Transgender athletes should not have to lower testosterone to compete, IOC says as it changes guidelines

[Escapedgoats]

news.sky.com/story/transgender-athletes-should-not-have-to-lower-testosterone-to-compete-ioc-says-as-it-changes-guidelines-12470620
Sorry if this has already been posted.

Maybe the Afghan girls team could have identified as male so they didn't need asylum... nope would never have worked.

Teenagers are literally being hunted and chased out of their homes for daring to be female and play sport. Meanwhile the IOC thinks 'inclusion' is more important than safety.

If they’ve washed their hands of it and handed it back to individual sports to determine, it’s probably quite a rational decision on their part. (Not saying it’s right or fair, just rational. No sane body would wish to be the arbiter of this sort of shit.)

I think actually this may be a very clever move.

Everyone with half a brain cell will go hang on then, what's the difference between a 'cis' man and a trans woman if nothing has to be changed?

And we can all say well, exactly.

Did you hear Dr Harper on the Today programme this morning? Having to point out that no, it's not discriminatory to have a lower testosterone limit for males because trans women should want to lower their testosterone to be more like 'cis' women.

reductio ad absurdum

The point of the lowering testosterone wasn't to be a path into competing.

The point was that that was what "transwomen" were doing anyway - the original definition was supposed to be referring to "male-to-female" transsexuals who were undergoing surgery and/or hormone treatment, either of which kills testosterone. The "tru-trans", if you will.

So the effort was to prove that these males who were choosing to do this to themselves for personal reasons (because no-one would EVER dream of doing it just to get into sport), didn't have an advantage.

And Joanne Harper is presumably part of that tru-trans contingent and now somewhat taken aback that "trans inclusion" is taken to mean "any male".

Harper had a reasonable stab at showing the tru-trans male with lowered testosterone lost advantage, but has now conceded that that's not really true (Harper has a study backing up Hilton & Lundberg's work), but still argues somewhat that the advantage isn't "too much".

But this idea that a totally untreated male could compete with women is obviously preposterous, too far for even Harper, and not what Harper wanted. Harper wanted transwomen like themselves to compete, not any male.

I agree that the IOC may effectively be digging us out - correctly concluding that a not-medically-required treatment being a precondition for competing is unethical. So that goes, and with that gone, there's not even remotely a grey area. You just divide on sex, and ignore hormones.

They did talk about this on R4’s Today, in the sports section at 8.30. They had a trans woman professor on from Warwick university, who categorically did not agree with this.

Like Stonewalls #NoDebate mantra, this policy will do trans people no good at all. It will fuel more arguments (rightly so).

But the idea of a “too much” advantage is nonsense too. How much is “too much” , who decides? Is a little bit of doping say ok, but not “too much” doping.

Yes I heard the transwoman professor on R4 earlier. I was glad they chose a trans person who didn't think it was right, to comment.

I'm surprised by this new set of rules, I thought things were going the other way in sport, slowly. There must be someone/people very ideologically motivated with a lot of influence in the IOC.

I'm not surprised by the new rules. Its considered a human rights abuse to force trans people to make any physical changes or interfere with their fertility, they insist on competing as women in the women's events; and that's had more influence than the fact women need single sex events to compete at all.

They have no problem with forcing women athletes to wear ridiculous skimpy outfits, they've been subjecting women to sex tests for decades.
Women effectively have no legal or social standing, and no rights.

Women's sport is finished and the patriarchy wins again. No need to forbid us to do sport' as they do in some countries, just make it impossible for us to win so we will retreat back home.

@Datun

Do they think that people will be so bloody outraged that if they revert back to the reduced testosterone scenario, everyone will be bloody grateful?

I wondered this too.

Its considered a human rights abuse to force trans people to make any physical changes or interfere with their fertility, they insist on competing as women in the women's events

I guess this just forces the issue back to governments, which is fair.

They can't mandate treatment for a condition that is no longer a condition. They can't tell men they aren't allowed to compete because in some jurisdictions men can legally be women.

So actually they've covered their own arses here. The ridiculousness of it might prompt some governments to rethink the notion that humans can change sex by wishing it so.

Fuck sake.
A cricketer did blackface 11 years ago and there is a huge outcry.
A male-born person can kit (pronoun)self up in female kit and join the female team and win medals and kudos and glory and that's just fucking fine?

Racism obviously matters. Misogyny? Pft, who gives a fuck apart from those tedious women-things?

🤯
Fucking outrageous.

There was a time when I didn't swear on MN. Then this shit took off.

Personally I thought your language moderate if anything, Grumpysaurus

I heard this on the radio this morning and I almost wept. The dreams of so many young women potentially shattered. It feels like a kick in the teeth to the women of the world, a message about how little we are valued.
Shame on them.

Well it will save on accommodation costs.

Just have the elite Olympian Men compete in the woman's category, they can win both. Let's see what Transwomen will say about fairness then.

FFS so tired of this misogyny.

Its considered a human rights abuse to force trans people to make any physical changes or interfere with their fertility, they insist on competing as women in the women's events

It just exposes the entire concept as fantasy. Men cannot become women.

And just because some men want to have surgery, or facial feminisation, or remove all their body hair, or take hormones, in order to fulfil their desire to look like a woman, it, of course, doesn't actually change anything.

You can't turn a man into a woman.

They've realised it. So they have abandoned the attempt.

And instead of the utter fuckers coming clean and saying look, we realise now this isn't right, exemptions should apply to sport, because otherwise it's unfair, they've basically said we can't make it look fair in anyway shape or form, so fuck it, we'll just abandon all the rules for women's sport so men don't have to abide by them.

Its misogyny in its purist form. Women are nothing more than a resource. And in this case just a service to enable crap male athletes get a medal.

The news article implies trans athletes were not allowed to compete without lowering their testosterone, which of course is not true. It's only if a biological male wanted to compete with women that this was required.
I think the IOC is right - no-one should be required to go through treatment to compete. Surely surely this means a move back to sex based competition? Am I too naive?

My daughter is a reasonable runner. She can do OK at jnr parkrun. Will never be an Olympic hopeful, however one day could probably do well in local 10ks etc. However even this could be taken away from her. If any man can say they are a woman to get the prizes.

I just don't understand it.

All eyes on England Rugby and British Cycling now. Both of them undertook consultation on their trans policies earlier this year. They were both waiting for the IOC to move on this.
The Sports Council Equality Group have released their well researched guidance giving them a framework to use too.
So what they going to do?
Choose fairness and safety or choose inclusion?
Who’s going to move first?

athletes should not be excluded due to "unverified, alleged or perceived unfair competitive advantage[s] due to their sex variations, physical appearance and/or transgender status".

There might be hope still...? The IOC is cowardly covering their backsides against accusations of arbitrarily trampling human rights...

But they do leave the door open for verified, proven, observable unfair competitive advantages to be taken into account going forward. This has to be done on a case by case basis, considering each sport. But it can (and hopefully will) be done.

But they do leave the door open for verified, proven, observable unfair competitive advantages to be taken into account going forward. This has to be done on a case by case basis, considering each sport. But it can (and hopefully will) be done.

Surely things like 'The World Records for the past 50 years' instantly verify that world class males outperform world class females?

Come on Emma Barnett, can you interview the IOC?

@quiteathome

My daughter is a reasonable runner. She can do OK at jnr parkrun. Will never be an Olympic hopeful, however one day could probably do well in local 10ks etc. However even this could be taken away from her. If any man can say they are a woman to get the prizes.

I just don't understand it.

I don't know. Using this logic perhaps she can have a few decades of competing in junior park run?