AIBU - Transgender 'athletes'

[HappyHippo1234]

To start off - I have no issue with trans people at all. The only issue I have is transgender females (male to female) competing in women sports.

Yes, they may have been taking hormones and they have lost some muscle and gained some fat. But, they have stronger bones and bigger spines, hands, feet, lungs and hearts. Basically trans females have an advantage over biological females.

What I absolutely HATE about the situation, it the trans athletes attitude, it honestly disgusts me. Did they never take biology as teenagers or learn about puberty?
For them to sit there with their wins and say that they have no advantage just p*sses me off. Are they stupid or ignorant? There's no way they don't know they have an advantage. Do they not realise they are taking wins away from girls and woman who have spent their whole lives training for a sport only for it to be taken away from someone who was a mediocre male.

Look at Lia Thomas, she was somewhere in the 400-500th best college male swimmer or something like that. She is now trans and BAM she is number 1 and winning everything.

It just annoys me to no end. Especially the trans woman who you can tell that they KNOW they have a major advantage and are cheating the system and then sit there with a SMUG GRIN on their faces. I mean every Caitlyn Jenner said it's wrong.

Sorry for the rant. My DD15 has been upset all week as on the weekend another girl beat all the girls by a huge stretch in her cross country meet (her team is usually 1st but were bumped to 2nd). At first everyone thought this girl was great, until one mom heard the group the girl was with discussing the results and how it was great for the team that this girl came out as trans and was boosting their results etc! Fair to say that news travelled quickly and there were MANY parents complaining to officials. But surprise surprise nothing was done about it. So at the award giving ceremony everyone waited as everything up to 1st place was given out and as soon as they got to the 1st team, I would say 95% of people walked away. It felt harsh but necessary!
(Also the girl was 16 and had only recently transitioned from what we could gather and when you actually looked at her you could tell she had gone through at least some portion of male puberty). Again nothing against the girl just don't think she could compete.

And to get around all these discrimination lawsuits, I think they should change the categories! Have an XX category and an XY category, that why there is no debate and no 'discrimination' as you can't identify as XY if you are XX! (And then also have an open category where trans, non-binary etc. can compete).

SORRY THAT WAS SO LONG. NOW FOR THE VOTE:

YABU - Trans (XX) women are woman and should be allowed to compete with XY women, even though they scientifically have an advantage.

YANBU - They will always have an advantage and so should not compete with XY women.

Love this.

Very well presented.

"And that is transphobic. Did you realise that?"

FACT!

Or maybe not. I do appreciate that some people would insist that statement was transphobic. But the NHS website says "gender dysphoria is not a mental illness, but some people may develop mental health problems because of gender dysphoria". So yes, trans issues are mental health issues.

But you keep policing what is and what isn't correct and proper in your world view. I'll keep looking for the nuance and pointing out the massive holes in your arguments. You might hate me for it ... but consider it training for the bigger battles that are yet to come. There's more Emma Watsons than Victoria Smiths and the former are still being born whilst the latter are dying out. The quality of the arguments needs to improve if you want to change people's minds.

The only reason GC's would want to prevent men and women playing golf together is because they fear the glory would flow disproportionately towards men.

Your entire argument is that men and women have different strengths in golf; and those arguments all support keeping the game single sex.

Golf if not not single sex because women demanded single sex golf. Its because traditionally, women were excluded from playing the game at all, and men were furious at being forced to include us.

presumably @Mark19735 doesn’t agree with para sport either. Because, after all, it’s just bitter people who don’t want all the glory and money going to able bodied men. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Oh give over, Mark. If you're male, 'looking for the nuance' is a nice hobby, isn't it? Something to do, smugly, without any real-life effects.

I could swear that some blokes think that being male is a virtue, an achievement, rather than the luck of the draw.

Treating them as women's rights issues is, in my view, a strategic mistake

This is madness. Of course determining who gets to compete in female sports is a women’s rights issue.

Are you male? I’m guessing so. Your posts feel typically male centred and with no thought to women and girls.

G*ood
*
Sigh.

I pointed out that in a thread where posters are concerned about what's happening in women and girls sports other posters have accused us of paranoia, just accept it because life isn't fair anyway, it's not that big a problem.

I think this is gaslighting.

Can we move on or do you still need to police my use of the English language? Or maybe you'd like to tell me to shut up again?

I draw the line where World Athletics seems to drawing the line.

At the moment, any male who has experienced any benefit from male puberty should not be eligible to compete with female athletes in a female sports category. I do expect that there will be in time research to clarify whether or not males who don't process testosterone (CAIS) have any advantage at all. They may do and this needs to be researched.

You are now trying to politically utilise people with Differences of Sex Development to progress your argument.

Caster Semenya is a male who has experienced male puberty. They have known they are male for a long time. They have 5-ARD. they were specifically targeted by a talent scout because it was known that that part of the country that Semenya grew up had athletes with this condition.

Is Li Wenwen someone who also has a DSD? Are they trans? Why have you brought Li Wenwen into the discussion?

"Who else are you prepared to erase/negate because they don't match your views?"

'My views'? Really? You have not produced anything that supports your argument beyond attacking feminists, making transphobic statements and repeating some men's rights activist discussion points.

I am not 'erasing' anyone. I am saying that male people compete with male people. They are not 'banned'. They are not 'erased'.

You keep resorting to emotional manipulation to make your point.

It is not just about safety. It is about fairness. The reality is even the OIC has conceded that it can't be 'fair'. The inclusion aspect though is also not supported. Because no other category will allow a person from a category of athlete that has advantages to enter into a category set aside to protect the competition of the athletes in that category.

"If the boxing governing bodies can devise categories based on weight first and testosterone levels second (or whatever else they come up with) and thereby allow men and women to compete together in a way that is inclusive and also safe, why would anyone ideologically oppose it?"

Read the facts. This will not happen! It is never going to be safe if a male boxer is physically punching a female boxer. Tell us by what magic will this happen?

'There's no safety issue in women and men playing golf together. There's no impact on their final score, or handicap."

There is impact on the final score and handicap. Do you understand how a golf swing works and the muscles, and the skeleton work to swing a golf club?

Mark's posts are long and slightly pompous, with an air of "come now ladies, let's be reasonable", but the actual substance of them is the same old "what about DSDs", "but Serena Williams is better than most men" and "but inclusivity" nonsense that has already been torn asunder a zillion times on this thread alone.

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt but I've seen him before.

You've just made my point better than I've been trying to.

There's nothing wrong with para sport. It relies on a professional sports governing body deciding what criteria make participation fair. Those bodies are saying that there are circumstances in which people born male can participate in the same categories as people born female. Why's that so hard to understand?

Do you get equally upset at the Paralympics when some competitors have an amputation above the knee and others have an amputation below the knee? I'm sure it's a hot topic in the A3/A4/A5 categorisation conferences and for the participants affected, but does anyone on MN post about it?

Mark19735 Both the Gender Recognition Act and The Equality Act recognise sports as a sex affected activity, and allow single sex sports for reasons of safety and fairness.

If you want to change the law, you get on with doing that.

So you think that people don’t get to comment on the - often highly political, and with real implications in terms of the exclusion of women and girls - policies of governing bodies?

Do you realise how ‘now calm down ladies. Just accept that all these male-dominated bodies just know better than you. Stop getting yourselves so upset. It’s unladylike!’ you sound?

Considering most sporting bodies are starting to come out and make policies that male born people can't compete in woman's categories ( in most circumstances) I think the few that disagree need to be taking it up with the sporting bodies.

Not the millions of people who agree with the sporting bodies decisions.

Top athletes can get college scholarships, sponsorships, etc. There is a lot to be gained when you can automatically become #1.

u r bonkers

Li Wenwen beat Laurel Hubbard to the Olympic Gold. You'd said there was no-one who could beat her, but what you meant to say was there was no-one in New Zealand who could beat her during that particular qualifying competition. I never said Li Wenwen had any medical condition - other posters inferred that.

There's nothing wrong with para sport. It relies on a professional sports governing body deciding what criteria make participation fair. Those bodies are saying that there are circumstances in which people born male can participate in the same categories as people born female. Why's that so hard to understand?

Make and female para sports athletes compete separately. They compete based on having an eligible disability against people who have the same level of disability with an eligible disability.

They've never argued a male with CP has the same disadvantage as a female with CP.

"The only reason GC's would want to prevent men and women playing golf together is because they fear the glory would flow disproportionately towards men. They want to ring-fence and capture a share of the podium finishes, medals and prize money - ideally one that delivers a 50:50 split by sex. But that's not equivalent to a 50:50 split by talent, or effort, or any other sporting criterion. It is just as arbitrary as insisting on a split by height. And it is a political choice, not a 'natural' one. Men have subsidised women's grass roots and competitive sports for years, because society deemed it equitable. GCs who aren't prepared to include trans people at all on a point of principle are just pulling the ladder up behind them - and the greatest irony of all is that women still have such a long way to go to achieve equality (never mind equity)."

I have separated this out for readers.

This is an incredible paragraph from someone who doesn't have a grip on the science of sport or have women and girl's interests at heart?

"The only reason GC's would want to prevent men and women playing golf together is because they fear the glory would flow disproportionately towards men."

For a start. Using the term 'GCs' is dehumanising. No one on this site is allowed to dehumanise trans people by using terms like 'the transes'. Using the term GCs detaches the term from the humanising word of 'people' or 'feminist'. In fact, the term rightfully was 'gender critical feminist' and by detaching the 'feminist' from the term, then also allows people to wedge in people who are not feminists and are not working in the collective interest of all females of any gender.

Next, it is such a men's activist take. No.... women want to be recognised as being the best in the category that they can fairly compete in.

Just because YOU don't understand the science of golf, doesn't mean that other people don't understand. And yes, male people have a physical advantage over female people in golf.

"They want to ring-fence and capture a share of the podium finishes, medals and prize money - ideally one that delivers a 50:50 split by sex."

No. The people who understand the physical advantages of male bodies over female bodies want both male athletes and female athletes to be rewarded for their best performances and to recognise their achievements.

At the moment, equestrian is probably the only sport that is suitable for male and females to compete freely together because it involves a horse!

Even darts. Even snooker. Male bodies have advantages that female bodies cannot overcome.

"But that's not equivalent to a 50:50 split by talent, or effort, or any other sporting criterion."

I have addressed this.

"It is just as arbitrary as insisting on a split by height. And it is a political choice, not a 'natural' one."

What the fuck does this even mean?

Oh... right. That male people and female people should compete in the exact same categories together and female people should 'just accept that they didn't win this time because not every one wins'.

So, am I to take it that you think that female athletes just don't try hard enough?

Do you believe that no female sports should exist? That female athletes are worth less than male athletes? That female sports should be treated as lesser? What are you arguing for here?

"Men have subsidised women's grass roots and competitive sports for years, because society deemed it equitable."

Sorry. this really is straight out of the men's rights activism guide. I am not even going to comment any further.

"GCs who aren't prepared to include trans people at all on a point of principle are just pulling the ladder up behind them - and the greatest irony of all is that women still have such a long way to go to achieve equality (never mind equity)."

In what way is a male person a female person ever?

How does including a male person in a female sports category benefit the female half of the population?

Maybe in the time I have taken to write these replies you have answered what other protected category of sports allows any competitor to compete who is not of that protected category or from an even more protected category?

Because really, all I am reading here is your own very deep and entrenched prejudice from what I read.

You have no arguments at all. You are simply repeating the same trope.

Because even the OIC admits it is not fair to include males who have gone through any male puberty in female sports categories.

The only thing that is left is emotional manipulation, denigrating people who disagree with you and insisting that you are right.

If Li Wenwen is a female athlete who is not doping, then Li Wenwen was fairly competing in the category that they should be in.

It is not really very hard to understand this.

I said that Laurel Hubbard, a 40 year old male with recent injuries who had spent a decade (I believe) not competing was not beaten in Hubbard's region to claim a place on that region's Olympic team.

You have grasped Li Wenwen to argue a point that you have misunderstood.

But thank you. Li Wenwen proves that mediocre male athletes (if they competed in their own male category) don't always win against elite female athletes. But we already knew that.

In fact, I am surprised we have not seen that argument here, or maybe we have. The arguments are usually:

scarcity - there is not many
performance - those male athletes don't win anyway so what is the issue
and
be kind - which is what you seemed to be advocating for.

But now I think that you just have a deep seated prejudice about feminists and are probably a misogynistic or someone who cannot see the misogyny in your own posts.

Because really, all I am reading here is your own very deep and entrenched prejudice from what I read. You have no arguments at all. You are simply repeating the same trope.

Bingo.

But now I think that you just have a deep seated prejudice about feminists and are probably a misogynistic or someone who cannot see the misogyny in your own posts.

Yes to this

Just because YOU don't understand the science of golf, doesn't mean that other people don't understand. And yes, male people have a physical advantage over female people in golf.

The fact that the design of golf courses offers different tees for men and women should be quite a big clue that there are important differences. They wouldn’t bother spending all that money and going to that effort if it didn’t matter.

As it is, the separate tees and the handicap system are all about letting recreational golfers play in mixed sex groups fairly.

Can you please point out the "massive holes in your arguments" in my arguments?

"There's more Emma Watsons than Victoria Smiths and the former are still being born whilst the latter are dying out."

You really seem to be disconnected from society. Maybe you have not seen the polls where the age group of 18-28 year olds don't feel they can talk honestly about their opinion to their peers due to fears of being ostracised or abused. How tolerant is that? I am happy to link them up if you like.

And maybe you have missed the rapid growth of young women who don't agree that Mulvaney is a 'girl'?

If you own bubble think that males should compete in female sports, you are missing the majority of people in numerous countries who the polls say don't agree with you. over all age groups.

But crack on. You are doing a fine job of showing the paucity of evidence and traction of the 'inclusive' argument on this thread.

"The quality of the arguments needs to improve if you want to change people's minds."

Oh dear.... really?

So far you have posted things that are transphobic, misogynistic, and just ignorant of the current research.

Please explain how teeing off alongside a man will worsen my handicap?
Please explain how any female boxer being punched in the face by a 6 foot 100kg woman is safe, but if it's by a 5 foot 70kg man it's unsafe?
Please explain why equal representation by sex on the podium is more important than equal representation by any other criterion?
Please explain why greater chances of competitive success is more important than greater participation and greater inclusion?
Please explain why we changed from claiming women were equal to men to now expounding all the reasons why women are weaker? And as a follow on - outside the side-show that is community and college sports - please explain why this battle is the hill to die on, when all that it does is reinforce male prejudices about women's capabilities - prejudices that do so much more harm in other socio-economic areas where it affects the lives of millions. Gender pay gap? Well ... clearly it's justified because women are weaker and tire more quickly and have periods and babies, right?