Transgender students may not have to reveal birth sex to play sports

[Bambambini]

"Transgender students should not have to declare their birth gender when applying to university sports clubs, the National Union of Students (NUS) is expected to rule.

It adds that trans and intersex students should not be asked to disclose their legal gender or personal medical information to participate in university sport, including details regarding hormone replacement therapy.

The motion suggests that the NUS follows the lead of Durham University’s new policy on inclusivity, whereby trans and intersex students are allowed to compete and train in whichever team “best fits their gender identity”."

Whole Telegraph article here www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/04/24/transgender-students-should-not-have-declare-birth-gender-applying/

No, and I think it's really sexist to suggest so. Rousey is a particular favourite person of mine, but I think saying a quote is 'male sounding' is sexism.

OK yeah I get that and probably didn't think it through properly. I just read that quote and it was all...entitled male taking the piss out of female with legit concerns.

Here is a female and a male pelvis.

A female pelvis has to be able to birth a child. This leads to an evolutionary trade off where a female is less able to run than a male, as the male does not need the same adaption for birth.

The word pregnancy will be "compromised"?

pregnant people, parent1+parent2, front hole, chestfeeding...

I'd say Cheesy is doing the gender critical posters a favour, giving them an opportunity to annihilate her arguments point by point. It provides a kind of backdrop of what uncritical support for the TRA agenda looks like, allowing feminists to set out their reasoned objections to it, a bit like practicing your ball skills against a wall.

Every thread like this produces new posters coming forward to say that now they understand the issues they have revised their views. I find this immensely encouraging because very much the same thing happened to me.

As a liberal and lifelong LGB supporter, I started as an unthinking cheerleader for trans rights. As I became increasingly aware of the inconsistencies and outright bad faith of the trans agenda my position changed. I explored the whole picture and I was horrified by what I found. This is now the sole social issue on which I deviate from the socially liberal party line.

The trans agenda is homophobic and misogynist. It is regressive, not progressive. It gravely harms children and young adults. It promotes misogynistic views of women, the fruit of obsessive porn consumption. If the average person became aware of the thinking of many MTTs their acceptance would evaporate. However because the material is easily found online, a doubter just needs to do a little digging and the fetishes and AGP lie just below the surface.

@Applebite - that at me?

when you've got some hairy arse shitting in the cubicle next to you, you have no problem with that?

You're either arguing that women don't shit or that I'll be in a situation peering under the cubicle to see a hairy arse. Both of which are questionable. I have no question shitting in a cubicle next to a man. In fact, I eat a lot of pulses and its them who are likely to fare worse.

I agree with the 'proper trans' vs 'pervert' argument (no offence meant to 'proper' trans people) but laws can account for shades of grey. An apt example is nudity. I'm not a lawyer but from what I do know, a flash of my arse through a window as I go upstairs with a cup of tea vs DH flashing (through the same window) as school children are going home from school are very different.

I'd feel uncomfortable changing next to bearded Peter Jane who was staring at me changing but wouldn't care about be-penised Lucy wearing make-up, with long hair who had been swimming in a swimsuit. I realise the gender stereotyping but it's to make a point.

I don't pretend to have the answers but I don't see a tiny, tiny number of sports men or women as the enormous encroachment and reason for outrage that many on this thread do. It isn't only about sports of course but they're one of the few legally segregated 'activities'.

@BigDeskBob

I think segregation came about because traditionally, the world was extremely sexist so women have been added as an after-thought or at least, after men's competitions.

resent money, time and effort spent on women, when it could be spent on men

This sounds a bit 'patriarchal conspiracy' to me!

@wankingmonkey

I don't really see a problem with transmen competing with males tbh. Because they won't have an unfair advantage.

Perhaps no advantage but it could be dangerous and I know my rugby playing DH (only club level but a fairly big guy) wouldn't tackle a transwoman properly.

@morningrunner

Yes, I'm not sure and I think that recognising you don't have the answers as opposed to being sure of your position can be a virtue.

I gave the example of my non-segregated hobby (to us a MN term) benefitting from being such and the UK are top of the medal tables. We had the advantages of economy of scale when it came to training, dieticians, tactician, support staff etc.

I think the livelihood argument is redundant (see image) as it goes beyond simple ability. I think there are and should be clear divisions when it comes to safety (boxing, rugby). I think that weightlifting trans person should have been embarrassed but, isn't the fact that they are such a famous case suggest that it happens so rarely as to be insignificant.

I think I genuinely couldn't give a fuck if some trans person who has had a terrible hand dealt to them in life wins the women's 1500m at secondary school and it gives their life a little validation.

Somewhere between Gavin Hubbard and sportsday it's a lot of shades of grey and I think seeing it all as the start of the end of equality is ridiculous.

@Bambambini

I think you have me confused with someone else. I'd also suggest that my line between ambivalence and empathy for trans people seems to be common (not on MN, obviously) otherwise this wouldn't be an issue for you.

@BeyondUser24601

and elbows have a different angle of extension, commonly accepted that it is to allow the carrying of young. Our lungs are smaller (as a percent of body size) as we would hang around caves with and not run after a woolly mammoth. Our eyes are different, enabling us to scan a wider area looking for attackers as opposed to focusing on prey with a view to getting it with our spears. We have better night-vision for the same reason. Men have better depth perception, great when throwing things at something else or fighting. We have 30% improved sensitivity to sound allowing us to hear predators approaching the family's living space. Men have higher percentages of hemoglobin which is why they can run further and faster and more efficiently, thicker and oilier skin to protect against abrasions, deeper voices signalling to women they have more testosterone and will make better hunters, beards because it signals higher testosterone and is attractive to women (evolutionary terms)...

I double dare you to suggest that male and female brains have evolved differently though...

@YawnofthePatriarchy

Which of my arguments have been annihilated (fuck, that's hard to spell!)?

I don't have uncritical support for "The TRA agenda" and having taken part in a thread on trans and prisons, I completely changed my mind and swung in line with MN consensus.

I think your assumption that I'm unthinking is offensive and does you no favours. I think I'm superior to your opinion there because I can see that I don't have the answer without derisive posts against those with an opposing view. I believe that remainers' attitude is the deciding factor in losing the referendum. Perhaps you could learn from that.

Nothing anyone has said has changed my mind re. "it's only bloody throwing things further or running faster".

The trans agenda is homophobic and misogynist.

One thing I have learnt through engaging on MN is that those two terms (along with transphobic) are overused to the point of redundancy.

forgotten image

Perhaps no advantage but it could be dangerous and I know my rugby playing DH (only club level but a fairly big guy) wouldn't tackle a transwoman properly.

Oh yes, in contact sports sex segregation is absolutely necessary. Which would mean trans people could not do them at all unless they play with their own sex. And transmen...couldnt play fullstop as they couldn't do it with the males, but would be on T so couldn't be with females either. Not 'fair' I guess, but safe.

@WankingMonkey

And transmen...couldn't play fullstop as they couldn't do it with the males, but would be on T

There's a difference between putting yourself in harms way and putting others there. If any FtM wanted to play rugby with men then they would be agreeing to potential injury whereas telling 29 women that Bob (self-identified woman, 6' 6" Islander) is called Catherine and is the new 2nd row is very different.

"I think segregation came about because traditionally, the world was extremely sexist so women have been added as an after-thought or at least, after men's competitions."

So you think segregation is a result of sexism? You think women aren't allowed in men's teams because men don't want them there? You think that no women plays for Manchester city, not because of lack of ability, but because of sexism?

If any FtM wanted to play rugby with men then they would be agreeing to potential injury whereas telling 29 women that Bob (self-identified woman, 6' 6" Islander) is called Catherine and is the new 2nd row is very different.

But the males would hold back surely, if they knew they were competing against a female? yes the transman could chose to put themselves in danger, but I would think other males would feel wrong about being as rough with them as they would with a male...if that makes sense? Pretty much like how not many male people would agree to boxing/other fighting with a female.

If you want to hear some blinding sexism in action, you listen to the comments that men make about women's football.

Even the twenty stone lumps who couldn't run after a ball unless you glued a burger to it.

Cheesy re your "It's only throwing things further or running faster" comment, you obviously are not interested in athletics and therefore care not one jot about the competitors. Yesterday greenwool linked an article about Andraya Yearwood a transgender male to female student who had taken no steps towards transition racing against female students - look at the pictures in that article and see how far ahead of the female students Andraya is. There is zero fairness and equality in that race, the other competitors might just as well not have bothered to turn up.

If you want fairness and equality then having TW compete against women purely to offer them validation is not it.

When TW set records for running and throwing that are utterly unattainable for any female to match, let alone beat, without copious use of drugs then there is no point to that sport whatsoever, or is that what you want as you personally seem to find those particular disciplines unworthy?

@wakingmonkey

But the males would hold back surely, if they knew they were competing against a female? yes the transman could chose to put themselves in danger, but I would think other males would feel wrong about being as rough with them as they would with a male

Didn't I say exactly the same?

Perhaps no advantage but it could be dangerous and I know my rugby playing DH (only club level but a fairly big guy) wouldn't tackle a transwoman properly.

I think that holding back in sparring (boxing) would be easier but when in competition, expecting someone to hold back and for those people to judge what counts as holding back is difficult.

DH broke a man's ankle a few years ago (accidentally). Depute it being a complete accident, shaking hands afterwards etc, I know he'd have felt worse had he broken a MtF's bone.

Sport shouldn't be about holding back and when the purpose of the sport is to run through the opposition or directly put them to the floor, safety over-rides sensitivities.

"safety over-rides sensitivities."

Oh. So being concerned for fairness; abuse of fair play; discouraging girls from even trying; blindly ignoring the fact that an enormous teenage boy with a moustache is lining up with girls and being praised for running an outstanding time... is just "sensitivity"?

Back to your knitting, girls, cheesy sure told us!

Didn't I say exactly the same?

Yes you did sorry I think I misread your post.

But yeah, if they compete with males, their own safety is compromised and the guys will not play to the best of their ability to try not to hurt the transman. or most guys would anyway, some might not care. So...its not fair for them to compete against males either.

Back to trans leagues, or not competing then. As they can't play against females if on testosterone. If sport is so important to them, stopping hormones is an option too I guess.

cheesy

I'm struggling to make sense of your posts. Although I agree it's a complicated issue, I think you are making it even more complicated.

You seem to be saying on the one hand that there are parts that are unfair, but on the other hand that shouldn't take precedence over all aspects of validation. And cherry picking which sports might accommodate trans people and which shouldn't.

Transgenderism has gone from being a psychological illness to an ideology. A belief system.

It reinforces the idea of gender and at the same time attracts misogynists.

Most people would agree that giving an autogynephile civil rights that accommodate them, is wrong. Most people would also agree that if a homesexual transsexual wants to present as woman to alleviate their symptoms that would be fine.

Why should either of these types of transwomen be able to legally call themselves women and then exploit that to the detriment of natal born women?

Do you have an opinion/argument/viewpoint in favour of this?

I'd feel uncomfortable changing next to bearded Peter Jane who was staring at me changing but wouldn't care about be-penised Lucy wearing make-up, with long hair who had been swimming in a swimsuit. I realise the gender stereotyping but it's to make a point

I'm struggling to understand this. Both these hypothetical people are men. Would you recognise one as a woman and not the other? Is it about who is performing femininity? Why is one ok and not the other?

I wouldn't want either of them in a changing room with me, or my daughter.

There's a good article by the British Journal of Sports Medicine here.

"Although the psychosocial arguments in favour of allowing transsexual participation would appear to be relatively uncomplicated, there is in my opinion inadequate physiological performance related data to allow an unambiguous position to emerge. It seems clear, however, that every sports authority or governing body, indeed every athlete, will ultimately need to wrestle with these issues and answer the questions raised above. It is not hyperbole to state that the IOC took a bold step when it decided to permit the participation of transgender athletes in the Olympic Games. Experience will eventually tell us whether they made the correct decision, and whether the modern female athletic playing field will remain level. Until such time when we can reflect on that experience with perfect hindsight, we must make the best decisions we can with the information available. However, whatever is decided, we must not forget that our actions will affect the lives of the athletes involved, both transsexual and not, forever."

It is worth noting that in the IOC and individual sports federations debates on this matter, the non-disclosure of transgender status has never been proposed - unlike Durham Uni.

How have I been 'undignified' Cheesy?

I have simply challenged your viewpoint. Nothing undignified in that.

My username is simply a username - nothing more or less.

You still haven't addressed the fact that this is an issue that only goes one way. With one tiny exception, transgender men do not compete with other men. And the reasons for this are obvious.

This is an issue that overwhelming and detrimentally affects women's sports.

On the one hand, it's 'just throwing / jumping / running'. Nothing to get out knickers in a twist over.

In the other, it's deeply important to allow transwomen to compete against other women, and it's 'transphobic' to object to that.

It clearly is important. To transwomen, and to women in sport. Very important.

As a liberal and lifelong LGB supporter, I started as an unthinking cheerleader for trans rights. As I became increasingly aware of the inconsistencies and outright bad faith of the trans agenda my position changed. I explored the whole picture and I was horrified by what I found. This is now the sole social issue on which I deviate from the socially liberal party line.

Thanks for perfectly articulating my stance on this, Prawn.

@wankingmonkey

If sport is so important to them, stopping hormones is an option too I guess.

Very true, but as it's only sport, completing 'their transition' is probably more important to them.

@Datun

And cherry picking which sports might accommodate trans people and which shouldn't.

Yes. I have no desire to see Rousey be beaten up by a man. My DH wouldn't want to play rugby against a MtF players. If my niece DD lost a sprint then it's less important than someone thumping your face or picking you up and driving you into the ground.

It reinforces the idea of gender and at the same time attracts misogynists.

I don't understand how it attracts misogynists and I completely agree with gender as a mosaic.

@RogueBiscuit

It was an extremely flawed example but I was trying to illustrate the difference between a trans person and a pervert playing the system. I see it as no different to begrudging financial support to someone with disabilities because a third person claims it without deserving it.

If 'Lucy' is truly struggling through life and feels they're trapped in the wrong body then I don't care if they're in the 'wrong' changing room. The difference is between the disingenuous and genuine.

@morningrunner

Surely you can see that the fact it can and should happen in one sport does not mean that it should happen across the board?

I've said why it's unsuitable in some sports but still, on the whole, I think it's running, jumping and throwing.

I don't know how many times I can say that this is an insignificant issue.

I don't know how many times I can say this is an insignificant issue.
Sport clearly isn't an insignificant issue though, at any level.

I don't know how many times I can say that this is an insignificant issue.

Actually cheesy. If I include the above plus your lack of understanding about how it has attracted misogynists, and the fact that you believe you can make a distinction between, a transwoman with gender dysphoria and a pervert, I really don't think you know that much about the subject.

Lets ask Jessica Ennis, Serena Williams, Christina Ohuruogo, Kelly Holmes, and so many other female athletes, how insignificant a matter this is.

I don't know how many times I can say that this is an insignificant issue.

Keep saying it. It won't make it so.

It is a very significant issue, to transwomen, to sportswomen and to feminists.