Forum menu
Do you have any references to support that? I’ve heard similar but never from a reliable source (no insult intended).
If you’re trans, intersex whatever you can compete – it just has to be against men – and yes you’ll be at a disadvantage instead of an advantage which is a shame, but such is life.
The point is why can't non-binary people compete against non binary people and let the men compete with men, and women compete with women?
The vast majority of non-binary people are still male or female, regardless of what they believe. I fully respect their belief but they don't have a right to have everyone else believe it too. Just like religious beliefs really.
The point is why can’t non-binary people compete against non binary people and let the men compete with men, and women compete with women?
Because a man who identifies as or has taken medical procedures/ drugs to be a woman still has a basic biomechanical advantage over any woman who now identifies as or has taken medical procedures/ drugs to be a man.
but they don’t have a right to have everyone else believe it too. Just like religious beliefs really
.... or dietary choices, life style choices or anything else for that matter.
Unfortunately it's now the way of the world we live in and to be honest I feel a bit concerned about the future that lies ahead for my 3 young boys
Because a man who identifies as or has taken medical procedures/ drugs to be a woman still has a basic biomechanical advantage over any woman who now identifies as or has taken medical procedures/ drugs to be a man.
I think you misread me, I agree entirely. I am saying that if you have gone through this procedure then compete in a new class, TRANS.
Because a man who identifies as or has taken medical procedures/ drugs to be a woman still has a basic biomechanical advantage over any woman who now identifies as or has taken medical procedures/ drugs to be a man.
Right. but at the moment the latter have to compete with men.
Because they are still men.
The vast majority of non-binary people are still male or female, regardless of what they believe. I fully respect their belief but they don’t have a right to have everyone else believe it too. Just like religious beliefs really.
I understand what you're getting at. I just wonder if the difference is that if you passively do not believe in someone else's religion it has no effect on them following that religion (for the most part, bar the odd point of contention).
If you do not believe in someone's gender, that can place serious day-to-day constraints on their ability to live a full and normal life. It would affect schooling, sports clubs, use of public amemities, participation in events etc.
McKinnon is acting like a dick and should be told to gtf if she/he thinks that it is fair to enter a race under the female catagory, its utterly absurd that she expects to compete in female events with a lifetime of previous testosterone abuse as a male athlete before declaring he is now female.
Just gtf and stop being a dick.
Indeed. XXY? Who will you race against? I have my own genetic subclass MC1-R homozygous, XY and plenty of others. It’s very complex. I’m of the personal opinion that gender reassignment prior to puberty is reasonable for trans females to compete. One could police this based on Tanner staging. I think puberty will always confer an advantage. Just ask the former East German female athletes. For trans male, there is no issue, other than a TUE for testosterone use. Which is a prohibited substance exogenously.
Of course should I be unfortunate enough to suffer and be treated for prostrate cancer, I might have to consider the 60yo female TT distance records. Not really, but the treatment is the same as that which McKinnon is receiving.
It's an interesting debate, for sure. It's clear to me that McKinnon is operating within vastly different sporting parameters to most of the female category. It doesn't look fair to me.
Sport is great because it represents the pinnacle of human physical achievement, pushing boundaries and going higher, further, faster. Which is all great - although I'll never be the fastest cyclist in the world, and nor will *any* woman (Caveat: in some ultra-endurance events there are women who probably outpace men). That doesn't stop me loving sport, though. Because of course there are other reasons why sport is good - for peoples' physical health, social, mental wellbeing etc. That's the real reason I like sport.
Being female is a handicap in most sport, but we as a society have created a female category to overcome that. So now we have a situation where female athletes can have something to train for, can still strive for excellence, and inspire others. Sport is good, and sportspeople help to promote goodness in the world.
As a society we have to decide whether the rights of a small minority of intersex or trans people are more important than the rights of all other women. Ironically McKinnon's 'sport is a human right' mantra might well come back to bite her when we all realise the vast majority of women also have that right.
Of course should I be unfortunate enough to suffer and be treated for prostrate cancer, I might have to consider the 60yo female TT distance records. Not really, but the treatment is the same as that which McKinnon is receiving.
I would love someone to do this just to prove that McKinnon is being an asshat, and to be totally open about it.
It would make for an interesting sports science study. Most of which are done as static bike 10 mile TTs. McKinnon is vet champion on the track, which is not really an endurance discipline. But yes, there is a valid experiment there.
It is, possible, however that the cancer treatment and surgery might bias the results. And I would struggle to get ethical approval for the “pure” cross-over study!
This will rumble on and on until someone puts a formal definition of what female is from the perspective of sporting competition.
This is the nub of the problem. The historical definitions of "male" and "female" that are currently used to categorise sport are no longer fit for purpose We now know that gender covers a complex range of different physical, hormonal and chromosomal conditions, occurring naturally in intersex individuals or as a result of medical intervention, where people have transitioned. No one has come up with cast iron definitions that can resolve this.
xx chromosome
Case in point. Five minutes on Wikipedia will show you that doesn't work as a definition of "female".
I think Semenya has been treated unfairly, because whatever her specific physiology (and despite rumours and partial leaks, the exact details of her condition have not been made public) I believe she is legally a woman, so she should be able to compete in that category, as currently defined. It seems perverse to force her to medicate to limit her natural abilities.
Perhaps we ultimately have to move to having more sporting categories, based on different criteria (I'm not suggesting there's an easy answer to defining those new classes). We seem to accept the principle of many classes in paralympic sport (despite some controversies) even though the classes can include athletes with significantly different disabilities. Boxing is another sport where multiple weight categories are applied within a gender, and I don't think anyone has seriously suggested having single open "male" and "female" boxing categories.
Perhaps trans F to M and M to F should be in the "para" categories, as they are after all conditions that require lifelong medical treatment.
Ironically McKinnon’s ‘sport is a human right’ mantra might well come back to bite her when we all realise the vast majority of women also have that right
I don't think there's any 'realising' to do - we have someone who has declared they can compete in women's sport because they're artificially manipulating some numbers to be in line with what women have. How that is then sufficient criteria to then perform in women's competitions is bizarre
The sporting authorities should have rejected this situation until it had been fully agreed - instead they've bowed to those who shout loudest, throw accusations of hate and infringing 'their rights' without engaging with the people that this farce is being foisted onto
xx chromosome
Case in point. Five minutes on Wikipedia will show you that doesn’t work as a definition of “female”.
Can you think of a better one for sporting purposes? (The whole point is to separate out the people who had massive testosterone boosts in their teenage years.)
But as I said earlier:
It’s simple, take gender out of it because that’s fluid.
Replace gender classification with two categories, one for people with XX chromosomes, one for everyone else.
‘XX’ and ‘other’. Problem goes away.
Maybe someone can tell me - in what way is Rachel McKinnon not a man? I don't believe there are any genetic/physical factors involved.
Being female is a handicap in most sport, but we as a society have created a female category to overcome that.
Is it, or is it a handicap in the same way it is for a job or pay? Isn't having these categories exactly why it's a handicap? We treat women differently, we teach them differently, we spend less money on them, we don't celebrate their achievements in the same way (by and large (in sport) because a man has done it first) and then we say "oh they're not as good".
It's the same as public school producing better results, it's very little to do with genetics it's a lot to do with money and social expectations. Or do you think Africans are generally less able cyclists than Europeans? That Kenyans are natural runners but not great shot putters?
It’s the same as public school producing better results, it’s very little to do with genetics it’s a lot to do with money and social expectations
It isn't, though. Within that same school, the very best male and female athletes are probably going to be pretty close on performance until around 14/15 years old. Then something happens which means that even with all the best training, equipment and so on that money can buy, the male athletes will perform better.
It's not about money, social standing, geographical location or anything really. It's about immutable biological facts. Male puberty fundamentally changes the human body.
It’s the same as public school producing better results, it’s very little to do with genetics it’s a lot to do with money. Or do you think Africans are generally less able cyclists than Europeans? That Kenyans are natural runners but not great shot putters?
So you're saying that with enough money and support, a female athlete can beat Usain Bolt's 9.58s 100m, or play Rugby for England (men) against the all-blacks? I am aware that a lot of women's perceived workplace performance deficit is a social construct. But this isn't about that, it's about biology. I don't think that's a controversial statement.
To answer your other questions: I don't think any Africans have really broken into pro cycling yet, but yeah it's something that I've wondered about before. I'm not sure about Kenyan shot putters, though. I don't think either of those examples are relevant.
To answer your other questions: I don’t think any Africans have really broken into pro cycling yet, but yeah it’s something that I’ve wondered about before. I’m not sure about Kenyan shot putters, though. I don’t think either of those examples are relevant.
more to do with the lack of decent roads, any history with the sport, and the cost
The one observation I have is that the issue is a M - F transition one. No F - M transitioned person is competing at that level and winning world championships. It would suggest that the assertions of some of the impact of transitioning don't stand up.
Perhaps trans F to M and M to F should be in the “para” categories, as they are after all conditions that require lifelong medical treatment.
is an interesting, though controversial, idea.
I think Semenya has been treated unfairly, because whatever her specific physiology (and despite rumours and partial leaks, the exact details of her condition have not been made public) I believe she is legally a woman
So is McKinnon.
To answer your other questions: I don’t think any Africans have really broken into pro cycling yet
Sure they have...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Teklehaimanot
But access to Early cycling and racing infrastructure is probably the rate determining effect.
I thought at one point they used the level of testosterone as the differentiator between Male / Female events to try and accommodate all the different Chromosome combinations; I assume that has been abandoned?
Mckinnon doesn’t help clarify the issue much – she’s a gift to those of a transphobic disposition, like a right wing parody of an entitled trans athlete.
Have to agree with this.
I've had a dabble in the world of trans-rights through work and to say that it is polarised is an understatement, it makes Brexit look like a polite disagreement over how to make a cuppa.
You also used the word "utilitarian" and that's what it should come down to IMO, her insistence on her right to exercise her advantage over her competitors impinges on their right to a fair contest IMO. And there are many more biological women than trans, obvs.
Rules will surely end up changed, but it's gonna be awkward.
I believe she is legally a woman
So is McKinnon.
Not in the UK though?
To answer your other questions: I don’t think any Africans have really broken into pro cycling yet
Not heard of this fella?
So you’re saying that with enough money and support, a female athlete can beat Usain Bolt’s 9.58s 100m, or play Rugby for England (men) against the all-blacks? I am aware that a lot of women’s perceived workplace performance deficit is a social construct. But this isn’t about that, it’s about biology. I don’t think that’s a controversial statement.
The recent women's World marathon record makes her the 15th fastest athlete of any gender ever over that distance. Why, if she can achieve that now and it's down to gender have women not permanently been in the top 20?
I don’t think either of those examples are relevant.
My point is people don't excel in things they aren't encouraged to do.
100 years ago you'd be having the same genetics argument about black people being less able than white.
Within that same school, the very best male and female athletes are probably going to be pretty close on performance until around 14/15 years old. Then something happens which means that even with all the best training, equipment and so on that money can buy, the male athletes will perform better.
Until you look at things boys are encouraged to do and girls not so much, like cricket or rugby or football.
It’s not about money, social standing, geographical location or anything really. It’s about immutable biological facts. Male puberty fundamentally changes the human body.
I think you give to much credit to the biology, in the grand scheme of things that make a difference IMHO testosterone is way up into the marginal gains end in a professional athlete.
Not heard of this fella?
He's British isn't he? Don't tell me you can just choose which country you want to ride for that gives you the best chance of winning. Its like Zola all over again.
So is McKinnon
Yes, so the same principle applies. If she satisfies the current criteria, she is eligible to compete in that category.
You return to the original problem. If the objective is to categorise people for the purposes of competition, the categories of male and female, as currently defined, are too simplistic to adequately cover the spectrum resulting from intersex conditions and gender transition or identification.
I think you probably need to re-think classification, but that's a big debate, and I don't think it has a simple answer.
I think you probably need to re-think classification, but that’s a big debate, and I don’t think it has a simple answer.
Open and XX? Or else Open, XX and a variety of other categories in the style of the paralympics?
I think you give to much credit to the biology, in the grand scheme of things that make a difference IMHO testosterone is way up into the marginal gains end in a professional athlete
This is demonstrably false. One example where people at the top end of their game show that men are more powerful than women. https://www.topendsports.com/sport/tennis/men-v-women.htm
Or compare mens and womens weightlifting world records. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_weightlifting
Or look at mens vs womens DH, Rachel Atherton and her mates probably get the same level of funding and train as much as Loic Bruni et al, yet at snoshoe fro example, the women came in at 3.43, the men at 3.03, thats 20% faster.
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/final-results-snowshoe-dh-world-cup-2019.html
This is demonstrably false
Also a brilliant example of where women are treated as second class, not invested in, get reduced prize money, lower sponsorship money, lower incentives to start out, less opportunity to play and develop at a young age and so on.
In not debating that women preform differently to men, I'm saying the data is completely skewed by the non biological factors to the point its not reliable.
We know those social factors are a huge limit in pretty much every situation so why not the major limit in sport? Does every successful male athlete have very high testosterone?
Look at Rachel Atherton as an example of a woman who was given a fairly level playing field with the men from a young age, she's Pretty handy in a bike and has put in plenty of times faster than a chunk of the men's field over the years if I'm not mistaken.
“Look at Rachel Atherton as an example of a woman who was given a fairly level playing field with the men from a young age, she’s Pretty handy in a bike and has put in plenty of times faster than a chunk of the men’s field over the years if I’m not mistaken.”
You’re completely mistaken. Rachel is an amazing DH MTBer but she’s significantly slower than all the junior men (short of big crashes or mechanicals) at every race, and even further behind the seniors.
Curtain shopping.
Is she up for it? Let her race.
Would she rather cut her wrists? Don’t let her race.
As I said, false. https://www.pinkbike.com/news/live-results-vallnord-dh-world-cup-2019.html
Loic bruni 4:11, racherl atherton 5:00 mins.
She is quicker than the 56th fastest man at Vallnord, and would not have placed 20th in the junior men.(there were only 20 junior men)
(She is amazing, and I admire her more than the blokes, I prefer watching the womens dh and talk about it all the time when its on, but its just a fact, they are not as good as the men)
She's still awesome though!
And not a massive dick. Like McKinnon.
Fully, she is one my heroes.
I follow Graham Linehan (father ted writer) on twitter and he has been very vocal on this , sometimes possibly gone to far but he has calmed down a bit lately and seems to make his point better now . Anyway he retweeted a thread the other day where someone compared gay rights to trans rights, the gist was gay rights required nothing from straight people , all gay people were asking was for the same rights as straight people , marry the person they love etc etc . how can you argue with that ? Trans rights requires non trans people to go along with a truth they may not understand or believe and those people are normally women having trans women wanting to use women only spaces. That may be a toilet or something like a sporting competition .
There needs to be an honest and grown up discussion about it and an acknowledgement that when it comes to sport in order to maintain fairness there may well need to be a form of discrimination . The problem is when idiots like Piers Morgan get involved the conversation turns toxic and i would imagine a trans kid who for competing at the Olympics is the last thing on their mind and are just trying to work things out in their head could feel like the world is against them .
Open and XX? Or else Open, XX and a variety of other categories in the style of the paralympics?
This. Job jobbed.
The recent women’s World marathon record makes her the 15th fastest athlete of any gender ever over that distance. Why, if she can achieve that now and it’s down to gender have women not permanently been in the top 20?
Not sure where this nugget of nonsense came from. It's impressive, but wouldn't make top 2000 mens fastest times over that distance.
I don't follow the trans rights movement closely, does anyone know if there is unity of opinion behind McKinnon's stance or do some others see her as counter-productive to the cause?
She is amazing, and I admire her more than the blokes, I prefer watching the womens dh and talk about it all the time when its on, but its just a fact, they are not as good as the men
I'd argue that it isn't about being "good", it's that physiologically, they don't have the power to carry the speed, I'm pretty sure if it were possible to stick Rachel Atherton's brain and skills into the 56th quickest male DH riders body, he'd go a damn sight quicker!
In all sports, it's not about being "good" it's about the physical "grrr" that years of naturally produced testosterone doping will give you.