The trans women in womens racing issue

[QueenStagiaire]

I would like to see some studies on physical performance before and after transitions. I think maintaining a level playing field is what sports should aim to do. But apparently as soon as you say that, you become part of the problem for other people. I‘m kind of torn because as stated above I don‘t want a minority group with POSSIBLY distinct physical advantages to become the group that wins all the competitions. Yet, at the same time, it would be cruel to exclude people from the group they want to identify with. Making Transgender only competitions would be pushing them into a niche forever. So when is science going to be done? After that we should discuss.

so why is it ive never heard anyone say trans women should compete with men? Its always they should be banned from sport.

 

[Izzyeviel]

I have not and never will say that trans women have transitioned in order to win. Why lie? The motivation for transition is entirely irrelevant to whether it is fair or not. the issue is male advantage being permitted in the female category.

If you have to resort to straw men and ad hominem rather than dealing with the actual points made then clearly you aren't engaging honestly with the discussion. Sadly this happens all to often on this topic.

On the subject of the DSD regulations in athletics, you appear to be woefully uninformed. the regs do not apply to any females. they apply exclusively to people who are XY with testes producing male range T that they are sensitive to. All such people are male with benefit from androgenised male development. My position far from ignores the issue. It recognioses the actual issue and restricts the exclusion from the female category to those who have the advantage that the category exists to exclude.

Your position argues that women with XY chromosomes should be banned from competing with other women because you've arbitrarily decided they're not real women, but men.

At the end of the day, If your argument relies on talking points promoted by fox news, your argument sucks.

 

[Netserk]

As for what's "normal" and what's a "deviation" from that, I think it's generally well-understood what is meant by saying that a duplication of the 21st chromosome is normal and a triplication is a deviation from that.

That only has the prescriptive implications one chooses for it to have - anyone is free to choose it to have none.

 

[Biggut]

We could also base the categories on something completely else. Like some other hormone levels, max VOM or whatever. Some people have natural advantages in most sports.
The decision to have men and women competing apart is based on social realities. One that both people who simply don't want to deal with the other sex and those who actually care about giving women opportunities as well, can get behind.
There are good reasons to have these categories, but they also come with problems. And I think it's fair to both see the good and bad that comes with it, to look at where the categories come from and what other possibilities there might be.

The other possibilities just don't exist. Once you get down to the vast combination of physical attributes you end up with either sex segregation any another name or a wholly male elite level with elite females competing with club standard males. It’s also incredibly complex when some of these characteristics are impacted by training and lifestyle. A male will be able to sustain far greater lean body mass than a female with far less effort and focus. It ends up rewarding sex not excellence In many instances.

 

[Nick2413]

This is a fairness issue being treated as a discrimination issue. Prevalence also has nothing to do with it - if nobody dopes for a year do we start allowing doping since such a small amount of people do it? All it takes is one elite male to transition and it’s game over for women. This happened in some swimming events in the US already.

With this demographic growing rapidly it’s not a matter of if but when. There may be options for a separate or open category, but the women’s category should remain protected.

When Title IX happened in the US, the activists required sex verification so the women couldn’t be cheated. Not sure how they’re the villains now.

 

[BR2]

As for what's "normal" and what's a "deviation" from that, I think it's generally well-understood what is meant by saying that a duplication of the 21st chromosome is normal and a triplication is a deviation from that.

That only has the prescriptive implications one chooses for it to have - anyone is free to choose it to have none.

It's normal if you think about it in terms of reproduction, however there is no need to socially negate everything that's not binary.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I see a lot of debating which appears to me besides the point. Sports should be fair, that's why you can't use a motor in your bike or use doping. If it can be proven scientifically that women who were born male, do not have an advantage over female born women, then there should be no problem. Failing that, if it can't be proven that they do have an advantage, then it becomes a bit tricky and i assume a "wait and see" approach seems most likely (whether that is the best solution is a different matter). If it can be proven that they do have an advantage, they should not be allowed in the same "category". In which case an extra category would make sense, but might ultimately be impossible/impractical to organise for a small group (at least at the moment). Maybe for the time being they could ride with another category (whether that is women, male, male u23... i have no idea) in the same way that you also have elites without contract, riding with the pros. It's not ideal, since 2 categories in the same race can influence each other. But i doubt there is a clear cut solution otherwise.

Seriously - 2% of US adults aged 18-29 identifies as transgender, falling to 0.3% for adults aged 30-49. Currently 109 of the top-150 riders in the PCS women’s ranking is aged 29 or lower, so based on that, statistically the mean number of trans women you’d expect in the top-150 is just over 1.5 (109/150*2 + 41/150*0.3) if they have neither an inherent physical advantage nor a disadvantage. Currently, that number is zero. But tell me more about how allowing trans women to compete is ruining the sport…

What does this tell you in terms of future projections? If it means it will be a problem in the future, it can't hurt to think about it now, can it. You say 2% between 18-29 identifies as transgender, and less than 0.3% above 30. Why less of the older generation? Do people revert once they pass 30? Or is it just that the younger generation is more flexible in their way of thinking. And what about the next generation of 18-29 year olds? Will they also see the same 2%, or will that number increase? And what number could become a problem?

If only 1 person has an actual advantage, it already is unfair, regardless if that 1 person wins or not. You also don't agree with one person doping, as long as he doesn't win, i assume.

 

[Biggut]

Your position argues that women with XY chromosomes should be banned from competing with other women because you've arbitrarily decided they're not real women, but men.

At the end of the day, If your argument relies on talking points promoted by fox news, your argument sucks.

No it does not. It’s not simply about karyotype. Why lie about my position again? People who are XY with CAIS should be entirely welcome in the female category… because they are female. As should people with complete gonadal dysgenesis or with inactive SRY gene even though they are male, because they do not benefit from androgneised male development.

I dont watch Fox News, why would I? I am a left leaning Brit. I’m not interested in talking points or the false left right dichotomy that people often promote on this topic. I am interested in why the female category exists and ensuring that the advantages it exists to exclude are excluded.

It seems you are more interested in straw men and personal attacks than actually discussing the substance or the issue.

 

[King Boonen]

My only input with be tagging @SHaines and @sward in here.

 

[Netserk]

It's normal if you think about it in terms of reproduction, however there is no need to socially negate everything that's not binary.

Of course not. That's my point.

As a thorough anti-realist, there's no need at all. Only what one chooses.

 

[Biggut]

Aside from being a PhD IN Exercise Physiology who was an expert witness for caster Semenya in her CAS case which revolved entirely around the benefits of androgenised male develoepemnt, the guy who organised the multi disciplinary exploitation of the science for World Rugby and somebody who has written extensively on cycling, nothing at all. Let’s be honest here, he’s far better informed on the science than Phillipa York is. Phillipa may be able to present anecdote and personal emotive story but she’s not presenting any real facts on the issue.

 

[Izzyeviel]

Never heard anybody in this debate say that, ever. It is always that they should not be competing in the female category. Certainly any serious contributor on the topic, such as Ross Tucker, would never argue that.

Trans kids are legally unable to play alongside their classmates at school in America

 

[Biggut]

My only input with be tagging @SHaines and @sward in here.

Why? Do you think the topic is forbidden? Cartainly the topic has been broached by Cycling News themselves. In which case do you think I have said anything that is breaking the forum rules? I haven’t said anything even negative about anybody for being trans. I haven‘t accused them of doing anything wrong. I am purely asking for the topic to be discussed in a more balanced way and for the discussion to involve the science and facts rather than one sided invective.

 

[Netserk]

Trans kids are legally unable to play alongside their classmates at school in America

This is not 'merica. Who cares?

 

[Biggut]

Trans kids are legally unable to play alongside their classmates at school in America

Do you mean their classmates or the classmates of the opposite sex? Massive difference. I’d oppose any law that prevents trans kids playing in competitions for their sex purely because of their gender identity. Such laws are generally made by religious zealots based in their religious dogma rather than on the science. As such I oppose the over simplistic laws of some states. The Mack Beggs example where a female on T was forced to compete in the female category was ridiculous. Males do not need a category that excludes females, even those on T. Don’t lump me in with those people, my position is not their position.

 

[Devil's Elbow]

What does this tell you in terms of future projections? If it means it will be a problem in the future, it can't hurt to think about it now, can it. You say 2% between 18-29 identifies as transgender, and less than 0.3% above 30. Why less of the older generation? Do people revert once they pass 30? Or is it just that the younger generation is more flexible in their way of thinking. And what about the next generation of 18-29 year olds? Will they also see the same 2%, or will that number increase? And what number could become a problem?

Goes without saying that there's a margin of error in the calculation because it treats age 30 as a binary divide, the point is that the percentage of transgender people aged 29 or below is too high to treat there being 0 transgender athletes in the top-150 of women's cycling as an indicator of a level playing field.

The number would be a problem in terms of fairness if the percentage of top-level transgender athletes outpaces the percentage of transgender women overall in a statistically significant way. So the percentage of transgender women in cycling should increase as younger generations whose ability to identify as the people they are is less impeded by transphobia (and other forms of bigotry) become the generations who make up the peloton. In other words, a rising number of transgender women's cyclists will not necessarily indicate a problem.

In fact, if in a couple of decades we live in a world where 5% of younger adults identifies as trans and there is still zero trans representation higher up in the women's rankings, we're likely also looking at a statistically significant difference. That would also be a problem in terms of fairness, either due to institutional transphobia in cycling or due to the relative strictness of the rules under which transgender athletes are allowed in this sport giving them an inherent disadvantage compared to cisgender athletes.

We'll cross either of those bridges if we get there, but right now there is a lack of proof to conclude that transgender women have an unfair (dis)advantage. That includes not only the presence of transgender women at the highest level of sport, but also the body of peer-reviewed scientific work in this field, which is relatively limited in size, often relies on tiny sample sizes and has produced mixed evidence in spite of what some people will claim.

 

[Izzyeviel]

No it does not. It’s not simply about karyotype. Why lie about my position again? People who are XY with CAIS should be entirely welcome in the female category… because they are female. As should people with complete gonadal dysgenesis or with inactive SRY gene even though they are male, because they do not benefit from androgneised male development.

I dont watch Fox News, why would I? I am a left leaning Brit. I’m not interested in talking points or the false left right dichotomy that people often promote on this topic. I am interested in why the female category exists and ensuring that the advantages it exists to exclude are excluded.

It seems you are more interested in straw men and personal attacks than actually discussing the substance or the issue.

you cant have a rule that says some women with an xy chromosome are banned, but others are free to compete.

you're literally arguing its ok for some trans women to compete with women, whilst simultaneously arguing that all trans women should be banned from competing with women. This is why you shouldn't watch GB News.

 

[Netserk]

you cant have a rule that says some women with an xy chromosome are banned, but others are free to compete.

You can't? Why not?

 

[Izzyeviel]

Do you mean their classmates or the classmates of the opposite sex? Massive difference. I’d oppose any law that prevents trans kids playing in competitions for their sex purely because of their gender identity. Such laws are generally made by religious zealots based in their religious dogma rather than on the science. As such I oppose the over simplistic laws of some states. The Mack Beggs example where a female on T was forced to compete in the female category was ridiculous. Males do not need a category that excludes females, even those on T. Don’t lump me in with those people, my position is not their position.

you support those people. You can't repeat their arguments and promote their views & then claim you have nothing to do with them!

 

[firefly3323]

I

Never heard anybody in this debate say that, ever. It is always that they should not be competing in the female category. Certainly any serious contributor on the topic, such as Ross Tucker, would never argue that.

As Ross has pointed out, you can have fairness or inclusiveness. Take your pick.

 

[Biggut]

you cant have a rule that says some women with an xy chromosome are banned, but others are free to compete.

you're literally arguing its ok for some trans women to compete with women, whilst simultaneously arguing that all trans women should be banned from competing with women. This is why you shouldn't watch GB News.

Can you actually read what I say not what you want me to have said. Absolutely no females should be barred from the female category. The only females who have XY chromosomes are all absolutely permitted in the female category. The DSD regs do not apply to any females. What I do say is that some males can be accommodated in the female category because they do not have androgenised male development. Barring all males who do have androgenised male development is only right IRRESPECTIVE OF not BECAUSE OF their gender identity. Nobody is being barred because of their gender identity.

 

[Biggut]

you support those people. You can't repeat their arguments and promote their views & then claim you have nothing to do with them!

No I dont. Youa re lying about my position yet again. Why cant you deal with what I actually say rathe than constantly wishing I said something else?

 

[KZD]

Its hard to take OP's viewpoints seriously when you realise this just another faux moral outrage. Trans people are the latest in a long line of minorities to be demonised.

It's pretty sad people think men are having their penises and testicles removed just to win in their chosen sport.

It's also pretty sad that people think women are delicate flowers and that competing with trans males will cause them to be hurt. The same argument was successfully used to ban womens football in the UK.

Its also pretty sad when people use the 'they're taking away spots from actual women' argument. For some reason, this only ever applies to trans women. Not trans men. Nor women who have exceptional talent and compete alongside men in male sports.

And their argument also ignores the existence of intergender people. Remember Castor Semenya? When your argument includes demands to visibly check peoples genitals especially those under 18...you might want to stop and think 'are we the baddies?'

& furthermore I'd like to think we could all agree that governments deciding who can & can't compete in sports is fairly sinister. Such decisions must rest with the governing body.

Ok let's break down your post.

First, you seem to miss the point that is being discussed here. This is not a question of trans people being demonised or not in the context of the society as a whole, this is about trans women in women's sport.

I really don't know why do you have to comment about they're genitals. There are plenty of trans women that kept their genitals despite being competing against women, Lia Thomas is the prime example of that to the point of leaving biological women uncomfortable with her in the locker room.

Also its not because a few think that women are delicate flowers that biological males should compete with women. Its one thing to having sexists thinking women shouldn't do sports because they're place is at home its another to think its fair to have biological males to compete against them including in contact sports and that brings me to your next point, of course people are talking about trans women because they are the ones that are taking opportunities away from biological women in sports. I am glad that you bring trans men too, if what really matters is hormones why aren't testosterone filled trans men winning sporting events against biological men the same away their women counterparties do?

Also if biological women with exceptional talent compete against men why would trans women compete against women? They are biological males after all and if you are not good enough to compete in professional sports then train more instead of taking spots away from people of the opposite sex. If there is one category that is open to more than one sex its the male one not the female one.

You also bring Semenya to the fore but she is a very different case. She is not 'intergendered' like you put it she is intersex but was born with external female genitals and always identified as a women. Not saying that's fair that she competed with women but as far as I know she was considered a women since she was born.

Finally, a trans woman can live as a woman during a normal life but still recognise that because she is a biological male she shouldn't be competing with women in sports. There are actually trans women that think like this but they are ridicularised and attacked by trans activists. And frankly if the dominant voices in the trans community and their allies were not so reluctant in having an honest conversation about how to integrate trans people in sports instead of being aggresive, you wouldn't have such an intense backlash from the society at large in a country like the US.

 

[CyclistAbi]

I don't support mandatory hormone treatments and operations from a young age. For being able to compete in some sport when you are an adult. Transgender people in my opinion should be allowed to choose if they want to compete in male or female version of sport. Or both. And the results would be categorized as such. Transgender person. To me that is fair and inclusive.

The rest of the debates i read in regards to this area in this day and age are usually a bit whacked.

 

[Izzyeviel]

If you don't understand your own argument don't blame others.

So clarify it once and for all.

Pick one,

a) Trans women should be banned from competing with women
b) Trans women should be allowed to compete with women as long as they meet whatever criteria the sports governing body deems fit?