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

@Muttonindistress

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.

I agree with this. Sport, for men, is a much more comfortable issue than prisons/loos/refuges because boasting about their superior speed, strength and size is much more comfortable than admitting to the fact that 98% of sex crimes are committed at their hands.

@nauticant

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.

Agreed, envy is a huge part.

Surely there is a simple remedy? Presumably women concerned about competing against transwomen will refrain from doing so. No competitors, no competition.

Surely there is a simple remedy? Presumably women concerned about competing against transwomen will refrain from doing so. No competitors, no competition

I saw this suggested on Twitter, and there were a lot of comments stating that it wouldn't be possible due to sponsors (for current athletes at least.) It seems like their hands are really tied, but I don't know enough about how that side of it works.

It still baffles me that men are being allowed into women’s sport against public opinion, against rationality and against sanity. How is it even a ‘debase’?

Well, the comments on that article certainly have given me pause.

Generally speaking, I think of TWAW as having been resoundingly accepted in liberal/democrat America. But those are considered, nuanced comments supporting women's rights. And the ratio is massive.

Blow me down.

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 very good point!
I do wonder whether it will take teams being made up solely of transwomen, all Olympic places and all medals being won by transwomen, for people to realise that the set of people women's sport was set up for, it's no longer servicing

@EvelynBeatrice

Surely there is a simple remedy? Presumably women concerned about competing against transwomen will refrain from doing so. No competitors, no competition.

Oh, very simple - basically throw in a job you've trained for for years ?

Why I posted this link was I couldn't access the NYT's one. It didn't seem open to casual readers. Will have to check again and see if I cant access it.

re Guardian commnets being turned off.

This happened prior to trans issues being promoted in the paper. It was a result of reallly anti woman monitoring when the first opened up Comment is Free on the internet.

As you would expect of leftist groupings, their idea of equality was to allow men comment onf articles by and about women is such a grotesque way that it actively encourage hard core MRAs to make it their go to place.

However women commenting on articles were heavily monitored, censored (I think I went trhough5 sign on names and just gave up) added to which it is official policy of the Guardian that if you criticise their moderation you get suspended.

Anyhow this total unthinking example of male privilege got so bad they had their own enquiry, and effective admitted that any article in the Guardian by and about women would be a target for MRAs (because they had been given free rieng), so they wouldn't open them up for comment.

On trans issues those commenting on the web site are nearly always very woke, but those commenting via Guardian facebook page and very gender critical.

I remember the unpc jokes over the female athletes of the USSR competing in the Olympics in the 60s and 70s.
It may force reality on many if the more competitive nations just field teams of men identifying as female for every women’s event.

Why I posted this link was I couldn't access the NYT's one. It didn't seem open to casual readers. Will have to check again and see if I cant access it.

I think it must be one that allows a very limited number of free articles per month.

The key to remember in all this is that sport is THE issue on which the whole TWAW debate rests.

Any acknowledgement that TW are in anyway different to women means that TWAW is invalid. Therefore any suggestion that TW retain any sporting advantage over women, or that there should be a third category in sports means the whole house of cards comes falling down.

Nothing less than total capitulation will do for them.

Yes I've noticed that in reports about mountain climbing. Women are much tougher and more likely to survive at high altitudes.

sport is THE issue on which the whole TWAW debate rests

Is this true? I can see lots of people saying TWAW except for sport, and they don't seem to have a problem with the cognitive dissonance. But I suppose this whole issue is clarifying that a male body remains a male body, even with artificial hormones, surgery, etc. Hmm. Interesting ... it does force some pretty blunt arguments about size, muscle mass, strength, etc into the argument.

One of the highest rated comments was, "either you believe in science or you don't. Trans women are not genetically the same as biological women..." that's the crux of majority of the comments.

@Delphinium20

One of the highest rated comments was, "either you believe in science or you don't. Trans women are not genetically the same as biological women..." that's the crux of majority of the comments.

I think the best comments are the ones telling the NYTimes that they're misreading their readership. It's interesting that there were no "NYT picks" on this article. I guess the staff couldn't find any comments to promote.

Have now read the NY Times article. Very woke! Like reading the Guardian. Cherry picking the bits they want to emphasise and the bits they want to gloss over. And then confusing intersex with transgender. I thought it was meant to be an upmarket paper.

Respect to the Washington Examiner for pulling out the significant bits.