Should Transgender Athletes compete in sports?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Like understanding ethics? Would you feel no guilt if you apparently had an unfair advantage? I would. I've never ever cheated in any exam, for example.

What I'm trying to figure out is why you draw the line between "fair" and "unfair" the way you do.

Any world-class athlete is going to be born with many advantageous characteristics, then train like mad to capitalize on them. What's your criteria for deciding which of these traits are "fair" and which are "unfair?"

The traditional way of deciding this has been:

- if you're born with it or it arises naturally, it's fair (or at least legal for competition).
- if it's the result of a drug or some sort of doping, it's unfair... though with an exception for drugs that are legitimate treatments for a real medical condition.

Allowing trans athletes to compete with no special restrictions is in line with this traditional approach. I'm still wondering why you are arguing for something different.

I also wonder if you're actually concerned with fairness in other ways. For instance, Olympic teams with more money tend to have better equipment than teams with less money. Have you ever argued for more fairness in that department - e.g. through bigger grants to teams from developing countries?

After all, if you're only concerned with fairness when it comes to trans athletes and not concerned at all when it comes to all the other types of unfairness in sport, could we really say that fairness is your motivating concern?

 

[Mock Turtle]

What I'm trying to figure out is why you draw the line between "fair" and "unfair" the way you do.

Hardly just me - the relevant authorities seem to think so too, otherwise they wouldn't think it necessary to try to make a level playing field. One obviously can't do a great deal about natural ability or the amount of money spent (facilities, time spent, and professional coaching, for example) but there does seem to be a difference (often substantial) - as between males and females in many sports - such that we do separate them. I would want to know that I won by fair means rather than anything else, and hopefully others would too.

 

[Shad]

Would it be unfair for women to consistently lose at most sports ?

That is why sex based divides are used to separate male and female in sports as males would dominate sports

If yes, isn't it unfair that short people consistently lose on volleyball ? Isn't it unfair for tall people to consistently lose at gymnastics ?

Height isn't a major fact compared to testosterone.

Who says short people lose in gymnastics? I need a source for that.

Why is there a divide between genders but not a divide between different heights ?

As male biology provides an edge beyond merely height.

Stephen Curry vs Lebron James. Curry specializes in 3 pointers and still is an all-star.

Why is it regarded as fair for every male to face every male at most sports as an equal when that is obviously not true ?

This is just a made up point which ignores the male biology has an advantage in sports over female biology.

Do you want another example ? Even though I am a male, there is no chance I would be able to win a marathon race. No matter how much hard work I do. I don't have the genes.

So?

Sports, in general, are not designed to be fair. Period. So when someone says: It is unfair for transgender women to compete against cisgender women, my answer is: So what ?

You still miss the point. Males have an advantage due to being male. FIFA women teams lose to male high school teams. Figure it out.

 

[Koldo]

That is why sex based divides are used to separate male and female in sports as males would dominate sports

Height isn't a major fact compared to testosterone.

Yes, it is depending on the sport.

"Only 25 players in NBA history have been at a listed height of 5' 9" or shorter." - Source

This is no coincidence.

Who says short people lose in gymnastics? I need a source for that.

I didn't say short people lose in gymnastics. I said tall people do.

"The tallest female gymnast to compete in the Olympics was Marie Sophie Hindermann, who is 5’9’’. She competed in the 2008 Olympics. The tallest male gymnast to win gold in recent years at the Olympics was Igor Cassie from Italy. He stands at 5’11’’ and won gold in Athens in 2000." - Source

Is it just a huge coincidence we don't get to see really tall women in gymnastics whilst at the same time basketball and volleyball are flooded with them ?

As male biology provides an edge beyond merely height.

Stephen Curry vs Lebron James. Curry specializes in 3 pointers and still is an all-star.

Which makes no difference to my point. I am not saying that the tallest you are the better you are at basketball. I find it funny though that you have mentioned Curry who is a tall person, just not by NBA standards.

This is just a made up point which ignores the male biology has an advantage in sports over female biology.

A statement is not an argument.
How is it a made up point ?
I am not saying that male biology is not an advantage in sports. What I am saying is that there are all sorts of advantages involved but no one is saying that it is unfair to have them.

So?

What constitutes fairness ?
I would say that if Joe can't play as good as Mike no matter how much ( smart ) effort he puts into it, then it is not a fair match.

Why is male biology being singled out as the only unfair advantage ?

You still miss the point. Males have an advantage due to being male. FIFA women teams lose to male high school teams. Figure it out.

I have not missed that point. You have missed mine: Sports are not designed to be fair. So it doesn't mean anything to claim that it is unfair for trans women to compete with cisgender women. It is just like dropping water in a river.

 

[Shad]

Yes, it is depending on the sport.

"Only 25 players in NBA history have been at a listed height of 5' 9" or shorter." - Source

This is no coincidence.

5'9 is below average male height.

I didn't say short people lose in gymnastics. I said tall people do.

"The tallest female gymnast to compete in the Olympics was Marie Sophie Hindermann, who is 5’9’’. She competed in the 2008 Olympics. The tallest male gymnast to win gold in recent years at the Olympics was Igor Cassie from Italy. He stands at 5’11’’ and won gold in Athens in 2000." - Source

https://www.tallslimtees.com/blog/can-tall-people-do-gymnastics/

Sorry bout the switch there.

So tall people can pick another sport. 5'9 is above average female height anyways. 5'11 is close to average height

Is it just a huge coincidence we don't get to see really tall women in gymnastics whilst at the same time basketball and volleyball are flooded with them ?

Have you looked at the sports you are talking about at all? Maybe the height of the basket?

Which makes no difference to my point. I am not saying that the tallest you are the better you are at basketball. I find it funny though that you have mentioned Curry who is a tall person, just not by NBA standards.

He isn't that tall. Just above average.

A statement is not an argument.

I stated a fact. Go look at world records. Almost all are held by men.

How is it a made up point ?

As the assumption all is to be fair.

I am not saying that male biology is not an advantage in sports. What I am saying is that there are all sorts of advantages involved but no one is saying that it is unfair to have them.

One isn't a hormone that male produce far more of which affects their body development. Go look at the TG that changed at 37 winning female competition.

What constitutes fairness ?

It is about an advantage one sex has over the other.

I would say that if Joe can't play as good as Mike no matter how much ( smart ) effort he puts into it, then it is not a fair match.

That isn't what fairness in sports is about. It is about having an edge due to sex the other sex does not have.

Why is male biology being singled out as the only unfair advantage ?

As males dominate most sports and world records over women due to biology which magnifies training.

I have not missed that point. You have missed mine: Sports are not designed to be fair. So it doesn't mean anything to claim that it is unfair for trans women to compete with cisgender women. It is just like dropping water in a river.

Sex based divisions were made due to the biological advantage males have over women. Otherwise women's sports would have been dead decades ago.

TG's that are male have a biological advantage over females.

 

[Koldo]

5'9 is below average male height.

Sorry bout the switch there.

So tall people can pick another sport. 5'9 is above average female height anyways. 5'11 is close to average height

Have you looked at the sports you are talking about at all? Maybe the height of the basket?

He isn't that tall. Just above average.

Do you agree that being taller can be a huge advantage in certain sports while being shorter can be a huge advantage in others ? If yes, then you agree that people have an inherent advantage based on their genes that no one can do much about.

I stated a fact. Go look at world records. Almost all are held by men.



As the assumption all is to be fair.



One isn't a hormone that male produce far more of which affects their body development. Go look at the TG that changed at 37 winning female competition.





It is about an advantage one sex has over the other.



That isn't what fairness in sports is about. It is about having an edge due to sex the other sex does not have.



As males dominate most sports and world records over women due to biology which magnifies training.




Sex based divisions were made due to the biological advantage males have over women. Otherwise women's sports would have been dead decades ago.

TG's that are male have a biological advantage over females.

And ? Why should we care if trans women have a biological advantage over females ?
You are arbitrarily picking one advantage saying that this one is unfair while all others that also have a huge impact in their performance such as height are being ignored. This is hypocrisy.

 

[Augustus]

Allowing trans athletes to compete with no special restrictions is in line with this traditional approach. I'm still wondering why you are arguing for something different.

Would you put any qualifications on trans women competing beyond self-identity?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Would you put any qualifications on trans women competing beyond self-identity?

I touched on this earlier. I'm on the fence about requiring trans women to have their testosterone lowered into the typical female range. I lean more toward supporting this restriction than not for a few reasons:

- there have been at least suspected cases of cheating by having cis men compete as women. I think there's still a risk that an oppressive regime could try to do this by forcing a cis athlete to go through gender reassignment surgery.

- I think there's a danger any time we create an incentive for an athlete to forego or delay treatment of a medical condition in order to compete.

 

[Augustus]

I'm on the fence about requiring trans women to have their testosterone lowered into the typical female range. I lean more toward supporting this restriction than not for a few reasons:

there have been at least suspected cases of cheating by having cis men compete as women. I think there's still a risk that an oppressive regime could try to do this by forcing a cis athlete to go through gender reassignment surgery.

Could happen anyway given the incentives. Time the transition in time for the Olympics to ensure maximum benefit.

Would you make any additional distinctions in sports with a chance of serious injury, like boxing?

- I think there's a danger any time we create an incentive for an athlete to forego or delay treatment of a medical condition in order to compete.

There are also medical ethics questions regarding medicating people purely to allow them to compete in sports events if they otherwise wouldn't have chosen to do so. So 'forcing' women to lower their T might not be a tenable position, and leaves the problem of discriminating against certain women based on natural advantages.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Could happen anyway given the incentives. Time the transition in time for the Olympics to ensure maximum benefit.

Requiring lower testosterone levels generally nullifies the benefit, which removes most or all of the incentive to cheat this way.

Would you make any additional distinctions in sports with a chance of serious injury, like boxing?

Boxing is classed by weight already.

There are also medical ethics questions regarding medicating people purely to allow them to compete in sports events if they otherwise wouldn't have chosen to do so. So 'forcing' women to lower their T might not be a tenable position, and leaves the problem of discriminating against certain women based on natural advantages.

Right: if trans people don't want to take hormones, that's a valid choice, and a trans woman is still a woman even if she has higher testosterone levels... hence why I'm on the fence.

There are ethical issues either way, since if a lowered testosterone level isn't required, we would probably also get cases where trans women who would normally seek hormone therapy to lower their testosterone, but don't do it so they have a competitive advantage.

 

[Estro Felino]

I touched on this earlier. I'm on the fence about requiring trans women to have their testosterone lowered into the typical female range. I lean more toward supporting this restriction than not for a few reasons:

- there have been at least suspected cases of cheating by having cis men compete as women. I think there's still a risk that an oppressive regime could try to do this by forcing a cis athlete to go through gender reassignment surgery.

- I think there's a danger any time we create an incentive for an athlete to forego or delay treatment of a medical condition in order to compete.

It is absolutely true. Since, after my SRS my tesosterone levels are stable at 0.20 pg/ml.
And yes...before the therapy I was much stronger and after the surgery I abandoned many tiresome hobbies to do sewing and gardening only.

Besides ...my endocrinologist said my estradiol level can easily skyrocket and surpass the levels of a biological female because what I take is synthetic estradiol and my body after surgery does not have regulatory mechanism.

 

[Augustus]

Requiring lower testosterone levels generally nullifies the benefit, which removes most or all of the incentive to cheat this way.

What makes you so confident on this? Is there any scientific evidence?

The article you linked to earlier certainly doesn't make this claim.

The author's view (from twitter): "We’ve now collectively established that across a range of levels, elite to recreational, biological sex confers advantage between 12% and 40%, depending on the event. That’s a target for policy to focus on - any reductions smaller than that (see Sweden study*) undermine fairness"

*Sweden Study is this: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/transgender-row-stoked-by-new-findings-3pwxjqqrp

We also have evidence of athletes who were not elite prior to transitioning have won elite women's events after transitioning, and we also know that PEDs still provide benefits long after people have stopped using them.

Boxing is classed by weight already.

Mismatches can happen at any weight.

Manny Pacquiao at the start of his career would have qualified for the lowest weight at the women's Olympics. That doesn't mean it would have been safe to let him box a woman.

Seeing as it is, at best, a grey area regarding the retained advantage, should post-transition women be allowed to box until we have more evidence that they do not retain a significant advantage?

Right: if trans people don't want to take hormones, that's a valid choice, and a trans woman is still a woman even if she has higher testosterone levels... hence why I'm on the fence.

There are ethical issues either way, since if a lowered testosterone level isn't required, we would probably also get cases where trans women who would normally seek hormone therapy to lower their testosterone, but don't do it so they have a competitive advantage.

We also have to consider lower level sports.

Ross Tucker: We should not care only if they’re on Olympic and World Champion podiums. The impact is likely to be much larger at the levels below that, where 99% of sport is played. That’s where a 5% drop in performance may have even more meaningful impacts, because it’s “the steep part of the curve”, where a mediocre biological male might leap into representative level, winning local events, or places on teams that compete at the next level up. Then it all comes down to the philosophy of how people value sport at participation and representative level, rather than elite levels, and it gets very messy indeed...

But we also have a subset of sports where the advantage will never disappear. This is particularly true where anthropometry – think stature/height, limb length etc – are crucial for sports performance. Lowering testosterone may reduce hemoglobin, muscle mass, strength, power and cardiovascular capacity, and it may cause fat mass to rise, but it’s not changing the skeleton, and it arguably isn’t undoing a body type and much of the size/bulk created in part by testosterone.

In some of these sports (contact sports, specifically), there is also a huge welfare issue, and so for that reason, the transgender MTF athlete poses particular concern for sports like boxing, MMA, rugby, AFL, even basketball, netball and handball.

Quite how sports sort through this issue, I don’t know...

But I respect that one can’t put a number to the problem’s size and say “XYZ is too many” in elite sport. In each case, one would be too many for a subset of athletes affected by any unfair advantage. I also think that the performance reduction may not be large enough to prevent the theoretical scenario I discussed above where some sub-elite men are able to win women’s events, and that individual variation and sporting variation will make it unfair in some instances.

Do you consider him driven by bigotry btw? "Inherent in all of it is this idea of female inferiority: if you perform well enough, you can't be a real woman."

 

[Shad]

Do you agree that being taller can be a huge advantage in certain sports while being shorter can be a huge advantage in others ?

Depends on the sport. Being tall in Hockey comes with a disadvantage which is reduced speed and agility. You are not accounting for disadvantages of being tall. Hence why your arguments are weak.

If yes, then you agree that people have an inherent advantage based on their genes that no one can do much about.

As per the above there are disadvantages. Curry still outplay hundreds of other players that have a height advantage. Chara vs Tav in hockey. Which one is the considered the one that scores goals?

And ? Why should we care if trans women have a biological advantage over females ?

As the advantage are hormone based which does more than provide merely height. Again go look at world records of males compared to females. There are female divisions for a reason... Male are better at sports than females to the point that elite female teams lose to HS males teams. Having a bunch of males in female sports defeats the point of the division all for the validation of a few at the cost of many.

Toss in this fun fact. In Canada all that is required to be registered as a woman is one government form and nothing more.

You are arbitrarily picking one advantage saying that this one is unfair while all others that also have a huge impact in their performance such as height are being ignored. This is hypocrisy.

Nope you are by conflating height with a hormone advantage.

 

[Koldo]

Depends on the sport. Being tall in Hockey comes with a disadvantage which is reduced speed and agility. You are not accounting for disadvantages of being tall. Hence why your arguments are weak.

Of course it depends on the sport. I have been saying that since the start.

As per the above there are disadvantages. Curry still outplay hundreds of other players that have a height advantage. Chara vs Tav in hockey. Which one is the considered the one that scores goals?

Let me be clearer then: Curry HAS a height advantage. He is taller 95% of all males. He is not tall by NBA standards but he IS tall. How do you think he would fare if he was 1.75 m ?

As the advantage are hormone based which does more than provide merely height. Again go look at world records of males compared to females. There are female divisions for a reason... Male are better at sports than females to the point that elite female teams lose to HS males teams. Having a bunch of males in female sports defeats the point of the division all for the validation of a few at the cost of many.

Toss in this fun fact. In Canada all that is required to be registered as a woman is one government form and nothing more.

Nope you are by conflating height with a hormone advantage.

It is not MERELY height. Height is a decisive factor. If you are going to claim that height is a minor factor then provide one source that states height is not a major factor in basketball or volleyball. Otherwise we are not getting anywhere. I have already shown you that short athletes don't get anywhere in those sports but you seem unconvinced it has anything to do with their height. Go ahead and show me your evidence.

 

[Prestor John]

According to The Daily Signal which is a conservative journalist website, biological males who are transgender competing in women's sports create an unfair advantage for born females. Hormonal treatments aside, allowing transgender women who were born male, to compete in what they call "natural female" (I'm paraphrasing here) competition sets a precedent of creating an environment where there is backlash if transgender women become successful. Citing Martina Navratilova, the first openly gay female tennis player felt that any criticism of trans athletes competing would bully others into be silent. According to the article, "Navratilova bluntly called the practice of allowing biologically male athletes to compete in women’s sports “insane” and said “it’s cheating" (Source).

It would appear that the debate concerning trans athletes competing is not necessarily their identity per se rather its a question about fairness. According to Outsports.com:

"It’s easy to understand why. Sports rules and regulations exist to create a “fair” playing field for competitors. Olympic rules regulate the use of performance-enhancing drugs. NCAA rules tell teams how much they team can practice, and how often. NFL rules outline parameters to make sure a defensive back doesn’t get an “unfair” advantage over a receiver. Even mixed martial arts, which seems to the casual observer to be a clash of anarchy, has rules.

Without rules to govern fairness, we don’t have sports." -Source

The argument continues:

"In a world where we’re told that men are always more athletic, stronger and faster than women, that’s what they see. Someone perceived as being “once a man” can’t possibly be on an equal playing field with women. At least, that’s how the thinking of a lot of people goes.

Yet having an honest conversation about the fairness of trans women in sports mandates a conversation about the concept of fairness itself, and the different ways it can be applied to sports and life."

Thoughts?

Men are men and women are women. No amount of surgery and drugs can change that.

Men have no business competing in female sports.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Men are men and women are women. No amount of surgery and drugs can change that.

Right: trans women are women. Trans men are men. We need to acknowledge this.

Men have no business competing in female sports.

Right: trans men should compete against other men and not be put in the women's categories.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Men are men and women are women. No amount of surgery and drugs can change that.

Men have no business competing in female sports.

I believe 9-10ths_Penguin answered for me

 

[Prestor John]

Right: trans women are women. Trans men are men. We need to acknowledge this.

Nope. You cannot change your sex. You cannot change your gender. You cannot change your race. You cannot change your species.

We are what we are.

Right: trans men should compete against other men and not be put in the women's categories.

Trans-anything should receive help in a place with padded walls and should not be encouraged by society to try and be something they are not.

 

[Prestor John]

I believe 9-10ths_Penguin answered for me

That's sad because what he said was dumb.

 

[Shad]

Of course it depends on the sport. I have been saying that since the start.

Not in the same way I was using it as you are ignoring the difference between male and females.

Let me be clearer then: Curry HAS a height advantage. He is taller 95% of all males. He is not tall by NBA standards but he IS tall. How do you think he would fare if he was 1.75 m ?

Not in the NBA.

Depends if he was still a good 3 point shooter as that is his game

It is not MERELY height. Height is a decisive factor. If you are going to claim that height is a minor factor then provide one source that states height is not a major factor in basketball or volleyball.

Curry is an all-star despite there being taller people than him in the league. He is still better than them

Otherwise we are not getting anywhere. I have already shown you that short athletes don't get anywhere in those sports but you seem unconvinced it has anything to do with their height. Go ahead and show me your evidence.

You didn't show anything as you are still ignoring that Curry is an all-star. You are still avoid the differences between male and female biology and world records.