Transgender athlete

[lewisnotmiller]

I didn't ever mention, as part of my suggestion, any of current leagues being replaced. I am suggesting the creation of a new category where innate biological characteristics that provide a significant advantage are not a thing, or at least, as less of a significant advantage as possible.

The creation of this category would make a difference to highly skilled athletes that can't compete properly against the "genetic freaks".

Those people can already access lower level competitions. I remain bemused by the idea that you think you can establish another elite competition, but one which doesn't have the best players. How is it an elite competition? Because we ideologically want it to be?

'Hey mate, I'm the best under 6'1" centre in the world' doesn't scream elite in a basketball context. Quite the opposite.

Once again, another person claiming to speak for everyone. I wasn't aware there were so many of those in here.

Not everyone. Just people who are actually involved and invested in the game.
To be clear, there is a majority of elite female players who want trans athletes included in the elite and sub-elite competitions based on anecdotal evidence, and I don't claim to be speaking for them on that.
But on whether you can magic up a new elite competition, restrict it based on height (or other more meaningful physical measures which still mean less than you think) and just expand how many players get to experience elite competition.

Source for no one wanting to play?

My life? If you're asking for a scientific analysis of why under 6 foot leagues haven't been successful, even at the domestic level, you'll be waiting a while.

But...as I have said repeatedly, and you just ignore...elite leagues aren't imposed based on ideology. They are grown from grass roots involvement.
Here...

Under 6 Feet Basketball League sanctioned

MICHAEL Clark, owner and originator of the Under 6 Feet Basketball league, has sanctioned the U6F 242 Basketball League. The U6FL here in the Bahamas is now in the formation phase and is looking forward to starting the league before the summer. It

www.tribune242.com

If this concept is going to work, then it's going to work, grow, and become popular with elite players. Otherwise, it doesn't. What you think is 'fair' at an elite level is really worth nothing.
Your better argument would be that lower level comps are allowing trans athletes to access female comps, so that should grow and feed up into the elite levels. Just in the interests of steelmanning for you.

I find the concept of 'meaningful competition', at least when talking about top-notch athletes, largely unachievable because most teams and athletes can't really compete for the first place. Many of them actually feel a huge sense of achievement when they reach 3rd place in a tournament since they know it is highly unlikely they would be able to get any farther than that. Worse yet, even games completely centered around skills don't make for a 'meaningful competition'.

If you want to see first place as the only way competition is 'meaningful', I don't know what to tell you.

The overarching point is getting lost here though. Where are the people who support creating a league for short men? Why do I only hear disapproval? I am not talking about the millionaires that might fund those teams. I am talking about the average Joes in here that reject the entire idea, just because. They absolutely would not support the creation of a fair league for short men, no matter if someone is willing to pay for it, because they don't care about having fair competitions.

What are you rabbiting on about? I play over 30s basketball because I want access to a 'more fair' competition for me. I'm 48, but I can still chase around younger guys.
I am not an elite player.

If I want to access 6 foot leagues, they are around (if VERY uncommon) but again...they are not elite.

If I'm a truly elite 6 foot player I am playing in the elite and sub-elite programs, despite you thinking the NBA is informative of basketball around the world.
As I mentioned (and I know you haven't had a chance to respond to yet), Fairleigh Dickinson University is playing at a very 'high level'. It's just not the NBA, which is always going to be a repository of amazing athletes, and would remain so even if your suggestions were followed to have a midget NBA.

And yet, if transwomen can participate in the women's competitions and make the unfairness even more prevalent, they suddenly get annoyed by having an unfair game.... which was always unfair to begin with. It is hypocrisy.

You think trans athletes will make women's competitions unfair? This is the problem with your 'fairness' doctrine. It's a nonsense. Competition isn't about trying to rig the game so that everyone is the same size, speed, etc. And splitting based on height as you have suggested does nothing to address 'fairness' at the top level, but instead sets up lower level competitions that have restrictions. And these already exist.

I am interested in whether adding trans athletes will impact on meaningful competition in the women's game. That's it. My somewhat uninformed supposition is that mostly it wouldn't matter, but that sometimes it might, and there should be a way we can develop sensible guidelines over time so trans athletes know what's expected for a given sport, and female athletes have a chance to input and be stakeholders in their own sports.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Are you going to substantiate that claim now or just keep appealing to authority?

Which claim? That you know nothing about the game? I'm not appealing to authority, just outright stating it.

Incidentally, it's hard to argue I'm 'appealing to authority' in terms of the logical fallacy when I'm talking about my own experiences and qualifications. That's just a rubbish argument people throw up to discount expertise in things.
Correctly used, an appeal to authority is used when I'm suggesting that other people's statements are definitive in a context where they are in fact not. That can be because the person's qualifications and experience don't relate to the particular topic at hand. It can be because their general statement (whilst true) isn't directly controlled and related to the topic at hand. It can be because the statement is used out of context. Etc.

But waving your hand and suggesting my lived experience is an appeal to authority is kinda weird.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It is in the last part...

"Meanwhile the 6'1" female players don't need to worry, since they won't be in ANY of the top level competitions."

Yep. Because it was unclear whether you had a vision of doing away with gender as a divider entirely, and using things like height.
If that was the suggestion, then you would have been excluding women from top level competition entirely. If it wasn't, then they'd be able to play in the female top level competition. Just like they already can. Which makes me wonder what it is you think you're achieving with any of this.

 

[Koldo]

Which claim? That you know nothing about the game? I'm not appealing to authority, just outright stating it.

Incidentally, it's hard to argue I'm 'appealing to authority' in terms of the logical fallacy when I'm talking about my own experiences and qualifications. That's just a rubbish argument people throw up to discount expertise in things.
Correctly used, an appeal to authority is used when I'm suggesting that other people's statements are definitive in a context where they are in fact not. That can be because the person's qualifications and experience don't relate to the particular topic at hand. It can be because their general statement (whilst true) isn't directly controlled and related to the topic at hand. It can be because the statement is used out of context. Etc.

But waving your hand and suggesting my lived experience is an appeal to authority is kinda weird.

The claim that creating a category for short men would radically change the game is an empty claim.
Are you going to substantiate it?

 

[Koldo]

Those people can already access lower level competitions. I remain bemused by the idea that you think you can establish another elite competition, but one which doesn't have the best players. How is it an elite competition? Because we ideologically want it to be?
'Hey mate, I'm the best under 6'1" centre in the world' doesn't scream elite in a basketball context. Quite the opposite.

The women players aren't the best players though. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either a women's league can be an elite competition, despite it not having the best players, or being an elite competition doesn't have anything to do with having the best players in the unrestricted sense of term.

Not everyone. Just people who are actually involved and invested in the game.
To be clear, there is a majority of elite female players who want trans athletes included in the elite and sub-elite competitions based on anecdotal evidence, and I don't claim to be speaking for them on that.
But on whether you can magic up a new elite competition, restrict it based on height (or other more meaningful physical measures which still mean less than you think) and just expand how many players get to experience elite competition.

Still assuming you can speak for them, I see.

My life? If you're asking for a scientific analysis of why under 6 foot leagues haven't been successful, even at the domestic level, you'll be waiting a while.

But...as I have said repeatedly, and you just ignore...elite leagues aren't imposed based on ideology. They are grown from grass roots involvement.
Here...

Under 6 Feet Basketball League sanctioned

MICHAEL Clark, owner and originator of the Under 6 Feet Basketball league, has sanctioned the U6F 242 Basketball League. The U6FL here in the Bahamas is now in the formation phase and is looking forward to starting the league before the summer. It

www.tribune242.com

If this concept is going to work, then it's going to work, grow, and become popular with elite players. Otherwise, it doesn't. What you think is 'fair' at an elite level is really worth nothing.
Your better argument would be that lower level comps are allowing trans athletes to access female comps, so that should grow and feed up into the elite levels. Just in the interests of steelmanning for you.

I truly don't think most really care about making sports fair(er), or even watching truly fair competitions.
I don't remember reading about people caring when Michael Phelps kept winning gold medal after gold medal, for example.
If anything, people rooted for him.

If you want to see first place as the only way competition is 'meaningful', I don't know what to tell you.

Do you compete to lose?

What are you rabbiting on about? I play over 30s basketball because I want access to a 'more fair' competition for me. I'm 48, but I can still chase around younger guys.
I am not an elite player.

If I want to access 6 foot leagues, they are around (if VERY uncommon) but again...they are not elite.

If I'm a truly elite 6 foot player I am playing in the elite and sub-elite programs, despite you thinking the NBA is informative of basketball around the world.
As I mentioned (and I know you haven't had a chance to respond to yet), Fairleigh Dickinson University is playing at a very 'high level'. It's just not the NBA, which is always going to be a repository of amazing athletes, and would remain so even if your suggestions were followed to have a midget NBA.

You would no qualms and actually support a new Olympic category then?

You think trans athletes will make women's competitions unfair? This is the problem with your 'fairness' doctrine. It's a nonsense. Competition isn't about trying to rig the game so that everyone is the same size, speed, etc. And splitting based on height as you have suggested does nothing to address 'fairness' at the top level, but instead sets up lower level competitions that have restrictions. And these already exist.

I am interested in whether adding trans athletes will impact on meaningful competition in the women's game. That's it. My somewhat uninformed supposition is that mostly it wouldn't matter, but that sometimes it might, and there should be a way we can develop sensible guidelines over time so trans athletes know what's expected for a given sport, and female athletes have a chance to input and be stakeholders in their own sports.

Do you even want to address fairness at the top level? This is a rhetorical question by the way.

 

[Koldo]

Again this logic is obviously fallacious, see if you can understand in this form this time:

“Unless you also support radical changes to a sport, it’s hypocritical to oppose the use of performance enhancing drugs in that sport”

Actually, the only reason to opppose perfomance enhancing drugs is because of the negative health effects. Not because they grant an advantage.

 

[Koldo]

Again; short men are not excluded from playing competitive basketball, they are just not getting paid millions to play at the professional level like the tall guys

Then why don't we see them playing in the Olympics and why is there no World Cup for them?

Fair enough; as long as you recognize there is a big difference between biology and genetics, and recognize the problem people have with what you are saying is based on you attempting to conflate the two. If you want to make your point pretending biology and genetics are the same,. that's your choice but the problem people are expressing is based on biological males playing sports against biological females, not genetically gifted people playing against those who are not genetically gifted for the sport.

There is absolutely no pertinent distinction between genetical and biological advantages on the context of this topic.

Yes! It's called the city league. Anybody can play in it.

Anybody...? Therefore entirely missing the point of what I am saying?

 

[Koldo]

1 sentence at the end that was copied on a phone in no way changed the point in context.

But some people always try to quibble as an excuse to avoid the topic.

It completely changes the context. Perhaps you should read it again?

Probably not at all because it would fail.

Small guys nearly good enough for NBA would play in normal leagues in other countries.

It would be a 3rd rate competition that would die out in a year or 2 after haemorrhaging money like the NFL imitators (and NFL has fewer games and is massively more popular so should be easier to support a 2nd league)

Then the NBA would still be the elite competition.

Again, making a league no one watches is not a workable idea.

The rules prevent the best small guys playing in the league if they want to get to the NBA, win an Olympic medal etc.

They have other options.

What rule exactly prevents the best small guys playing in the league if they want to go to the NBA?

No, I’m incredibly confident it’s a dumb idea and that “not good enough to play with the big guys” small man NBA will not be successful.

That makes it unworkable and thus a pointless addition to the debate.

Asking people who like basketball if they like the idea would be evidence for you, no one else needs it though as it obviously bad.

Relentlessly arguing for a pro sport that not even you think would be popular requires a special type of logic

Most sports are not popular... So... What?

 

[Koldo]

I don't remember saying he was short. I said he is 16 inches shorter than Tacko Fall, but is a substantially better player. He is 186.6cm, which is a grand total of 1.6 cm taller than your magical height cutoff. Your idea of assigning weightings to physical measurements is flawed. And...I've played basketball for 32 years, I'm not suggesting for a moment that 'height is not very impactful'. I'm suggesting that 'taller is better' is a flawed measure. Context and skill matters.

If you'd prefer, consider Fairleigh Dickinson University in the recent March Madness.

I am not saying that taller is better. I am saying that tall is better.

We have fair competitions.

Empty claim.

The best players compete at the top level, regardless of anything. Other players can access all sorts of controlled and inclusive competitions. Simple and workable.

Would you allow a transwoman who has transitioned in the last month to play freely in the top level women's competition. Perhaps you would. I wouldn't. It's not trans athletes competing in women's competitions that I have any issue with. It's what you mean by 'freely', and the fact that you are very inexact when speaking about this stuff.

Considering how unfair the women's category still is, I would most certainly allow all transwomen to play, no matter when the transition happened. No need to worry about hormones either or anything else, really. And as far as entertainment value goes, this would certainly make for some games that I would really appreciate watching.

 

[Madmogwai]

I dunno. The science isn’t definitive on this yet.
Sports scientists do agree that a lot of athletes now technically have their own advantages and disadvantages, based on their own unique biological makeup (due to this thing called Evolution, giving people different adaptions. But that’s just my uneducated guess.)
For example the gold winning breastroke/freestyle Olympic athlete Ian Thorpe actually has more lung capacity than even the average athlete. Something he was actually born with and occurred entirely naturally.
Arguably this gives him a biological advantage and he has even had to defend his own gold medal legacy from time to time. He’s since retired though. So I doubt he cares too much lol

With transition arguably starting at younger ages than it was before, with the use of puberty blockers, one could make the argument that such biological differences don’t always have a chance to actually occur in the case of some trans athletes. In others it might.

This might come down to a case by case basis.
Though truth be told, I honestly don’t care lol.

Case by case basis, how about facts like the Fastest Female runner in history is slower then the top 1000 fastest male school boys.
I teach Martial Arts, most highly trained woman are in trouble even against untrained men.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I support lgbtq's but I think transgenders in sports is unfair for obvious reasons. They should have there own league. That would be cool. I guess I don't really care either way though. Just tryin to think of a fair way. I mean can you imagine a bodybuilder size trans 230 lb. on a football field with 130 lb women? I mean where do u draw the line? It's nonsensical. I mean if your going to do something then do it right? You can't discriminate against the gladiator can u?

They need to just give trans people their own league so we can all move on. I don't understand where this avalanche of athletic trans women is coming from all of a sudden. It's not like people haven't been medically transitioning for about a century now, but this trans sports controversy is all new, just like the pronoun stuff and "trans kids" stuff is all new, too.

 

[Augustus]

Actually, the only reason to opppose perfomance enhancing drugs is because of the negative health effects. Not because they grant an advantage.

Another very strange opinion you hold. The reason they are banned is because of the advantages.

Pro sport is bad for your health, some PEDs aren’t any more harmful than normal competition.

 

[Kfox]

Then why don't we see them playing in the Olympics and why is there no World Cup for them?

The same reason there is no professional league specifically for them; if you wanna make the team you gotta be good enough and short people probably can’t jump high enough to make the team.

There is absolutely no pertinent distinction between genetical and biological advantages on the context of this topic.

Yes there is. Nobody has a problem with leagues accepting those with genetic advantages, as a matter of fact, that’s what everybody wants to see! The problem is with those with a biological advantage.

Anybody...?

Anybody good enough to make the team

Therefore entirely missing the point of what I am saying?

No I understand the point you are making. You want a special league for short people because you think they have an unfair disadvantage in basketball when compared to tall people. The problem is there aren’t enough people who agree with you; there aren’t enough people who care about your subjective view of what constitutes fairness concerning this issue so your ideas are not getting done. Ya win some, ya lose some buddy; that's the way of the world!

 

[Kfox]

They need to just give trans people their own league so we can all move on. I don't understand where this avalanche of athletic trans women is coming from all of a sudden. It's not like people haven't been medically transitioning for about a century now, but this trans sports controversy is all new, just like the pronoun stuff and "trans kids" stuff is all new, too.

I don't think there is enough interest in having a "trans league". I think it would be just better to forget about gender and go with biology. I think that would solve the problem.

 

[SomeRandom]

I don't think there is enough interest in having a "trans league". I think it would be just better to forget about gender and go with biology. I think that would solve the problem.

That’s what they previously said about women’s sports in general, to be fair.
Both of our official national football leagues in my country were honestly surprised by the interest shown for the women’s divisions when they officially launched a few years back. Just for example.

And don’t forget that if it’s pure biology, then you have other intersex conditions to take intro consideration.
Sometimes such conditions are unknown to the athlete in question even. Though I think with improved testing, that gap is closing

There have been instances where a “non binary” athlete was stripped of their medal after the fact, due to various factors. Not recent either, I’m talking early 20th century.

 

[Koldo]

The same reason there is no professional league specifically for them; if you wanna make the team you gotta be good enough and short people probably can’t jump high enough to make the team.

Women are not good enough either. So?

Yes there is. Nobody has a problem with leagues accepting those with genetic advantages, as a matter of fact, that’s what everybody wants to see! The problem is with those with a biological advantage.

This is called hypocrisy. Having XY chromosomes is also a genetic advantage.

Anybody good enough to make the team

No I understand the point you are making. You want a special league for short people because you think they have an unfair disadvantage in basketball when compared to tall people. The problem is there aren’t enough people who agree with you; there aren’t enough people who care about your subjective view of what constitutes fairness concerning this issue so your ideas are not getting done. Ya win some, ya lose some buddy; that's the way of the world!

In other words, not enough people care about fairness in sports. I have already said so.

 

[Koldo]

Another very strange opinion you hold. The reason they are banned is because of the advantages.

Pro sport is bad for your health, some PEDs aren’t any more harmful than normal competition.

I was thinking about stuff like anabolic steroids. As for the fairly harmless PED, it is just sheer hypocrisy. It is not like there aren't a lot of things and services that people regularly make use of to improve their performance.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't think there is enough interest in having a "trans league". I think it would be just better to forget about gender and go with biology. I think that would solve the problem.

That doesn't solve anything, as you'll have FTMs on testosterone therapy competing against women. That's already been mentioned in this thread.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The claim that creating a category for short men would radically change the game is an empty claim.
Are you going to substantiate it?

It's a claim. You can suggest it's empty, I don't really give a damn, as you have no idea about the sport, and wouldn't understand the answer.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The women players aren't the best players though. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either a women's league can be an elite competition, despite it not having the best players, or being an elite competition doesn't have anything to do with having the best players in the unrestricted sense of term.

Are you even reading what I write at this point? The term 'elite' has a specific meaning with Australian basketball, and represents the top level male competition (NBL) and the top level women's competition (WNBL).
The term 'sub-elite' has a specific meaning, and represents the next tier (NBL1 mens and womens comps)

The top level women's comp is the elite women's comp. Full stop.

Still assuming you can speak for them, I see.

Yes. I am. Again, would you like to put this to the test in a basketball forum, and see what response you get? Or do you just move on from fallacious claims of 'an appeal to authority' to cries about an appeal to popularity. Ultimately you don't address anything at any level of detail, ignore inconvenient arguments, and just deal in overarching, repetitive statements.

I truly don't think most really care about making sports fair(er), or even watching truly fair competitions.
I don't remember reading about people caring when Michael Phelps kept winning gold medal after gold medal, for example.
If anything, people rooted for him.

*sighs*

Do you compete to lose?

Nope. But...much like actual informed debate...it's possible to get something out of competition without needing to win.
This is not an actual informed debate, but still. Hopefully you've seen one before.

You would no qualms and actually support a new Olympic category then?

For what? Midget men playing basketball? I could give a crap. Go for your life. 3x3 is an Olympic sport, so...*shrugs*

Do you even want to address fairness at the top level? This is a rhetorical question by the way.

Then I won't bother answering.