New York Times report acknowledges biological men in women's sports is unfair

[stumbledin]

The New York Times took the question of transgender athletes to experts, and with a few exceptions, they came back with the same verdict: Allowing transgender women in women’s sports is unfair.

According to Dr. Eric Vilain, who has worked with the NCAA and the International Olympic Committee, gender identity and biological reality are “two almost irreconcilable positions” in women’s sports. Ross Tucker, who helped World Rugby draft its rules that concluded biological men should not be allowed in women’s rugby, said that we must choose between prioritizing “inclusion” or “fairness and safety.”

The piece focuses on testosterone, which highlights the clear advantage biological men have over women. A 2019 study in Sweden found minimal decreases in strength and muscle mass among transgender women after a year of testosterone suppression. Using data from World Athletics, the governing body for international track and field events, the New York Times relays that the lowest level of testosterone generally found in men is still four times higher than the highest in women.

www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/new-york-times-report-acknowledges-biological-men-in-womens-sports-is-unfair

Thanks for reporting this good news, Stumbledin. Another outbreak of sanity. The more experts speak up, the safer it becomes for others to join them.

Yes I really only posted it so that there is a reference to it in the see of trans advocacy over running women's sports.

So angry that people with the relevant knowledge of biology are just sitting on the side lines.

On the one hand we get reports that by only testing medicine of men it puts women at danger, and then the next moment they seem to be saying there's no real difference.

Sometimes it just feels like being Alice in Wonderland. But a nightmare.

The actual report in the NYT had me quite a bit.

www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/sports/transgender-athletes-womens-sports-idaho.html

How can they be serious--"two sides."

The article gives the impression that there is majority support for trans women competing against women and there are just a few backward trump supporters holding out. The comments do not agree. They need to learn the Guardian's trick and turn off comments.

Sometimes I genuinely struggle to understand how this is even a debate. Sport (or most sports) have been segregated by sex for as long as females had their own categories. Sports people and athletes are so conscious of and tuned to the differences in our bodies.... then I remember that like many other industries they're governed by commercial/business people and susceptible to capture.

I'm so proud of world rugby and the way they approached it. They present a blueprint and template for other sports to follow, to do the same evidence led examination. I hope they take it.

I really wish they would stop talking about testosterone. Some male people (both transwomen and just plain ordinary men) have very low testosterone levels; that doesn't mean they should be allowed to compete against women.

I still don't understand why the onus is on sporting bodies to prove that letting biological men compete with biological women is unfair; surely the proof should be the other way around. The status quo (sport separated by sex) should remain unless it is proven beyond doubt that male people who identify as female have no advantage.

Totally Albus.

The rush for 'inclusion at all costs' needs to be slowed down. Show why it's safe and viable first. Sign of the times though. Perform as ally first, ask questions later.

It's SPORT. If this doesn't demonstrate and illustrate just how much political and cultural society has lost its mind, nothing will.

@Apollo440

The article gives the impression that there is majority support for trans women competing against women and there are just a few backward trump supporters holding out. The comments do not agree. They need to learn the Guardian's trick and turn off comments.

They usually do have the comments off for articles on trans issues. When they do allow comments, they general skew the direction of this article's comments.

There are often posters on this board who speak up in favour of allowing trans women into women's toilets and changing areas.

Are any of them in favour of allowing transwomen into women's sports, I wonder?

Transwomen in women's sports really is the be all and end all for the mantra TWAW.

I haven’t read the whole NYtimes article yet (just skipped to comments , which are encouraging) but the sub head One group prioritizes inclusion. Another group says we want fairness and safety. says it all.

The piece in the Times yesterday about JKR had over 1000 comments. Too many to read but I couldn't find one that wasn't supportive of JKR. The system got overwhelmed. Some comments were taken down but not many and some people just re-posted what they'd said ooooh rebellion

Just thought you might like to know that Times readers are GC by a country mile

I read the NYTimes comments and they are overwhelmingly GC, with majority respectful towards trans people while stating unequivocally that trans women in women's sports is unfair.

@highame

The piece in the Times yesterday about JKR had over 1000 comments. Too many to read but I couldn't find one that wasn't supportive of JKR. The system got overwhelmed. Some comments were taken down but not many and some people just re-posted what they'd said ooooh rebellion

Just thought you might like to know that Times readers are GC by a country mile

Yes, I saw that too. I must admit, I tend to skip to the comments on a lot of these articles, and I’m almost always encouraged by them. (I’m sure the Guardian turns them off because they don’t want anyone seeing what the general public think.) Though in a way, it makes me even more frustrated that political parties and other big organisations are going along with trans ideology against public wishes.

Though in a way, it makes me even more frustrated that political parties and other big organisations are going along with trans ideology against public wishes.

Perhaps all the recent sunlight will make a difference and of course, plenty of court cases - potential lawsuits can often be a mind changer

@highame

Though in a way, it makes me even more frustrated that political parties and other big organisations are going along with trans ideology against public wishes. Perhaps all the recent sunlight will make a difference and of course, plenty of court cases - potential lawsuits can often be a mind changer

🤞

In the sport debate I have a horrible feeling there's an undercurrent of people actually wanting to see females hurt.

Interesting that the original NY Times report uses trans jargon, eg “ciswomen”, though one of its authors, Gillian R Brassil, is a former elite athlete herself.

The NY Times report is well researched, quoting a lot of scientists and other sports experts.
But it says that Martina Navratilova claimed “without evidence“ that any man could “decide to be female,” take hormones and become victorious and then reverse course “and go back to making babies.”
I don’t know about the fertility aspect, but Martina was certainly correct about self-ID, as currently allowed. The male-bodied people currently taking women’s medals and prize money could change gender again tomorrow or whenever their age slows them down.

Whereas the Washington Examiner opinion piece, clearly supporting women’s right to fair competition, is by a man, Zachary Faria. He says No one is arguing that transgender women should be left out of sports altogether, simply that biological reality dictates that their natural advantages born through male puberty should not be permitted in women’s sports.

In the sport debate I have a horrible feeling there's an undercurrent of people actually wanting to see females hurt.

Considering how much pornography is about violence against women, and how popular that is, I think you’re right, MondayYogurt.

Whereas the Washington Examiner opinion piece, clearly supporting women’s right to fair competition, is by a man, Zachary Faria. He says No one is arguing that transgender women should be left out of sports altogether, simply that biological reality dictates that their natural advantages born through male puberty should not be permitted in women’s sports.

Cynically, I can’t help thinking that the reason there are a lot of men ‘on our side’ regarding sports is because it allows them to go on about how much bigger, stronger, faster men are. But I’ll take the support anyway.

This issue makes me furious. So many of my friends are happy to throw women under the bus in general, but that they can't see the inherent unfairness, or they do and their TWAW dissonance won't allow them to admit it, makes me rage. it's not even just elite athletics. Every time there's a selective team, at all ages and skill levels, and a girl/woman loses the spot to a biological male... Argh!!! Who cares if it's "just" the school netball team? That girl tried her hardest and would have got a place except for somebody completely taking the piss and ignoring their unfair advantage to take the spot. It's not on.

And then the woke "but are you saying women aren't as good as men at sport, how awful are you?" as if it's some kind of gotcha. YES. YES I AM. Women are at an obvious physical disadvantage in nearly every physical characteristic. It's not a slur on women to say so, it's the reality of our biological bodies. That's why we have women's sports, you fool!

Women have better endurance on average. I think it’s fine to point out disparities between men and women in different categories of physical endeavours, and to set out fair arenas of competition.

However what must be resisted is the “women are the weaker sex” message. We have relative strengths in different areas, but compounding the problem that physical contests are culturally entirely designed to showcase the strengths of men.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-kent-49724851

My eyes were entirely opened by this achievement by Sarah Thomas doing FOUR laps of the English Channel continuously, literally no man could accomplish what she did, and it caused me to go down the rabbit whole of relative physiological differences. It became pretty clear we’ve stacked the deck against women by making them compete in areas men have the edge.

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

In the sport debate I have a horrible feeling there's an undercurrent of people actually wanting to see females hurt.

Considering how much pornography is about violence against women, and how popular that is, I think you’re right, MondayYogurt.

We used to have circuses, fights to the death. Wrestling and MMA cage matches have become extremely popular. A recent game, The Last Of Us 2, has gruelling and brutal female (and trans) violence that the player has to perform. Violence is cooler than ever, but how do they push the boundaries now?

I think the thought of women standing lower on podiums, and the fantasy of women being pushed, blocked, bent, crushed, or otherwise physically forced into submission on the sports field holds a lot of pleasure for many people. To finally put us in our place, under the heel.

Of course this also applies to putting trans women in women's prisons. It's that delicious extra punishment isn't it? The stupid women broke the law, who cares if they get a bit of extra punishment, they deserve it. I expect there's a whole porn genre waiting to be made along those lines.

I'd say it's more a case of some people thinking that women have got above themselves and it will suit everyone if they're taken down a peg or two MondayYogurt. Added to that is envy of women actually being women.