FINA Set to Announce Transgender-Participation Guidelines

[Helleofabore]

www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/fina-set-to-announce-transgender-participation-guidelines-standards-expected-to-be-strict/

On Sunday, during the World Championships in Budapest, FINA is expected to reveal its transgender-participation guidelines. For several months, the international governing body for aquatic sports has been working with national federations, including USA Swimming, to design competition standards for transgender athletes.

And

It is expected that the threshold for transgender inclusion will be challenging to meet, as FINA has discussed the issue closely with USA Swimming, among other national federations. USA Swimming’s guidelines for transgender participation require athletes to possess a testosterone level of less than 5 nmol/L for 36 months.

It will be interesting to see what they say. However, as many experts are now saying, it is pointless to keep reducing T levels and extending time periods.

Ultimately, I expect sports will get to a place in years to come where they will change the guidelines back to ‘female only’. This concept of inclusivity is not symmetrical. Even the UCI admitted that females will not have an ‘equal’ chance at success and they deemed that acceptable.

From the UCI document:

It is paramount, however, that all athletes competing have a chance to succeed, albeit not necessarily an equal chance and in line with the true essence of sport.

And this paper Why the Trans Inclusion Problem cannot be Solved by Tomas Bogardus might also be of interest.

philpapers.org/archive/BOGWTT.pdf

But male bodies have no advantage didn't you know without the pesky T- the development and bone structure means nothing if you grow your hair, that causes the female drag that slows you down...... will be interested hear if they back women athletes.

I suspect though that there will be a great deal of discussion about this announcement next week.

Particularly if FINA come close to matching UCI testosterone levels.

The males who wish to compete or support other males competing in female sports categories are already voicing their disagreement based on health.

Who knew that male bodies need a certain level of testosterone for long term health that would make female bodies very unhealthy??? Almost like they have to admit that they are not female athletes and stop using the phrase ‘other female’ athletes that has snuck in recently. Even in the UCI document.

I mean, I think testosterone levels are not the issue anyway, all males who have been through male puberty, and maybe even those who have taken puberty blockers considering the latest Dutch study this month showing that puberty blockers have little effect on male height and those males may still even have height advantages over females.

However, like all other athletes who have to make tough choices about competing versus taking medication that has effects on performance, why do these males persist in believing they deserve to have special exemptions?

They can be like other males who have to take performance limiting treatments for their health and still compete with other males, accepting they may have lower performance levels than before.

SD1978

I am sure many will be watching carefully. And there will be many people flicking their lush long locks dramatically at the announcement if the restrictions are as strict as some pundits have suggested.

‘It is paramount, however, that all athletes competing have a chance to succeed, albeit not necessarily an equal chance and in line with the true essence of sport.’

This is idiocy. Obviously not all athletes have an equal chance: some have talent, some have natural advantages not shared by other people who compete in the same group as them.

Doesn’t mean we let some people compete in the wrong groups. That means they have unfair advantage.

Maybe we could get lucky and they will admit the truth and say " Sorry no way to make this fair, so if you are biologically male you can't compete in the female category"

One can only wish, 334bu.

Look forward to this.

Fingers crossed that they have a woman's (XX only) group and a male/open group

‘It is paramount, however, that all athletes competing have a chance to succeed, albeit not necessarily an equal chance and in line with the true essence of sport.’

This is idiocy. Obviously not all athletes have an equal chance: some have talent, some have natural advantages not shared by other people who compete in the same group as them.

And a male who has undergone testosterone reduction has a far greater chance of succeeding against another male, than a female has of succeeding against a testosterone-reduced male.

The only way this gets vaguely close is if it's an elite female against a sub-par male. The female's "chance of success" here comes from the chance that no elite males turn up for the race.

The female's "chance of success" here comes from the chance that no elite males turn up for the race.

For example - competitive women can beat Rachel McKinnon - he's a doughball.

Absolute elite women can beat Laurel Hubbard, as he's over twice their age.

Can any woman beat Emily Bridges, an actual elite male?

It doesn’t matter if any woman can beat Bridges. Bridges is advantaged by maleness. That means however average, or however exceptional, Bridges is as a cyclist, Bridges has advantages of biology over all female people.

As a result of intense training, male elite athletes often have very low levels of testosterone anyway (in one study 25 percent of elite male athletes had testosterone levels below what the International Association of Athletics Federations consider the lower limit for men). So a bunch of them might co-incidently qualify as 'women' if we're just using testosterone levels.

Two questions, is the hormone level being altered to make it risky for biological males to compete, therefore using science as an excuse to put males off entering women's sports?

Secondly, why is the abstraction of the term women never discussed, why are ethics of male inclusion being ignored and an ideology rapidly adopted? Present and future female competitors have the right to disagree a man is not a woman and even if the man is eminently beatable they have taken a woman's spot, her equal chance to compete?

Musomama you are being too logical here. Some males want to compete as women and females who object are just bigoted meanies, don't you know?

Here's a flow chart they can use for free.

HAVE YOU BEEN THROUGH MALE PUBERTY?

YES >>> Male sports for you

NO >>> Tell us more

‘It is paramount, however, that all athletes competing have a chance to succeed, albeit not necessarily an equal chance and in line with the true essence of sport.’

This exists, and always has - compete within their own sex category. It entails athletes making choices about their priorities, which may not always be compatible with winning.

Jenner is the obvious proof of this. A transwoman who succeeded brilliantly and fairly in sport.

Women athletes regularly have to make difficult choices, deeply affecting their 'identity' and lives about when/whether to have children. No one tries to say that women's sport needs adjusting so that women in various stages of pregnancy and motherhood can 'have a chance to succeed', do they?

It's honestly so depressing and frustrating. I can't believe sporting bodies are not getting to a place of simple, no arguments logic instead of bending in two for an outcome that will never be fair or reasonable to women.

It's clear sex discrimination.

Did anyone notice that World Rugby changed their guidelines last year to say that transgender w cannot participate in female rugby, however, if a boy has not gone through male puberty (blockers, hormones etc) then they could.
I wonder if they know that that would be difficult with osteoporosis/osteopenia.

If I'm not mistaken, the part about the timeline of transitioning is a new addition?

The guidelines were updated late last year, way beyond the original publication

The Dutch research I mentioned up thread.

academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgac349/6603101

Trans girls grow tall: adult height is unaffected by GnRH analogue and estradiol treatment

Lidewij Sophia Boogers,
Chantal Maria Wiepjes, Daniel Tatting Klink,
Ilse Hellinga, Adrianus Sarinus Paulus van Trotsenburg, Martin den Heijer,
Sabine Elisabeth Hannema

published: 06 June 2022

As more and more research comes out about male transitioners, I cannot think this ‘inclusive’ above fairness will continue even for puberty blocked males who may have good enough health to compete at sport.

I am a mother of a swim teen daughter. She is reasonably speedy (but not speedy enough to have to do drug tests).

The idea that it is okay to have had 'high levels of testosterone in your body 5 years ago, but not now, and that's just fine' is batshit.

Puberty makes a huge difference to the boys. They shoot up and develop significant muscle mass (typically starting at about 12-14). You can't shrink that skeleton!

Firstly they need to move away from the focus on 'T'. I believe they don't want to do this because they know what the answer will be and the trans community will go nuts, they are basically scared.

Secondly what I don't understand is how they are going to prove the levels are below a certain amount for months and months. Who is doing the testing and reporting/monitoring results? We have seen athletes beat the drug testing regime so I don't see how they can ensure this is carried out consistently and fairly. Lastly how quickly do 'T' levels rise/fall? Could an athlete cheat by suppressing near to testing?

Since TWAW why is there any need for a discussion or guidelines. Why even make any rules about testosterone etc. unless, mmm, TWANW. They are men.

And no one says let's adjust men's sport so that transmen can 'have a chance to succeed' either.

When I feel overwhelmed by the open contempt for women (as in those who have the female body) that is so clear in all these debates I begin to feel despondent.

Many sports are segregated because humans come in two basic body types and one is, on average, faster and stronger than the other, while the other has very specific additional biological attributes having to do with reproductive roles which the former will never have. And not segregating on the basis of sex is in many sports a recipe for unfairness toward those with the female body.

So then we shift from that to arguing that sports should be segregated on the basis of an abstract gender identity which most people are unlikely to even possess, and anyone who opposes that as a meaningless reason for segregating anything is seen as the bigot.

This is only possible because the decision-makers in societies don't really care about women or women's sports or women's rights or women's privacy or any of that, and because women are expected to prioritise being kind to others over their own interests.