Forum menu
I seriously doubt anyone chooses to transition just to be more successful at a sport.
Hmm. There will be edge cases though. We know that some folk are willing to take life-threatening drugs to do so.
Personally, if the world sports bodies can all agree that a hormone level up to “x” is suitable to compete as a woman to avoid an unfair advantage, I’ll bow to that decision and let people get on with it.
Two issues; (a) the advantages created by male puberty don't disappear, (b) we've done the "taking drugs to get a competitive advantage" thing in the past and decided it was a bad thing.
Having said that, I'm a man and I don't compete so my opinion doesn't really count for much. I do think we should mostly be listening to women.
I do think we should mostly be listening to women.
Agreed, and perhaps like yours, my views on the subject are mostly informed by having listened to women.
I think it's actually going to be easier to sort this at the top level than the grassroots and youth mass participation level, where the arguments move away from what's fair to what people are comfortable with.
That hasn’t changed, as genetics hasn’t so seems an entirely rational consistent.
Aside from if you start looking at someones genes then you get various syndromes which dont match the binary options we get taught at school
For example xy females (Swyer syndrome) and xx males (de la Chapelle syndrome) or even xxy males (Klinefelter syndrome) plus various others.
I think there can be a lot of positives that come out of it though. Not least of which is asking ourselves why we separate children’s sport by gender.
Youth is a fascinating one and there's a reasonable chunk of evidence to suggest that at U8 / U10 / U12, there is very little physical difference between boys and girls, it is certainly possible to hold a single mixed U8 race and then separate the results out to boys and girls but they will all be mixed in.
British Cycling removed the National Series for U8 and U10 a little while ago to remove some of the pressure of competition at such a young age and instead focus on enjoyment, skills development and so on and although there was some push-back from parents, many actually welcomed it in terms of saving significant chunks of cash and also allowing more time in the day for a race organiser to run decent length races for older kids rather than everyone being crammed into one racing programme.
However once past the U12 stage and into U14 / U16, you do get very noticeable differences as children mature at different ages. I've seen 14 year old boys built like the proverbial and 16 year old boys who'd be blown away in a stiff breeze which is where factors like gear restrictions come in. BC also have a process by which Youth riders, after scoring a certain number of points in their own age category competition, could apply for Dispensation to ride up into the next older category. There were restrictions on it (Youth riders still not allowed to compete on the open road for example) but it was a good well-managed system for ensuring that one overly mature 14yr old boy did not spend a year lapping the field every time in U14 races but could instead go up to U16 and race.
I suspect we will have a third category of competition for transgender atheletes
The problem with that is you run into the same issue that Women's racing was struggling with for years which is very low numbers.
Organiser puts on Women's race, gets 3 entries, cancels it and declares Women's racing a total loss.
Organiser puts on Women's race, gets 3 entries, spends all his time on social media berating Women for not entering, loses all the goodwill of potential participants, declares Women's racing a total loss.
Organiser puts on Women's race, gets some entries, shoots himself in the foot by only paying out paltry prizes (because "smaller field"), social media storm ensues, declares Women's racing a total loss.
It took years of working with race organisers, progressive improvement in rider categories, points on offer, prizes on offer and so on to bring Women's racing up to par and that's with 50% of the population available to race. Try that with 1% of the population (TG) open to race and then understand that it's not as simple as "TG"; at the very least there is M->F and F->M.
I think it’s actually going to be easier to sort this at the top level than the grassroots
I think grassroots might be a lot easier. For example, I play badminton at grassroots level. I regularly get beaten by women, and even young teenagers. I don't care, it's just for fun. If I became a woman they would still beat me because they are better players, but at local club stuff no one cares who's playing really. Separating by ability makes a lot more sense than by gender (OK, maybe you need gender as well in boxing, but not in snooker for instance)
There is only one sport I am good at, but if I were to become a woman there is a very real chance I would be world champion. My 49th in the mens category would have been 3rd in the womens last time. This would understandably (I expect) upset the women who compete at that level, people would definitey notice and would care, at that level the skills are on par but strength and power would give me a huge advantage.
Almost as if it depends on the sport, and the individual. Rules will have to be sport specific, and depend on the level of competition, and it will no doubt exclude some trans-women while hopefully allowing others to compete. It will not be simple if it is to be fair. Of course the simple blanket "no" that the Prime Minister says he backs (knowing most of the population will happily embrace the simple and easy to understand glib approach) is the only path that many people will accept. Governing organisations will have a tough job resisting being pushed down that route... but I hope many will. This needs long careful consideration on a sport by sport, competitor by competitor basis, and will evolve over time.
Male and female categories plus transgender. If you are trans you can enter the trans or the sex you were born as. For those that are not genetically wild type make or female you look at that on a case by case basis. It doesn’t have to be hard.
you have to (I think) define what is male and female, and I think that there is a growing acceptance that the mere presence of a willy or muff doesn’t cut it any more.
Barring those people born with intersex chromosones, this is not difficult to do. The biological definition of male and female is quite easy to establish. The sociological definition is where we run into problems (a problem I am very familiar with and entirely sympathetic to).
The problem with that is you run into the same issue that Women’s racing was struggling with for years which is very low numbers.
True but that's life; you can't set rules just to keep everyone happy and to some degree you have to become the change you want to see. Women's participation has increased because women have started participating, which is due to the initiative of women and is the best and only resolution.
what about rock climbing? Woman are pretty much on par with men.
Is that true? I just had a look and the gap is about two grades, with the hardest ascent by a woman being 9b and 9c for a man. That's still a very big gap, not really par but then really who cares? Competition rock climbing isn't really what climbing is about.
If you chose to be different you should have to deal with the consequences.
🤦🏻♂️
"There should be a separate category for trans athletes" Yeah, and at nearly every race there would be nobody in that category, or someone would have to race themselves.
The prevalence of trans folks who are also elite athletes is much less common than the media or the general discourse would have you believe. In mountain biking it's maybe two or three riders out of a participant base of millions.
The stuff about keeping discrimination out of sport also rings very hollow - outside of womens's downhill, how many pro cyclists are openly gay?
The stuff about keeping discrimination out of sport also rings very hollow – outside of womens’s downhill, how many pro cyclists are openly gay?
I think you're in danger of conflating one aspect of discrimination where there is zero potential for someone to have an unfair advantage, i.e. sexual preference, with another in which the question is at best indeterminate. I totally understand and recognise where you're coming from with that statement, but I'm not sure it's a valid contrast.
Until we are able to unanimously determine one way or another whether exposure to testosterone in puberty does indeed confer an advantage then we will always have doubt hanging over how fair trans women's participation in female only events is. And until we do, then we absolutely should continue to debate and discuss it.
On another note, a not all men are stronger than all women, there's significant overlap between the sexes that are driven by genetics. Some women have the ability to train and develop muscle mass in excess of men (and some of those women may well end up transitioning to a male gender identity) and would be at a distinct advantage over those men in strength based competitions.
Of course the real problem here is that we are so hung up on eugenics when it comes to elite level sport in the first place, but that's a whole other ball game.
It's all about inclusivity, isn't it? It seems they're not doing a great job for either trans or gay folk at the moment. You can have all the diversity and inclusivity policies you like but what does it say if you fail to implement them, or throw them in the bin at the first whiff of a public controversy?
There is only one sport I am good at, but if I were to become a woman there is a very real chance I would be world champion. My 49th in the mens category would have been 3rd in the womens last time. This would understandably (I expect) upset the women who compete at that level, people would definitey notice and would care, at that level the skills are on par but strength and power would give me a huge advantage.
You wouldn't have the same strength and power if you underwent extensive hormone treatment to feminize your appearance. Particularly if you genuinely wanted to properly feminize your appearance.
You might retain some advantages, but so far the evidence doesn't suggest it is that great, specifically how many TG women are really participating at the top of the top levels. Read my earlier posts, and also the Pippa York cafe ride video.
Yes there's a chance that someone somewhere will dose just enough to pass the hormone level test but maximise the retention of male characteristics. Again, not happening yet.
@mattsccm. Really? A 'choice'? Shall I tell my son he's just made a bad one; he won't leave his room currently because he's a got 'woman's problems', and if he'd just chosen differently he'd be happier?
Yes there’s a chance that someone somewhere will dose just enough to pass the hormone level test but maximise the retention of male characteristics.
I expect, again sport depending, that the hormone level tests will come to require lower levels and for a longer period of time, to prevent this. The sporting organisations have a lot of learning and adapting to do. They won't learn anything with blanket bans/responses. Some don't want them to even be looking into it though... and that's not from concerns about fairness, and all about prejudice and/or misunderstanding, I strongly suspect. Easier to wave about the idea of banning all trans-women from all women's categories in all sports... like our Prime Minister... easy to understand... doesn't require much thinking... doesn't require any work from sporting organisation... superficially "fair"... and doesn't require trying to look past our own prejudices and/or misunderstandings.
On another note, a not all men are stronger than all women, there’s significant overlap between the sexes that are driven by genetics. Some women have the ability to train and develop muscle mass in excess of men (and some of those women may well end up transitioning to a male gender identity) and would be at a distinct advantage over those men in strength based competitions.
Yes, some incredibly strong women might be stronger than some fairly weak men in a strength based competition.
However, strength based competitions don't tend to work like that as they are self selecting in favour of strong people.
For example if you compare powerlifting WRs:
<table class="resp-tab">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="right wclass">-59kg</td>
<td class="left name">Fedosienko Sergei</td>
<td class="left team">Russia</td>
<td class="right dob">1982</td>
<td class="right bwt">58.48</td>
<td class="right result">669.5</td>
<td class="center date">2016-06-24</td>
<td>Killeen / U.S.America</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
with
<table class="resp-tab">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="right wclass">-63kg</td>
<td class="left name">Bavoil Prescillia</td>
<td class="left team">France</td>
<td class="right dob">1993</td>
<td class="right bwt">62.86</td>
<td class="right result">548.0</td>
<td class="center date">2021-09-30</td>
<td>Halmstad / Sweden</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
I went up a weight class for the women as the weight classes don't exactly line up.
I'm fairly sure any Male sport where speed, strength and power is even a moderate factor is pretty safe from Female to Male Transgender athletes.
It's just not fair is it really.
A biological man competing against a biological woman regardless of hormone replacement will always have an advantage.
If you want to compete, you should have to compete at your born gender.
No lamp.
It just isn't like that, if you can take the time to actually listen.
Look at the Pippa York cafe ride from about 19 mins. A proper elite level rider being open about what it's really like.
A biological man competing against a biological woman regardless of hormone replacement will always have an advantage.
Luckily people are actually researching and testing this, across different sports, not just going with their gut reaction. Lots to learn still. But refusing to learn is a temptation that I hope sporting organisations will resist. It'll be difficult though, as, like in everything, the overwhelming majority of people they work for are not trans... and of them the majority are happy with the shoulder shrugging "ban them no matter what", or "doesn't effect me, so I'd rather not concern myself with this" persuasion, understandably.
meanwhile
and specifically as the uninformed refuse to try to become informed and just keep saying how simple it is.....
“There is strong evidence that minorities experience greater levels of stress when their rights are being debated,” said Dr Adam Jowett, the chair of the British Psychological Society’s Sexualities Section.
It’s all about inclusivity, isn’t it?
But not to the detriment of others.
@poah - exactly. Men competing as women will mean some women athletes losing out on prize money, sponsorship and a livelihood because they're competing against someone who is physically stronger / more athletic.
You can't start trying to 'level the playing field' (pun intended!) by balancing hormones etc.Who would want to partake in that and who would pay for it?
Biology has 2 sexes, keep it simple.
Women are losing out on sponsorship deals to trans athletes? Really?
On the subject of "balancing hormones", athletes born female are under no obligation to disclose what their hormone levels are. Trans athletes, on the other hand...
Biology has 2 sexes, keep it simple.
Except, as pointed out several times over the course of just this thread, it's not that simple.
There is one particular recent case that has probably prompted this statement. I am quite familiar with it because my son raced with the athlete in question at youth and junior level and as a junior male they were incredibly strong and competed at a very high level.
They are now wanting to compete as a woman and there has been a large backlash amongst the female competitors including a potential boycott of a national championships.
It is an increbly difficult and delicate situation and I have no idea what the correct answer is.
Biology has 2 sexes, keep it simple.
There are a few chromosonal variations affecting a very small number of people that can make this into a non-binary situation. To be fair though, that's not (afaik) an issue in the recent British Cycling case, nor any of the other recent, high profile examples. As these variations can be detected by simple testing it shouldn't be too difficult to create a rule accommodating them. Of course, it then becomes an invasion of privacy issue but regular testing is something that elite athletes have to submit to in any case.
Perhaps there's a simpler solution, rather than banning TG participants from various competitive sports, we just ban competitive sport...
It only serves to bring out the worst in our species engendered corruption and gambling, providing incentives for participants to cheat or take PEDs where disproportionate wealth gets attached to a sport.
Worst of all professional/competitive sport ends up overriding basic human decency in how we treat people who have probably been through a fair bit personally up to that point so let's take away the opportunity for everyone, TG or otherwise, to emotionally and physically damage themselves in the name of competition...
If we're going to pick on or choose to "disadvantage" any group I think it should be "winners" those selfish, boarder-line sociopathic people for whom a shiny medal and affirmation of worth is attached to their ability to kick a ball, run fast or pedal quicker than the next chromosomally and physiologically similar mammal...
Another random thought...
We have categories of physical disability enabling folk to compete right up to Paralympic level, but nothing similar for those with affected by their mental health.
Except, as pointed out several times over the course of just this thread, it’s not that simple.
Biologically speaking it almost is. The frequency of intersex chromosones is so vanishingly small that we can, to all intents and purposes, remove it from the equation.
Sociologically and psychologically speaking it is a very different, complex and, as I have experienced at very close quarters, painful problem. But however painful that may be, and for as real as the personal experience of gender dysphoria is, it does not negate the underlying biological imperative.
Again, to restate the problem, this is very simply an issue of whether exposure to testosterone during puberty leaves any lasting enhancement to an individual once they transition and start to reduce their testosterone levels.
We simply do not know the answer to that question and until we do (and likely we will never know it), then there will always be people who feel trans women have an advantage. And considering that entry into all elite level competition is predicated on accidents of birth (i.e. genetics), the sooner we realise that all advantages are inherently unfair the better.
but nothing similar for those with affected by their mental health
True but it depends on your definition of mental health as cognitive impairment is, I think, recognised in the classifications for the paralympics.
Biologically speaking it almost is. The frequency of intersex chromosones is so vanishingly small that we can, to all intents and purposes, remove it from the equation.
Depends what you mean. If you mean people who are born intersex and identified as female but effectively go through male puberty then the number is very small. Caster Semenya's case shows that you can't just ignore it though
However, the number of people who could be classed as intersex is about the same as the number of people who are transgender (estimates are 1-2%). Most probably won't gain a competitive advantage from this.
Biologically speaking it almost is. The frequency of intersex chromosones is so vanishingly small that we can, to all intents and purposes, remove it from the equation.
Exactly. This is what it needs to come back to. The rest is just noise and peoples choices that come with consequences
I've said it before and it doesn't seem a popular view but I think the situation with respect to intersex/DSD athletes is similar.
If we want a protected class of athletes called "women" where the vast majority of women feel they fit, and see "someone like them" winning, then we need to define "woman" in such a way as to exclude a fair number of minority cases. Who will themselves be hurt by this decision.
In athletics in recent years it's not that unusual to see someone who basically appears to be a strong male youth running in amongst a bunch of women.
I know it's not the same thing as transgender, but the issues seem basically the same to me. What is a woman, in a sporting context?
I know it’s not the same thing as transgender, but the issues seem basically the same to me. What is a woman, in a sporting context?
It is an interesting question. People tend to focus on women who have an advantage due to their entirely natural sexual characteristics but it's worth remembering that it can also work the other way. People with Klinefelter syndrome, for example, are effectively excluded from competing against people with similar levels of testosterone to themselves.
I think this debate is good for people to question what we are actually trying to achieve with women's sport and what is the real cause of the performance differences between men and woman.
If we look at Downhill, I would say that most of the difference in times we see between the women's and men's field is cultural rather than physical. I think it mostly comes down to the fact that fewer women are encouraged to do competitive sport in general and this is especially true in Downhill.
I’ve got a TERF streak I just don’t seem to be able to let go of. My immediate, instinctual response to cases like this is to think that it’s blokes of a different kind still making life difficult for women. Thinking about it harder I can see it’s not that simple and I’m much more sympathetic, but still a large part of me wants to say go and do something else if you want to go down this path that’s understandably so important to you. I imagine most ordinary trans women must get annoyed at all the drama cases like this bring to their lives. However, having said all that I know that the younger, radical trans rights activists will be proved correct, just as feminists, gay rights and anti-racists have been over the past few generations. I wonder what problem the next generation will struggle to deal with in the way Gen Xers like me have with this one. My guess is body modding, their kids popping their eyes out for cameras or something.
But why this?
🤦🏻♂️
Surely this is real life not every selfish idiot wanting their own way?
If you chose to step away from the norm you are welcome to do so but why expect the rest of the world to change for you? It doesn't matter what the situation. Personal choice is yours but don't inflict it on the rest of us.
You make it sound like a choice between peas or beans for tea. It's not a choice in that respect, it's a necessity for those affected by it.
Why do we make allowances for others in society? Because it's the mark of a decent civilised society.
I agree that if someone was transitioning just to be competitive then that wouldn't be right, but once again the overwhelming evidence is that this is not happening. The very few people that are both TG and elite athletes are first and foremost the former and accept the impact that their treatments have on their competitiveness, particularly when the dose rates are sufficient to feminize (let's be honest this is almost exclusively a MTF TG issue) rather than 'just enough to pass the testosterone test' .
As I've suggested before look at the Pippa York cafe ride on p1, spend 15 mins listening and maybe you might rethink.
In the end I don't think a blanket inclusion or exclusion will work, but the 'there's two sexes, that's all we need for competition and anything else is a choice with consequences' is quite offensive.
there’s two sexes, that’s all we need for competition and anything else is a choice with consequences’ is quite offensive.
why do you find the biological facts offensive? It’s straightforward science or do we need to have alternative facts to not offend anyone even if they aren’t true?
Personal choice is yours but don’t inflict it on the rest of us.
1) the choice is only to be honest with yourself, rather than hide away because of the attitudes of others
2) our societies aren’t just for “people like me”, or “the rest of us” as you put it, but for everyone
the biological facts offensive?
The biology we are born with is not everything, as all of us who have had operations, or rely on insulation pumps will tell you. Many of us would be dead if we were to not embrace the fact that bodies can be changed.
two biological sexes is not offensive. I accept and believe that [edit - with some chromosomal outliers as discussed elsewhere - but that's not what we're discussing here]
The fact is that sex doesn't mean the same as gender and gender identity and finding an inclusive solution to that is what is needed. That it can be reduced by a couple of posters who won't see beyond sex as the only possible solution, and calling it a choice with consequences is offensive, in the sense that it offends me.
It’s not just you who finds this simplistic ‘basic biology is the only thing’ arguements offensive @theotherjonv 👍
Keep up the good work and know there are people out here who are impressed with your clarity and patience.
I’m learning a lot.
The fact is that sex doesn’t mean the same as gender and gender identity and finding an inclusive solution to that is what is needed.
i agree entirely they are not the same thing. But when it comes to elite sport there needs to be a way of determining category that is based on scientific facts and not what some one chooses to say they are.
Thanks Lister (and others)
I had a conversation about this on the club run today. As I've disclosed my son is TG / AFAB. Socially transitioned and lives his life as a boy, and we're seeking to medically transition privately.
He's fallen out of love with sport, despite being a talented basketballer there's no way he can compete with 16 yo boys; particularly those that are suited to basketball because they're all getting to 6ft+ now. I guess some would say that's his choice and consequence, he could technically still qualify for girls teams, but that would be impossible to him. Anyway, that's not the point.
His other passion is and always has been theatre and performance. He auditions for, and wins leading roles as a boy/man. Other AMAB boys don't get these roles because he does. He may even be advantaged, not physiologically but because as a younger girl he did dance classes in a way that most boys didn't / wouldn't (stereotyping I know!) and consequently has that background.
IDK if parents mutter and complain behind the scenes, we don't see anything but support from the casting people, creatives and directors he works with.
The person I was discussing with started from a position that there was no place for TG women in women's sport. They didn't however see a problem with him playing male roles, even to the detriment of other boys. When asked why it was OK their best answer was that theatre has historically been inclusive.
I don't think they got the point that they were arguing that sport doesn't need to be. Or indeed that theatre may be the same as sport but just 30 or 40 years more evolved in its understanding of inclusivity.
there needs to be a way of determining category that is based on scientific facts
I agree. But I think more work needs doing to establish what those facts are, and don't think sex at birth is the right criteria for all sports.
and not what some one chooses to say they are.
By the same token, I agree. But you can't just declare yourself a woman and start winning...... as you well know. And the process of transitioning substantially reduces your competitiveness / chances (have you looked at the Pippa York video yet?) - but that also needs clearer study and definition.
Including one of the GP’s that we have asked to support us with private prescriptions
Maybe refer to said GP as master (not doctor nor mister as they will think they're a consultant) and use it to remind him/her how insulting it is to get nomenclature wrong.
It’s straightforward science or do we need to have alternative facts to not offend anyone even if they aren’t true?
Biology is one of the least straightforward sciences there is and PPE graduates, the public and non-biologists struggle with it as a result. (I include myself in the struggling category too, it's much too wooly at times for someone who enjoyed applied maths, trigonometry and physics/chemistry).
Reading through this thread we were doing so well until the usual suspects turned up.
When you understand that being Trans is no more a choice than being blonde or being tall then we can move forward.
No one, NO ONE, would choose to be Trans. It causes the worst possible levels of self loathing
Yes, you can choose whether or not to transition, but for so many, the choice is "Transition or suicide", because being in a body of the wrong gender is totally intolerable.
Imagine tomorrow you wake up and instead of a penis, you have a vagina and breasts. Your brain still says you are a man but your body is female. Would you be alright with that? Or would your brain be shrieking at you all day that everything was wrong, that you have things that you shouldn't have and didn't have things that you should have?
Imagine that. Every single minute of every day. How long could you put up with that for? How long before you hated your body so much that you punished it by cutting it and stabbing it?
The only way out of this madness involves incredibly painful surgery, drugs which will shorten your life, and informing your friends, family and colleagues that the person they thought they knew doesn't exist in the way they thought they did. You will lose people who are important to you, you will hear many very painful things. The chances are very high that you will receive verbal and physical abuse, probably regularly.
But people do it because it's the only way of preserving any sanity at all.
For many, it's not a "choice", it's the only possible means of survival.
Now how that works with professional sport is a massive conundrum. It's impossible to get it right for every person and every group. But at least now we are recognising the issue and trying to move forward. Every journey starts with a single step.
So for all the "scientists" who still can't tell the difference between sex and gender, please do some reading on the subject. Educate yourselves, learn some empathy. Then your random spoutings on the subject might be a little less offensive to those of us who are very closely affected by this issue.
@theotherjonv you rock. Your son is so lucky to have you as a father. My trans friend hasn't seen or heard from her parents since they threw her out when she was 15. That was 15 minutes after she told them she was trans and 25 years ago.
And a big plus one for @boriselbrus.
Be humane with people who's birth gender assignment went wrong and be thankful one will personally never have to tussle with that conundrum. Anything else is an abrogation of rule 1.