Paper on including transwomen in women’s sports

[SunsetBeetch]

Including Trans Women Athletes in Competitive Sport: Analyzing the Science, Law, and Principles and Policies of Fairness in Competition

docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1dNyl7q_05JGyW3JfNdf1v97Xs5U_hWNfX-VM2ZApgHc/mobilebasic

Enjoy

Ah, nothing like a paper written by an unbiased expert ....and this is nothing like a paper written by an unbiased expert.

I'm sorry, I CBA to read it.

Actually I think I'll stick with the troll boy , he's very busy tonight

A delightful word salad of lies, omissions and half truths. No mention of the myriad of advantages male have over females. It's all about the T and a you have no research that it confers an advantage you have to let transwomen compete against women because you let tall women in and they have an advantage. Or some such utter gobshite

That’s a whole lot of words when they could just say cheat 🤷🏻

Barely skimmed as I was interested in the science. Can’t they do anything without bringing DSDs in?

"Moreover, genitals do not play sports: genitals are absolutely irrelevant to sport performance."

A whole new level of disingenuous. As if this is what those with concerns mean. Wow.

They are excluded from women’s sport, under IOC policies, if they are legally recognized as men: trans men do not need to undergo testosterone hormone therapy in order to compete as men.

Ah the straw trans man argument. Trans men do not have a physical advantage over men. Hence why it is a completely irrelevant point.

Simply put: trans women are women, and it’s fair for trans women to compete in women’s sport.

After such a biased paper it's hardly a surprise this is the 'simply put' soundbite but that's doesn't make it any less disappointing.

Including Transwomen Athletes in Competitive Sport

Fine. Of Course. They absolutely should be included.

... in men's sport, where they belong.

Oh excellent.

Can someone with more patience than me please tell me if this paper concludes that, since there is no evidence of testosterone benefiting sports performance, then the male and female categories of sports should be done away with,with everyone competing together?

Does it also suggest doing away with junior categories too, for similar reasons?

I thought RMcK was now VI? How old is this paper? I'm only asking coz we've had actual peer-reviewed research demonstrating that testosterone suppression does not level the playing field, but RMcK/VI is all about the T. And nothing but the T.

Lovely framing about discrimination for a "natural trait". Like being male and therefore lawfully discriminated against by being excluded from competing against those with the natural trait of being female.

How old is this paper?
There are references from 2018 but no later, as far as I can see.

I wonder if @DrFondOfBeetles has seen it and has the patience to critique it?

Aren’t the College of Charleston embarrassed by such publications being affiliated with them? It’s just so poorly written. The English language butchered. It’s supposed to be a scientific paper.

It's from last year.

"Moreover, genitals do not play sports: genitals are absolutely irrelevant to sport performance."

A whole new level of disingenuous. As if this is what those with concerns mean. Wow.

Yep. But this is McKinnon, who always argues that other people are just obsessed with genitals.
Remember "cis lesbians and their genital hangups"?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3411070-Rachael-McKinnon-another-gem-from-the-you-couldnt-make-it-up-guidebook?pg=1

It’s supposed to be a scientific paper.

Is it? It doesn't look like any scientific paper I've ever seen.

Genital hangups my bum. If spending the best part of a decade trying to make it work with a self-confessed agp taught me anything, it's that there's a shitload more to not wanting to shag men than just the genitals.

It honestly may as well say "people are being mean, THAT'S not fair".

It's so exhausting. If banging your head against a brick wall was an Olympic sport I feel like I would get gold if I competed in men's or women's categories.

Let's be honest, women probably do have an advantage in that one as we have so much fucking experience of doing it from birth.

@ErrolTheDragon

How old is this paper? There are references from 2018 but no later, as far as I can see.

I wonder if @DrFondOfBeetles has seen it and has the patience to critique it?

It's just been published

"Here it finally is in print! Our mammoth paper on the law, ethics, and science of the fairness of including trans women in women's sport!"

jstor.org/stable/26927952?fbclid=IwAR0n9l1FbdKeW_vObqxEmS0h0Q52TAMDQNFW6XSlYdC-7hBytnUhuqzE1SA

twitter.com/SportIsARight/status/1310999277657874433?s=20

Probably worth a reminder that Cyclepath's own departmental head said Cyclepath's philosophical arguments about sport were shit and given that Cyclepath has spent all their time on them and neglected their other departmental responsibilities then Cyclepath really needs to improve them and address the fundamental question of why have segregated sports at all if there is no benefits of being male.

Has they done that?

I bet not.

I eagerly await the gold medal winning transman athlete in a men's category sport. Wonder what it will be? Javelin? 100m? Very exciting and I expect it any day now.

Haha I’m so glad others have pointed out that even MacKinnon’s department thinks these arguments are very poor! As an aside, I used to work in academic philosophy and MacKinnon’s arguments really are dreadful- I have no idea how they got hired. That one about “you don’t play sport with your genitals” is a blatant sophistic straw man - no one has ever suggested such a thing!

That's not a scientific paper. I am a published scientist and I know what one looks like; I promise that's not! University of Arkansas press, eh? So they've touted that round for 2-3 years without getting anyone else to agree to peer review or publish that drivel.

Thus the question of trans inclusion in sport is a question of if and when discrimination on the basis of an athlete’s status as transgender is justified. That is, it is a question of when and if trans athletes should be deemed eligible.

The end full stop is misleading.

That is, it is a question of when and if trans athletes should be deemed eligible to compete in a sporting sex class of their own choice irrespective of their biological sex class

In a sense, this boils down to the very simple question: are trans women women (and female), or not? [ quote from the absolute bollocks paper]

Not.

Next question?

Next question would probably be: are female women dreadfully mean? But I predict the word 'female' would be replaced with the banned c-word, just so there's scope to waffle on for seventeen obfuscating pages.