Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Trans people being allowed to compete against women in the Olympics

999 replies

OhShutUpThomas · 24/01/2016 09:37

The Olympics are now allowing men who have taken hormones for 12 months compete against women.

It is NOT transphobic to say that this is grossly unfair and a huge violation of women's rights.

Women who have trained all their lives cannot be expected to compete against people with male bodies and who will be allowed roughly 4 times the normal female testosterone levels.

It's not on. We can't stand for it.

Please get behind this mumsnet. Someone needs to take a stand.

It's NOT transphobic to state that this is unfair. It really isn't.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Maryz · 31/01/2016 12:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 31/01/2016 12:53

^ yy

ClaudiaApfelstrudel · 31/01/2016 13:19

"But telling individuals they can compete as women, and then having a personal campaign against them winning would be terrible for them."

but I worry that likewise telling individuals they can neither compete as women nor men isn't ideal either .. which appears to be the alternative on offer.

When Pistorius was allowed to compete in the men's olimpics with an artificial leg very little fuss was made and most see that as being a positive thing.

The only thing that worries me is the idea that a man can hormonise himself for a year and then apparently be a woman..perhaps I am out of touch but for me it's a very simplistic idea

DrSeussRevived · 31/01/2016 13:27

Claudia, IIRC, there was a lot of debate first at the IOC as to exactly which blades would ensure Pistorious had no physical advantage.

venusinscorpio · 31/01/2016 13:47

If they want to be Olympic athletes then they could have competed as men. They are taking artificial hormones for a medical condition. These affect performance negatively so they would be at a distinct disadvantage when competing against men, but that is not women's fault, is it? I don't see that they have some sort of unassailable right to compete in a sporting competition so that everything has to be rewritten to suit them, particularly when they then have an unfair advantage over women.

Maryz · 31/01/2016 13:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DrSeussRevived · 31/01/2016 13:57

And the case of OP competing was surely more analogous to a woman joining a man's competition, given disabled athletes typically set slower records than the able bodied.

HermioneWeasley · 31/01/2016 13:59

Biology deals people shitty hands all the time. If you decide that your gender dysphoria is so disabling that you have to transition, then if you're a man, you're not allowed to compete against women, and if you're a woman taking testosterone then you're not allowed to compete against women.

Lots of people won't compete at the top level for lots of reasons - pick what's most important to you.

Or campaign for trans category. But I won't accept its fair for men or doomed women to compete against women.

HermioneWeasley · 31/01/2016 13:59

Doped not doomed!

Maryz · 31/01/2016 14:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Kidnapped · 31/01/2016 14:05

Nothing wrong with transgender people wanting to compete in the Olympics at all.

There should be either a dedicated transgender category or an open category in which they can compete. They should be campaigning for this and I would support them. Most folks would, I suspect.

Maryz · 31/01/2016 14:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Kidnapped · 31/01/2016 14:15

Yup, Maryz, and all of this while the IOC are supposedly dedicating themselves to eliminating doping from the Olympics. Hmm

ClaudiaApfelstrudel · 31/01/2016 15:05

I don't think there is an easy answer to this, I do wonder if the lax 'transgender' label is a major sticking point. The idea that someone can go through a painful transition, face life threatening surgery and come out the other end is proof enough for me that the individual does see themselves as fitting their recognised category.

On the other hand somebody (man or woman) who has horminised themselves for a year and still has the genitalia of the 'opposite' sex they doesn't seem to me to be ready to be part of this category and should have to wait to compete in the chosen gender until the whole process is complete

As far as I'm aware a post op trans person resembles a lot closer the biological make up of it's intended sex than one that is pre operative (i.e. still has a penis/testes or a womb/ovaries). As they are a very small minority of people I doubt it would come up as an issue very often, and the chances of ever one being good enough to set world records are pretty low

Maryz · 31/01/2016 15:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 31/01/2016 15:12

Sorry claudia, i'd hate to misinterpret - could you clarify what you mean by "resembles a lot closer the biological make up of its intended sex"?

ClaudiaApfelstrudel · 31/01/2016 15:16

it does seem that these two categories 'physical transition' and 'feeling like a woman' have become mixed up and blurred in the IOC guidelines

ClaudiaApfelstrudel · 31/01/2016 15:18

Sorry claudia, i'd hate to misinterpret - could you clarify what you mean by "resembles a lot closer the biological make up of its intended sex"?

I mean that once the ovaries/testes are removed there is no need to medicate to surpress the oestrogen or testosterone, leaving the body in a more natural state

BeyondBootcampsAgain · 31/01/2016 15:22

I'm not sure whether you simply mean closer than it was before, or closer to its intended sex than its actual sex.

A transwoman on the "scale" of man (say -1) to woman (+1) is still closer to a biological man after transition. They might get to -0.1, but they are never gonna pass 0.

CoteDAzur · 31/01/2016 15:51

"once the ovaries/testes are removed there is no need to medicate to surpress the oestrogen or testosterone, leaving the body in a more natural state"

No need? Why do they continue with HRT for the rest of their lives then, in your opinion?

ClaudiaApfelstrudel · 31/01/2016 15:51

well the longer a body is exposed to the hormones of the opposite gender, and with the genitalia removed (ovaries or testes depending on which way they are going) the more time it is in that state the more it resembles it's intended gender, the muscle/skeletal basis of the body is a dynamic structure and does also change with time according to hormonal intake as far as I know

QueenStromba · 31/01/2016 15:57

I wouldn't call removal of the gonads a natural state.

HermioneWeasley · 31/01/2016 16:12

claudia what do you mean by "intended gender"?

Maryz · 31/01/2016 17:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

suzannecaravaggio · 31/01/2016 17:16

the longer a body is exposed to the hormones of the opposite gender, and with the genitalia removed (ovaries or testes depending on which way they are going) the more time it is in that state the more it resembles it's intended gender

perhaps, but within limits, a man can be feminised to an extent but he will still essentially have a man's body...masculine stature and musculo sketetal system, especially if he has undergone puberty as a man

also just administering estrogen does not replicate the natural hormone cycles which shape women's physiology