Stats on why we have women and men sports?

[InaConfusedState]

I came across the story of Fallon Fox shattering Tamikka Brents eye socket a while ago. It’s so patently obvious that a woman is at serious disadvantage fighting a person with a male skeleton, muscle structure and build, I really couldn’t see why Fox wanted to compete against a woman let alone be allowed to do it. It led me to here and reading fascinating (and diverse) views.

After talking to someone about this case, it got me thinking about why we have women’s sports in the first place. I always thought it was because women are structurally different to men and therefore unable to compete against them on a level playing field. But if men are now able up compete against women, is this not true?

I wondered if anyone has links to evidence and stats that show why women have their own sports.

For example, what does going through puberty as a teenager do for male strength, muscles, etc compared to a female?

What advantage does testosterone confer?

What are the typical levels of testosterone in make and female sportspeople?

If a man competes as a woman, does he have to artificially bring his testosterone levels down (and if so is it to the same level as a woman?). Does the fact he’s been through puberty give him any advantage regardless of whatever testosterone level he now has?

What else - hormones, physical build - do men have as an advantage over woman that makes them faster/stronger?

I’m really interested in these physical aspects as it’s what got me (and several friends) questioning what it means for women if a man can become a woman.

So provided an individual ticks the "female" box and has a testosterone level for a year at under X (X currently being equivalent to approximately 5 times the higher end of normal for a woman and approximately the lower end of normal for a man, but who knows where it is going), they can compete as a woman no questions asked.

As far as I can tell the IAAF came to that decision by sitting down with a load of medical experts, so surely there is some merit to it? But even as a flawed test, what's the alternative?

A far smaller proportion of trans people participate in sport to the levels considered healthy (and therefore cost effective regarding health spending) than in the general population, both men and women - I was reading a government paper the other day. So both they and the sports governing bodies themselves are keen to find a way to include them.

What's the solution?

The solution is quite simple - do not let transwoman play women's sport, because they are and will always remain biologically male and biology is what matters when it comes to sport. They can continue to play men's sport if they want or play one of the many sports out there that are mixed sex but they should not be playing women's sport.

I completely understand where you're coming from, and I want to see that as a solution, but is it? Should transmen continue to compete as women? Or should all trans people compete as men?

Given that sports governing bodies segregate to ensure safe and meaningful competition for all competitors (not specifically to ensure safe and meaningful competition for women it would seem), how would this be achieved in this scenario?

Or should all transpeople have their own leagues? Is this kind of segregation going to be beneficial, and is it even something that's being called for by those - including women - participating within sport? I'd be really interested to know which sportswomen are speaking out about this actually, and to see what those involved are specifically calling for.

I really hope there is an alternative solution that works for what sport itself wants to achieve because frankly that would be easiest for everyone, but so far it evades me, and it would seem it is evading those in control of the sports themselves as well.

Transmen can't compete as women once they're taking testosterone, because they would be ineligible under doping regulations.

As for what the views of women in sport are, we don't know because we're not allowing them to say. We're creating a climate of fear where women can see how grossly unfair the situation is, but they're not allowed to comment for fear of being villified, hounded on line, accused of transphobia. See for instance, the reaction to Andrea Yarwood, or the look on the other women's faces on podium shots of Jillian Bearden (Beardsley?), Laurel Hubbard. See the post match interview with Fallon Fox's victim after Fox had broken her eye socket.

Everyone has to sing from the hymn sheet of "it's lovely and inclusive" while rolling their eyes.

You want a transwoman athlete I really admire - how about this:
www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/29/jaiyah-saelua-transgender-footballer-interview
This is a transwoman playing international men's football, because she recognises that that's where she should be playing, and I massively admire her for it.

Transmen can't compete as women once they're taking testosterone, because they would be ineligible under doping regulations.

Precisely, so how can sport find a way to create safe and meaningful competition for them? Not at the expense of women is an obvious answer, but it doesn't help the what sport itself seeks to achieve.

As for what the views of women in sport are, we don't know because we're not allowing them to say.

I'm going to go looking now, but are you sure? Even without speaking out publicly they would certainly be appealing to their sports' governing bodies, and that would surely be reflected in policy? And couldn't it equally be the case that a very many sportswomen support the current way of doing things (whilst of course retaining the right to criticise individual cases where they might think their sport "got it wrong")?

Do I detect a hint of female socialisation at work here? "How do I make it nice so no-one gets left out, because that would be sad?" How about "How do I make it fair while accepting that some people just don't get to play - too old, too fat, too unathletic, too male, too much artificial substantance in their blood?"

I can feel very sorry for the hard path in life the transman has chosen to take, because it will be a hard path. That doesn't mean I have to let people with elevated levels of testosterone continue to play women's sport simply because I feel sorry for them.

It's more the mentality of particular sport which I've been brought up with I think; one of the primary drivers in my sport is to get as many people as possible playing it; those that are too old, too fat, too unathletic*; we find ways to incorporate them because at the end of the day we love what we do - we live for it - and we want everyone to have the chance to feel that way. I suspect the government's motivations are more financial...

*By evidence for this there are 7 mens and 7 ladies teams in my club, 4 "development" teams, vets teams, over 40s, 50s, 60s, children's age group teams, 4 mixed gender teams, indoor teams, training sessions for people who have never played before, and we're considering introducing a session for the newly founded "walking" version of our sport which has recently taken off.

I can feel very sorry for the hard path in life the transman has chosen to take, because it will be a hard path. That doesn't mean I have to let people with elevated levels of testosterone continue to play women's sport simply because I feel sorry for them.

It could easily have been said by men in sport in days gone by that they appreciate how hard women have it in life, but unfortunately sport's just not for them; they're not as strong or as quick, golf/football/cricket/rugby, they're clearly men's sports. The clubs, the people with the money, they shouldn't be spreading their resources trying to incorporate this group to the disadvantage of men already competing. And if women really want to get involved, they can go and sort it out for themselves.

Thankfully (for me) sport disagreed.

It does seem a bit female socialiasation tonsay ‘let’s find a way to be inclusive of these men who want to be women’ in sports. These sportswomen have trained hard, but they’ll never match the physical prowess of people who were born male. For all reasons shown in this thread.

I also think it’s socialiation that means we don’t really know what sportswomen think of this situation. If they speak up, appeal, challenge - they’ll get accused of transphobia and just not being nice. How can they speak up freely in that environment?

I completely get that we want to offer all people a chance to compete. But surely the very act of allowing men to compete against women means that women won’t be able to compete fairly? Where do women come in this hierarchy - where do they count?

I feel sorry for female teenagers who are currently training for elite sports. Seriously, what is the point if they’ll enter competitions with biological men - all that effort, dedication and passion to end up on an unlevel playing field?

"Walking" teams - I think this means that your sport is probably the one I used to play, till my knees got too knackered to continue.

So, do you think your women's first team ("ladies" is another giveaway as to which sport, which is connected with the class origins of the sport in question) could take on your men's 1st, 2nd, 3rd... team? Where's the cutoff.

Thinking about football for instance, it wasn't so long back that Farnborough (non-league team) had a good FA cup run, and happened to find themselves on a training camp in Spain at the same time as the England women's team. They had a friendly - Farnborough won. They were about 6 tiers down the men's national game, playing a women's international side.

(Socialisation and history play a big role too, of course - the story of Dick Kerr Ladies is a fascinating and sobering one - the FA were so terrified of the success of women's football, they banned women from playing on FA affiliated grounds altogether. But physical strength - speed, the ability to kick the ball a long way, the height to "cover the goal mouth" or win balls in the air, the strength and weight to contest another player - these are a massive part of the game.

And no-one's saying transmen who've taken testosterone can't play at all - they just can't play women's sport if they're effective testosterone doping. Men's sport is open to them. Mixed sport is open to them. Or they could lay off the testosterone (as transmen who choose to get pregnant do) in order to continue to play women's sport - nothing's stopping them doing that either.

If you knackered your knees it probably is

I captained our first team against the men's 4th team actually. We lost. I've also competed nationally is the mixed version so play against men, and know just how imbalanced that can be.

The thing about doping is more complex than it seems; I use inhalers that were I not able to prove my medically diagnosed condition would be considered performance enhancers. Transmen I expect usually have medically diagnosed conditions, so you've got the complication of consistency; shouldn't you then allow the use of that medication? It's not as simple as it all seems.

I'll have a good long think about it, but I'm struggling to come to terms with any solution that says "tough for some people, sport's just not for them" - and I don't think that's socialisation (although perhaps it is), I think it's sport.

Precisely, so how can sport find a way to create safe and meaningful competition for them? Not at the expense of women is an obvious answer, but it doesn't help the what sport itself seeks to achieve.
Creating an open category?
There are lots of sports where sex isn't a huge advantage, trans people who want to compete could take part in one of those? Or in a mixed sport?

There's also a difference between "friendly" sport and elite sport. Friendly sport can afford to be more inclusive.

Finally many sports have disability categories - I can't see the difference there to having a trans category also for competitive sport.

"what's the alternative?" - to let people with male bodies compete in the men's category and people with female bodies compete in the women's category, obviously.

Why would there be any problem with that? After all, that's why it was categorised by SEX (not by gender feelz or whether the competitor wears a dress when not competing).

I don't get why anyone would think any other way about this.

And transmen can compete as women if they are not taking and never have taken male hormones (so just ticked an M box).

For a woman to take testosterone would be cheating (see Soviet Union athletic records ), so transmen surely shouldn't be allowed to.

Sorry, I'm catching up.

No-one is saying "sorry, tough for them, they can't play any sport". Male bodied transgender people can continue to play in the mens category, in any sport, or play as one of the male competitors in mixed sport, or play for fun. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is what they are doing - mediocre men are declaring themselves to be women and winning women's sport at a much higher level.

The vast majority of people will never be world champions. We don't allow 16 stone men who aren't very good at boxing to identify as being 11 stone so they have a chance of winning the flyweight division. Or allow 70 kg women rowers who aren't very good to identify as 57 kg so they can row lightweight. No-one would ever say that was ok.

So why allow men to identify as women to have a chance of winning?

why is it up to women to create a nice fluffy way for them to take part? There are several solutions:

a) compete with your biological sex - if that means not taking artificial hormones then so be it. You have a choice to make as to where your priorities lie - competing or transitioning.

b) train in a different sport where your sex doesn't matter - equestrian, shooting, archery, mixed team sports.

c) don't compete. Go running or to the gym or cycling for the sheer pleasure of it.

d) lobby for a separate category - perhaps added to the paralympic categories where there is a precedent of several categories for the same event.

@RatRolyPoly I'll have a good long think about it, but I'm struggling to come to terms with any solution that says "tough for some people, sport's just not for them"

Well, life isn't fair, is it?

I wanted very much to be a pilot, but neither my maths or my finances were up to it. I might be able to do a PPL and fly a little light aircraft round local airfields one day. But I'm never going to be telling an A380 full of people I am about to fly them to Sydney.

Continuing with my tortured analogy to the trans in sport thing, it would be akin to me taking the place of an experienced captain and letting me have a go because I said I was a pilot, I felt to my very core I was a pilot and so therefore I should be entitled to take the stick. And anyone who questions me is committing literal violence against my pilot-ness.

why is it up to women to create a nice fluffy way for them to take part?

It isn't up to women though is it, it's up to the sports governing bodies, exactly as it was when they created nice, fluffy ways for women to take part.

Shotsfired are you very much involved with sport? There's an underlying ethos of inclusion and participation. It isn't the same as being a pilot. Access to sport is generally considered something that should be universal in a modern society. I for one subscribe to this, and I'm trying to see if or how that ethos can survive.

exactly as it was when they created nice, fluffy ways for women to take part.
ODFOD. 1) who is "they"? Men arent tge default, they didnt "let" women play. Women have always played sport in womens teams because 2) Categorizing into women and men allows 99.9% of the population to compete safely and fairly. It's a totally sane way to manage things.
Proposing to enable trans competitors to compete in categories with their identified sex is neither safe nor fair for men or women.
Your misogyny is showing now

Access to sport is generally considered something that should be universal in a modern society

No-one says trans people can't or shouldn't be able to access sport. Competing however is different, and the playing field, pun not intended, needs to be even. If that means trans people have to delay transition, or compete against their biological sex, then so be it.

You post as if there are no options for trans people to do sports - in fact there are plenty of options.

@Rat do you think women’s sport was created by men to enable fluffy women to play and stop them bleating on about being excluded? Do you see any value in women’s sport for women themselves?

who is "they"? Men arent tge default, they didnt "let" women play. Women have always played sport in womens teams because 2) Categorizing into women and men allows 99.9% of the population to compete safely and fairly.

Well there you go, I didn't say the they was "men", in fact it's quite clear from my previous posts I mean sports governing bodies, sponsors and facilitators - although historically they have obviously included proportionally more men. There have been whole networks of clubs and leagues in particular sports that are entirely run for and by men and that dominate to the point of being that sport. Women didn't go away and try and build that up for themselves, those sports realised they weren't "owned" by the men who dominated them and expanded their resources to not exclude women.

You post as if there are no options for trans people to do sports - in fact there are plenty of options.

Honestly I'm just keen to hear the alternatives, because the way I'm most familiar with is the current norm of competing alongside transwomen. I'm also open to hearing the pitfalls.

Rat do you think women’s sport was created by men to enable fluffy women to play and stop them bleating on about being excluded? Do you see any value in women’s sport for women themselves?

No, I don't think that, see previous post. I hugely value women's sport on both a personal and societal level. I'm not sure I've answered your question?

Ski Jumping

Men consistently jump further than women. It's one of the many reasons why The Jump TV show is a pile of rubbish.

Last 3 World Records Chronologically

Men (bolded figure is in metres)

15 February 2015 Anders Fannemel Norway Vikersundbakken Vikersund, Norway 251.5 275 825
18 March 2017 Robert Johansson Norway Vikersundbakken Vikersund, Norway 252 275.6 827
18 March 2017 Stefan Kraft Austria Vikersundbakken Vikersund, Norway 253.5 277.2 832

Women

9 February 1997 Eva Ganster Austria Kulm Tauplitz/Bad Mitterndorf, Austria 167 182.6 548
29 January 2003 Daniela Iraschko-Stolz Austria Kulm Tauplitz/Bad Mitterndorf, Austria 188 205.6 617
29 January 2003 Daniela Iraschko-Stolz Austria Kulm Tauplitz/Bad Mitterndorf, Austria 200 218.7 656

Honestly I'm just keen to hear the alternatives,

I gave you four alternatives....

titchy, yes, I got that, but I thought you were questioning my posting "as if there were no alternatives". I was just explaining that I'm posting from the POV of the current status quo.

Given that, I'm obviously more drawn to solutions to the current perceived problems that build on the current policies rather than seek to go backwards and start from scratch. I can see that's what a lot of people want, but I think it's unrealistic, certainly in the short term.

Socialisation and history play a big role too, of course - the story of Dick Kerr Ladiess^ is a fascinating and sobering one - the FA were so terrified of the success of women's football, they banned women from playing on FA affiliated grounds altogether.

There was an excellent C4 documentary about this.