewhere, and the gap in physical ability between a transexual woman and biological women is smaller than the gap between a transexual woman and men.

You're wrong. They literally don't have to let anyone compete there that they don't want. They let transwomen compete there because they feel that its fair, not out of some pity that they don't fit anywhere else.

This may have something to do with the fact that the current rules (which require trans women to have had female-level testosterone levels for year before competing in the female bracket) have only been around for JUST over a year

No? It has been almost 14 years.

https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Reports/EN/en_report_905.pdf

The one I've been linking from the Olympics is their current policy, but trans people have been allowed to compete for a while.

 

[Jenov]

Cut the "genetic women" bullshit already.

There is not a sudden surge of trans women atheletes.

?
What's wrong with using the term genetic women? Weren't we just talking about the supposed genetic lottery and what that entails?

 

[Platy]

Trans women are also women and they get the genetic lottery over CIS women

This may have something to do with the fact that the current rules (which require trans women to have had female-level testosterone levels for a year before competing in the female bracket) have only been around for JUST over a year

What does that even mean ?

That trans women didn't existed before ? =P

 

[Zen_Arcade]

You're wrong. They literally don't have to let anyone compete there that they don't want. They let transwomen compete there because they feel that its fair, not out of some pity that they don't fit anywhere else.

Because "Olympics bans trans people" is really good PR. Every organization on the planet is hoping for that as a headline in the local paper.

I really don't think they do it because it's fair. Or rather, they do it because it's as fair as it can be currently. I think they do it because they know they should let them compete and it would be unfair to them if they weren't able to, and because out of the options that exist, the gap in physical ability is much smaller putting them in with women than with men.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

No? It has been almost 14 years.

https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Reports/EN/en_report_905.pdf

The one I've been linking from the Olympics is their current policy, but trans people have been allowed to compete for a while.

Sorry, I was confused. Ignore that post then

 

[stephen08]

I'm kind of fuzzy on a lot of this so I have some questions and thoughts, I apologise in advance if anything I say comes off as transphobic or ignorant, it is not my intention and I am just trying to better understand the issue.

When we talk about transgender persons it is my understanding that we are talking about someone who identifies as a gender that differs from their birth sex. That is to say, there's no line in the sand as to who is transgender and who is not. A person who is pre-gender reassignment surgery or hormone therapy can still be considered transgender correct?

If that is indeed the case it seems to me there needs to be a set of criteria that determine if it is fair to feature a transgender person in a competitive event. Maybe some kind of panel that clears competitors for the event on a case by case basis.

I understand that the kneejerk fear of 'man puts on dress and dominates womens sport's is largely hypothetical but I think that there needs to be standards to point to. Not just to ensure an even playing field for cis female athletes but for transgender athletes as well that they be able to claim a victory that isnt disputed because of their birth gender.

 

[Sunster]

I'm kind of fuzzy on a lot of this so I have some questions and thoughts, I apologise in advance if anything I say comes off as transphobic or ignorant, it is not my intention and I am just trying to better understand the issue.

When we talk about transgender persons it is my understanding that we are talking about someone who identifies as a gender that differs from their birth sex. That is to say, there's no line in the sand as to who is transgender and who is not. A person who is pre-gender reassignment surgery or hormone therapy can still be considered transgender correct?

If that is indeed the case it seems to me there needs to be a set of criteria that determine if it is fair to feature a transgender person in a competitive event. Maybe some kind of panel that clears competitors for the event on a case by case basis.

I understand that the kneejerk fear of 'man puts on dress and dominates womens sport's is largely hypothetical but I think that there needs to be standards to point to. Not just to ensure an even playing field for cis female athletes but for transgender athletes as well that they be able to claim a victory that isnt disputed because of their birth gender.

there are very strict requirements. there is a set of criteria. Tests are run on the athletes. Every athlete is considered on a case by case basis.

 

[Raonak]

Could we replace gender divisions with body type and mass divisions?

Yep. People are trying to fit a square peg into a triangle hole.
There is no right answer. Transwomen have a advantage over cis women, while this isn't a "problem" right now, it is a valid discussion point and something to be mindful for in the future.

Sports gender divisions are simply outdated in our modern world. We need a new system.

 

[norm9]

Sports gender divisions are simply outdated in our modern world. We need a new system.

Nah. I think it's fine and is simple to understand.

 

[HerrPalomar]

Transgender people should be treated in the best way possible, but allowing them to compete in their chosen gender is going to far. There are biological differences between the genders that can not be overcome by training. All the woman competing with them would have an enormous disadvantage . Even hormonal therapy would not dimish the advantages given by the body build etc . Maybe if they started hormon therapy before puberty.

This is a lost cause in my opinion and the LGBTQ should drop this particular case and focus on more important topics .

Of course I understand that this is difficult especially for the athlete in question but I see no way how this would work.

 

[Ketkat]

Sorry, I was confused. Ignore that post then

This is a pretty genuine question. Now that you know trans people have been in the Olympics for 14 years, does that change your view on it?

For instance, if trans people really had such an overwhelming advantage when it came to the Olympics/competitive sports, would they not have been dominating it at some point since then? I mean, you didn't know it was even allowed, so I don't see how it could be problematic.

I'm kind of fuzzy on a lot of this so I have some questions and thoughts, I apologise in advance if anything I say comes off as transphobic or ignorant, it is not my intention and I am just trying to better understand the issue.

When we talk about transgender persons it is my understanding that we are talking about someone who identifies as a gender that differs from their birth sex. That is to say, there's no line in the sand as to who is transgender and who is not. A person who is pre-gender reassignment surgery or hormone therapy can still be considered transgender correct?

If that is indeed the case it seems to me there needs to be a set of criteria that determine if it is fair to feature a transgender person in a competitive event. Maybe some kind of panel that clears competitors for the event on a case by case basis.

I understand that the kneejerk fear of 'man puts on dress and dominates womens sport's is largely hypothetical but I think that there needs to be standards to point to. Not just to ensure an even playing field for cis female athletes but for transgender athletes as well that they be able to claim a victory that isnt disputed because of their birth gender.

This is a profesional organization. Requirements already exist. You can't declare yourself a woman, and then compete in the women's groups. You have to be transitioning for so long, and have certain hormone levels for so long before you're allowed in.

Transgender people should be treated in the best way possible, but allowing them to compete in their chosen gender is going to far. There are biological differences between the genders that can not be overcome by training. All the woman competing with them would have an enormous disadvantage .

This is a lost cause in my opinion and the LGBTQ should drop this particular case and focus on more important topics .

Of course I understand that this is difficult especially for the athlete in question but I see no way how this would work.

Its already been working for a long time.

 

[Raonak]

Nah. I think it's fine and is simple to understand.

I disagree, trying to boil down a wide spectrum of gender options into 2 categories, while also making it fair to all parties involved is a fools errand.

It's not a problem right now, but it's one which will become increasingly relevant as more body modification processes become mainstream.
- it's not even gender related either; if I got a special operation in my eye to make my eyesight better, which incidentally makes me better in archery, how will sports organisations react?

 

[HerrPalomar]

I disagree, trying to boil down a wide spectrum of gender options into 2 categories, while also making it fair to all parties involved is a fools errand.

It's not a problem right now, but it's one which will become increasingly relevant as more body modification processes become mainstream.

So what is the alternative. Make a difference category for every niche case? How would
this even work.

 

[Greddleok]

Could we replace gender divisions with body type and mass divisions?

Weightlifting is already segregated by body mass. The men are stronger than the women within each category, hence the necessity for gender segregation.

Sports gender divisions are simply outdated in our modern world. We need a new system.

That'll be the end of women's sports. There would be a few stars who worked their way up, but fighting against inherent sexism AND genetic barriers, you'd just see women fade out of sports.

 

[HerrPalomar]

High Level sport is a genetic lottery. Not enough height? Forget that basketball career.
We don't have a smaller guys league and we should not have a transgender league.

Compete in the gender that genetic
Lottery decided for you. I know it sucks but society can not make changes and destroy women sports which has it tough already.

 

[Ketkat]

Compete in the gender that genetic
Lottery decided for you. I know it sucks but society can not make changes and destroy women sports which has it tough already.

Except, its been fine for the past 14 years where its been allowed. Women's sports still exist, and nothing has gone wrong. At least read the current page you're on so I don't have to keep saying this here.

 

[CrimsonSquall]

High Level sport is a genetic lottery. Not enough height? Forget that basketball career.
We don't have a smaller guys league and we should not have a transgender league.

Compete in the gender that genetic
Lottery decided for you. I know it sucks but society can not make changes and destroy women sports which has it tough already.

I would lowkey love to see a 5'11 and under bball league. Would be interesting at least once to see