Max testosterone level for trans athletes to be halved

@Mogleflop
This is not an NUS position but refers to a workshop at NUS Women's 18
The discussion about the slideshow on this forum was connected to EH's condemnation of Mumsnet for transphobia.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3222263-Slide-show-on-How-to-Deal-with-TERFs

This is bollocks.

There is NO possible allowable level of testosterone for transitioned athletes, since the likes of Laurel Hubbard in female terms doped for 37 years before reducing testosterone.

So the question of 10, 5 1, 0.1 is invalid and it doesn't really make a difference.

If you have ever been a male you have no place in elite female sport, end of study. You might as well let Usain Bolt compete but say he has to hop, or have a hand tied his back or something, it's by definition nonsensical.

Nope, fear of TERF literal violence is pure fantasy irrational, in that it’s not reality-related, so I’d say phobic.

Anyone would think Bindel, Bellos, Brunskell-Evans and Jeffreys were running around Clockwork Orange-style the way these tantrummers carry on.

Terfphobia should definitely be a word!

I'm so cross at that definition from the NUS.

As an autistic person these things matter, and since a lot of trans people are apparently on the spectrum, they may be more vulnerable to this nonsense.

Look, I don't doubt that some people in the world would like to bomb trans people; there are some people ready to kill, bomb, murder out of any number of reasons. There are clearly issues with domestic abuse. On a daily basis there must be some real vitriolic knee jerk homophobic disgust out there too when you "look" a certain way and that must be horrible to encounter. There are definitely threats out there (to all of us, all the time).

But focusing on some imaginary bad guys and giving them a weird label doesn't help with that, it makes more people turn against you as you demonise them for asking logical questions.

Refusing to ask those questions (ironically) really does make someone more vulnerable to the real threats around them which could include damaging bodies and fertility, mental health, as well as disrupting their friendships and relationships, personal growth and career opportunities with this sort of black-and-white "you're one of us without question or you're the antichrist" thinking.

terfobia (sp)?
I suspect, more likely, misogyny.

My bottom line is that biological males should not be allowed to compete against biological females in sports. This is one of the areas where it is very easy to determine and therefore monitor.

I'm beginning to wonder if some people really do see "TERFs" as sincerely horrifying, terrifying demonic/terrorist figures who would usually "look" a certain way? Do they really imagine packs of savage, rabid women out there ready to stab them to death or something?

It’s almost sounds like a... literal phobia.

What exactly does a "TERF" look like, let alone a disguised one?!
I'm beginning to wonder if some people really do see "TERFs" as sincerely horrifying, terrifying demonic/terrorist figures who would usually "look" a certain way? Do they really imagine packs of savage, rabid women out there ready to stab them to death or something?

Yes this view is held...
recommended resource from an NUS Women's 18 presentation
theterfs.com
"TERF Position on Trans Equality
For decades, TERFs have sought to legislate trans people out of existence. Moreover, they work to oppose trans equality measures, infiltrate trans-inclusive feminist spaces, work with anti-gay groups to target trans kids and collaborate with anti-trans extremists who advocate bombing US targets."

So are the IOC also acknowledging that without the suppression of testosterone (to a greater degree than previously claimed) trans gender women may have an unfair physical advantage due to nature of male biology?

this being the case then...
Several other major marathons said they have no official policies but are taking a similar approach to Boston. Organizers of the Chicago, New York City, London and Los Angeles marathons all said they honor the gender that runners submit during sign-ups.
"We want to be inclusive and sensitive to all of our participants," said Carey Pinkowski, Chicago Marathon executive race director. "At this point, we don't feel that we need to require legal or medical records or anything along those lines."
But there's still a wrinkle: Many races, including Boston, New York and Chicago, require runners to show IDs with the same names and genders as their application forms, which can be an obstacle for trans athletes who haven't legally changed their personal information. Race officials said they haven't fielded complaints but will monitor their policies to make sure they're inclusive.
In elite competition, debate has mostly focused on transgender women, who typically require surgery or medication to lower their testosterone levels. Olympic officials issued new rules in 2016 saying trans women can compete if their testosterone levels stay beneath a certain limit, and many professional races now follow similar rules."
In response to the March blog post, some commenters said transgender women have an unfair physical advantage and shouldn't bump other women from qualifying.

Stevie Romer, a transgender woman from Woodstock, Illinois, says she registered for Boston as a woman because that's what she is. Although she hasn't done anything to lower her testosterone levels, Romer legally changed her gender, grew her hair out and started living openly as a woman more than a year ago.

"To be able to experience it as me was really, really important," she said. "I've been a runner since as long as I can remember. I love running, but I just happen to be transgender."

abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/boston-marathons-trans-women-compete-women-54320495

Arguably whether transwomen/men have advantages or disadvantages, either way they're not competing on a level field. There should be more categories.

A "TERF in disguise"?

What exactly does a "TERF" look like, let alone a disguised one?!

I'm beginning to wonder if some people really do see "TERFs" as sincerely horrifying, terrifying demonic/terrorist figures who would usually "look" a certain way? Do they really imagine packs of savage, rabid women out there ready to stab them to death or something?

2whatever physical advantages transgender athletes have, they are not nearly as large as the sociological disadvantages"

What sociological diadvantages are there to being raised a boy in regards to sport?

crispbuttyfan what study is that, where is it published and how many athletes studied? Do you have a link?

Inclusion policies in sport (as in all areas) for people who are transgender are vital BUT in order for sport to remain inclusive, there must also be consideration and impact awareness on how such policies might affect some women and girls.
To ask questions about this is not transphobic.
There are some conflicting rights and there is a desperate need for these to be able to be discussed with both nuance and debate.

Further discussion by Delia Johnson about sporting policies:
metro.co.uk/2015/10/21/transgender-woman-on-her-desperate-struggle-with-her-new-identity-and-how-she-was-accepted-by-the-fa-but-not-her-daughter-5376352/

crispbuttyfan Really interesting post. I haven't seen those studies before.

There has already been studies about the efficacy of trans women on hrt vs cis standards, generally if people were more aware of the actual issue instead of just plainly trying to say no trans women should be involved.

Some power events give trans women a distinct disadvantage such as the 100m, probably because of reduced muscle mass tendon/ligament strength pushing an otherwise male skeleton.

Where as the shot putt gives trans women an advantage but javelin a disadvantage,its not so clear cut, I have attached an image of preliminary findings averaged out, less than 1% either way is dismissed due to is being based on averages

I always wonder if male muscle tissue responds to the same amount of testosterone in a way that would advantage a man even with all other things being equal. Has this been studied?

Interesting to read in the article today about Liz Truss' support for MN position.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3228488-Liz-Truss-MP-breaks-cover-backs-MN

Last night Delia Johnston, the former head of a charity campaigning for trans sportspeople to be allowed to compete in their chosen gender, condemned Ms Truss. Ms Johnston said: ‘She is giving kudos to Mumsnet who are particularly vicious on this particular front. Truss could be investigated for backing a group that is effectively advocating violence against the transgender community. She may be a terf in disguise.’

The principle that trans women can compete is still upheld by IOC (albeit with a change in hormone requirements).
The IOC principle that trans women can compete is the founding basis for other sports. If there is no drug test for other competitors due to the level etc, then it would seem likely that the principle of inclusion remains. It would of course be completely discriminatory to blood test some women & not others.
With such a principle established and such a wide umbrella of what it means to be a trans gender woman & unclear situation with regards documents showing sex or gender. Self id to women's sport as seen at this year's Boston Marathon seems inevitable :

It's a start but i guess they were never going to turn around & so "oopsie we let men into the women's categories".
Fingers crossed the madness will end!
Thanks for the link.

I don't think this is positive. As pp have said, it's as if no one medical is remotely involved in these decisions. It's appeasement. Consider the opposite argument: why are the times, distances, heights, speeds etc all better in men's sport compared to women's? If anyone thinks the answer is "the only reason is their testosterone at the time of competing" then they are barking.

As an interesting note, the man who's an arm amputee who won his version of the 100m at the recent Commonwealth Games would have won the able-bodied women's 100m easily.

Exactly Zero

It’s interesting that we’re viewing this as a victory when 5nmol/l is still twice the top of the natural range for women, and testosterone level isn’t the only factor that gives men improved athletic ability.

Because the IOC started with the barmy 10 nmol/l we’re conditioned to think a reduction that is still unachievable for women is a victory. We’re frogs being boiled.

Men shouldn’t compete in women’s sport, no matter how much cosmetic surgery they have or what drugs they take.

I cannot fathom why this is even a fight we have to have. Except that men’s feelings are more important than women’s safety, women’s competitions and anyone’s integrity.

I agree with everyone else that this is good but I don't understand why testosterone is treated as the deciding factor. There are so many other biological differences which will not change. I am aware that transwomen will say they are so much weaker than they used to be since taking hormones, but that doesn't mean that they are not still stronger than female athletes.

this is a good start. And planned research to investigate of trans women retain an advantage over women is fantastic news too.

it feels a bit like sanity is starting to prevail.

Generally fair level set on the evidence most transgender competitors easily fall under this level if meeting the other criteria. The 10mml was so high that some men could have just entered without doing anything at all.