FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Transgender Women in Sports. Is it Fair? Part 2
Transgender Women in Sports. Is it Fair? Part 2
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"Original OP: So the USA have introduced legislation to ban transgender girls and women to participate in female sports on the basis of protecting biological girls and women in an industry that is already biased in favour of men. Women's sports doesn't have the same coverage, financial support and backing that their male counterparts have. And the reasoning for the legislation is because transwomen are biologically male and things like testosterone, skeletal and heart structure are different than biological women, which in turn would likely lead to an unfair advantage to the trans women. Do you agree with the banning of trans women in female sports? I'm conflicted on the idea personally." Cant see why not. People are very wired | |||
| |||
"Original OP: So the USA have introduced legislation to ban transgender girls and women to participate in female sports on the basis of protecting biological girls and women in an industry that is already biased in favour of men. Women's sports doesn't have the same coverage, financial support and backing that their male counterparts have. And the reasoning for the legislation is because transwomen are biologically male and things like testosterone, skeletal and heart structure are different than biological women, which in turn would likely lead to an unfair advantage to the trans women. Do you agree with the banning of trans women in female sports? I'm conflicted on the idea personally." World Rugby is the only international sporting body to ban transgender women competing in male sports after they concluded that there is evidence biological females would be at higher risk of injury when tackled by a player who underwent “Male puberty” regardless of their current hormone levels. The aspect of “fairness” and whether a “level playing field” exists can apparently be completely ignored hence it’s unsurprising that a contact sport was the first one to bring in an unambiguous ruling. Biological female athletes are meant to just accept the new status quo as the mantra “transwomen are women” carries too much political capital. Hence why female non-contact sports (track and field) are most at risk as the risk of actual harm (injury) argument cannot be used to counter the emotional harm a transwoman would experienced by someone telling them “sex is real”. | |||
| |||
| |||
"I’m not going to say any more now that this, and peace to you all . We have Olympics and paralympics We have amateur sports and pro sports We have adult teams and youth teams We have men’s sports and women’s sports . Let’s cheerfully have trans sports but let’s not think for one second that putting the Man united who’ve suddenly all transitioned up against the under 13,s scumbag college girl 5 a side team is ever going to be fair on Shanade, Leticia , Marie - Kylie, Amber and Jade" Apologies for the poor diction . Tired eyes . Night | |||
 | |||
"I’m not someone who has any interest in sport of any kind so am probably wrong here when I say; I’m under the impression that trans people have been eligible to compete in the Olympics since 2014 but none have qualified. This doesn’t seem to be a huge problem. Having been through transition myself, you would never do this just to be a better athlete! Transition is long. It’s hard. And trans people are among the most discriminated in the world with less rights than anyone else. I wouldn’t wish this on my worst enemy. It Fricking hurts too "I haven’t come across any examples of transwomen athletes taking up playing sports at a competitive level only after they transitioned. If they went through male puberty whilst engaging in regular sporting activity then the end result gives them an irreversible advantage over females who played the same sport/activity levels growing up without Male puberty. You can tell the difference between young men who played regular competitive sport throughout puberty to those that didn’t and maintained sedentary lifestyles. So it’s false argument to compare someone like yourself who “had little interest in sport” to playing sport to Hannah Mouncey. | |||
"I’m not someone who has any interest in sport of any kind so am probably wrong here when I say; I’m under the impression that trans people have been eligible to compete in the Olympics since 2014 but none have qualified. This doesn’t seem to be a huge problem. Having been through transition myself, you would never do this just to be a better athlete! Transition is long. It’s hard. And trans people are among the most discriminated in the world with less rights than anyone else. I wouldn’t wish this on my worst enemy. It Fricking hurts too "I think because the "rules" have been so variable and difficult to wade through, few transgender athletes have chosen to stick it out. Most Olympic sports don't come with much funding unless you're elite and likely to win medals and semi pro or PT athletes are unlikely to make the grade whatever their gender. Things might change in Tokyo though: "Transgender women who could compete at Tokyo include BMX freestyle rider Chelsea Wolfe of the United States, Brazilian volleyball player Tifanny Abreu, and weightlifter Laurel Hubbard of New Zealand." | |||
"I’m not someone who has any interest in sport of any kind so am probably wrong here when I say; I’m under the impression that trans people have been eligible to compete in the Olympics since 2014 but none have qualified. This doesn’t seem to be a huge problem. Having been through transition myself, you would never do this just to be a better athlete! Transition is long. It’s hard. And trans people are among the most discriminated in the world with less rights than anyone else. I wouldn’t wish this on my worst enemy. It Fricking hurts too
I think because the "rules" have been so variable and difficult to wade through, few transgender athletes have chosen to stick it out. Most Olympic sports don't come with much funding unless you're elite and likely to win medals and semi pro or PT athletes are unlikely to make the grade whatever their gender.
Things might change in Tokyo though:
"Transgender women who could compete at Tokyo include BMX freestyle rider Chelsea Wolfe of the United States, Brazilian volleyball player Tifanny Abreu, and weightlifter Laurel Hubbard of New Zealand.""That weightlifter will just make a farce of the whole thing. | |||
| |||
"I yet to say anything on this topic as I really haven’t anything to set on it But I do get a kick out it when people bring up testosterone and hormon levels And you have proper woman out there failing the highest drug test for test In the words off someone THEY ALL ON STEROIDS " As many male athletes dope too. Cheating isn't gender specific. | |||
"I yet to say anything on this topic as I really haven’t anything to set on it But I do get a kick out it when people bring up testosterone and hormon levels And you have proper woman out there failing the highest drug test for test In the words off someone THEY ALL ON STEROIDS As many male athletes dope too. Cheating isn't gender specific." Oooo I 1000% know I sit with professionals ever weekend and I talking at the highest off highest levels off a sport I have even gameplan for some very well knowing top MMA fighters | |||
| |||
| |||
"Obviously it’s not fair and shouldn’t be allowed. Dunno how it’s even a question. Growing up as a man gives you an advantage when you transition into females sports + drugs used to transition are already banned PE drugs " Totally on point here ! If a male takes test etc to enhance his abilities it’s cheating. If a woman takes it and it’s under the umbrella of transitioning then it’s legal ? | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. " That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. " I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making | |||
"Obviously it’s not fair and shouldn’t be allowed. Dunno how it’s even a question. " It is a question (and a complex problem) due to IAAF decision. . As I put earlier in part 1, although I am a TV, I am against trans-women in female sports especially in individual events. However, the problem of fairness occur when IAAF allow, people with XY chromosomes and elevated testosterone level to compete in female events who identifies themselves as "female". IAAF initially put the limit of testosterone at 10ng/ml but then reduce it to 5ng/ml. If based on these criteria, then, by right, trans-women who fulfilled the criteria (female physical appearance, identify themselves as female) , should also be allowed to compete in female events if their level of testosterone level is less than 5ng/ml. If they allow XY chromosomes with hyper-androgenism to compete just because they identify themselves as women, then the trans-women should be allowed as well. . Personally I think: - transwomen shouldn't be allowed to compete in female events (especially individual events) - "female" with XY chromosome also shouldn't be allowed to compete in female events. - females events only for female with XX chromosomes. The testosterone level at 5ng/ml can be maintained. | |||
"Obviously it’s not fair and shouldn’t be allowed. Dunno how it’s even a question. It is a question (and a complex problem) due to IAAF decision. . As I put earlier in part 1, although I am a TV, I am against trans-women in female sports especially in individual events. However, the problem of fairness occur when IAAF allow, people with XY chromosomes and elevated testosterone level to compete in female events who identifies themselves as "female". IAAF initially put the limit of testosterone at 10ng/ml but then reduce it to 5ng/ml. If based on these criteria, then, by right, trans-women who fulfilled the criteria (female physical appearance, identify themselves as female) , should also be allowed to compete in female events if their level of testosterone level is less than 5ng/ml. If they allow XY chromosomes with hyper-androgenism to compete just because they identify themselves as women, then the trans-women should be allowed as well. . Personally I think: - transwomen shouldn't be allowed to compete in female events (especially individual events) - "female" with XY chromosome also shouldn't be allowed to compete in female events. - females events only for female with XX chromosomes. The testosterone level at 5ng/ml can be maintained. " Just as a quick note. I only think it’s a simple question when we are discussing people that have transitioned. If you are intersex or born with da fgerejt chromosomes or whatever else, I haven’t even looked far enough into that to discuss it. But if you’ve transitioned from one sex to another you shouldn’t be allowed to compete in either category in my opinion. You should have a choice. Compete fairly as the sex you were born in, or transition and not compete. | |||
| |||
" Just as a quick note. I only think it’s a simple question when we are discussing people that have transitioned. If you are intersex or born with da fgerejt chromosomes or whatever else, I haven’t even looked far enough into that to discuss it. But if you’ve transitioned from one sex to another you shouldn’t be allowed to compete in either category in my opinion. You should have a choice. Compete fairly as the sex you were born in, or transition and not compete." It is a very complex issue. I understand your point and not disagree. However as I post earlier, anybody can claim that they were brought up as female. The need to be successful in sports is very important especially in developing/non-developed countries that people willing to do anything to have a better life. So far the XY 'females" (at least the one I know) are from Africa and 2 latest from China. (i've listed their names in Part I - try google/youtube them) In the earlier 20th century, Stella Walsh from Poland. The trans-women, many of them, lead an effeminate life as well. I don't see any different (in sports) between the 2 groups. . As I said in Part I, the disadvantage is the XX-female (I can't use the word normal anymore because what is normal nowadays). I think it is an interesting topic but very complicated. | |||
"I’m not someone who has any interest in sport of any kind so am probably wrong here when I say; I’m under the impression that trans people have been eligible to compete in the Olympics since 2014 but none have qualified. This doesn’t seem to be a huge problem. Having been through transition myself, you would never do this just to be a better athlete! Transition is long. It’s hard. And trans people are among the most discriminated in the world with less rights than anyone else. I wouldn’t wish this on my worst enemy. It Fricking hurts too
I haven’t come across any examples of transwomen athletes taking up playing sports at a competitive level only after they transitioned. If they went through male puberty whilst engaging in regular sporting activity then the end result gives them an irreversible advantage over females who played the same sport/activity levels growing up without Male puberty.
You can tell the difference between young men who played regular competitive sport throughout puberty to those that didn’t and maintained sedentary lifestyles. So it’s false argument to compare someone like yourself who “had little interest in sport” to playing sport to Hannah Mouncey.
"Transition strives to reverse the damage puberty does to you and many things are reversible. I avoided competition but my lifestyle, work etc ensured my body was very fit and very strong. I still live that life but, as I said in an earlier post, hormones have taken nearly 3” off my biceps. When I joined the armed forces I was in an entry of over 200 men. I was in the top 5 for fitness and strength as we competed in the gym. I measured myself all over before I started and have continued to throughout my transition. Every muscle has changed dramatically. I work in the building trade and things I did with ease I struggle with. Things I could lift before, I can’t anymore. My physical ‘advantage’ has gone. Studies have shown that it takes about two years for this to happen. I see _ultry succubus talking about testosterone levels and what’s allowed; for the record before I started blockers my testosterone was 10.3. Now my testosterone generating equipment is gone (yay ) it’s 1.2.
Please don’t assume I’m arguing that trans women should be allowed to compete in women’s sport, I haven’t said that.
I have reservations too but I have watched a fair few discussions on the subject and rather than making an uninformed opinion I’m open minded to the evidence plus my own experience.
For me, the jury is still out on this as I watch the evidence and research presented. | |||
| |||
(sorry I get passionate when it's about olympic sports). | |||
"I’m not someone who has any interest in sport of any kind so am probably wrong here when I say; I’m under the impression that trans people have been eligible to compete in the Olympics since 2014 but none have qualified. This doesn’t seem to be a huge problem. Having been through transition myself, you would never do this just to be a better athlete! Transition is long. It’s hard. And trans people are among the most discriminated in the world with less rights than anyone else. I wouldn’t wish this on my worst enemy. It Fricking hurts too
I haven’t come across any examples of transwomen athletes taking up playing sports at a competitive level only after they transitioned. If they went through male puberty whilst engaging in regular sporting activity then the end result gives them an irreversible advantage over females who played the same sport/activity levels growing up without Male puberty.
You can tell the difference between young men who played regular competitive sport throughout puberty to those that didn’t and maintained sedentary lifestyles. So it’s false argument to compare someone like yourself who “had little interest in sport” to playing sport to Hannah Mouncey.
Transition strives to reverse the damage puberty does to you and many things are reversible.
I avoided competition but my lifestyle, work etc ensured my body was very fit and very strong. I still live that life but, as I said in an earlier post, hormones have taken nearly 3” off my biceps.
When I joined the armed forces I was in an entry of over 200 men. I was in the top 5 for fitness and strength as we competed in the gym.
I measured myself all over before I started and have continued to throughout my transition. Every muscle has changed dramatically.
I work in the building trade and things I did with ease I struggle with. Things I could lift before, I can’t anymore.
My physical ‘advantage’ has gone.
Studies have shown that it takes about two years for this to happen.
I see _ultry succubus talking about testosterone levels and what’s allowed; for the record before I started blockers my testosterone was 10.3. Now my testosterone generating equipment is gone (yay ) it’s 1.2.
Please don’t assume I’m arguing that trans women should be allowed to compete in women’s sport, I haven’t said that.
I have reservations too but I have watched a fair few discussions on the subject and rather than making an uninformed opinion I’m open minded to the evidence plus my own experience.
For me, the jury is still out on this as I watch the evidence and research presented. "It just seems a little naive for you to say “my muscles got smaller so my advantage is gone” What about your increased bone density? What about your wider shoulders? What about the beneficial effects you had for most of your life with testosterone that women didn’t have? More testosterone means you get more out of training. It’s helps you recover faster, train harder and grow more. These things can’t just be ignored. | |||
" It just seems a little naive for you to say “my muscles got smaller so my advantage is gone” What about your increased bone density? What about your wider shoulders? What about the beneficial effects you had for most of your life with testosterone that women didn’t have? More testosterone means you get more out of training. It’s helps you recover faster, train harder and grow more. These things can’t just be ignored." You are correct. And that is why, females events should be only for XX-female as I stated earlier. | |||
" But if you’ve transitioned from one sex to another you shouldn’t be allowed to compete in either category in my opinion. You should have a choice. Compete fairly as the sex you were born in, or transition and not compete." When you choose to transition, (that’s the one bit you do choose, as I didn’t choose to be trans) you open yourself up to more discrimination than pretty much anyone else. The simple ‘ you choose to transition so that bars you from competitive sport’ is a pretty big blanket discrimination. | |||
"@ Rachael. 1.2 ng/ml !! That's great. The IAAF put it as 5ng/ml limit. I am not sure of other governing sport bodies (IAAF is for track and field only). So, what events are you taking part in? Balance beam gymnastic or synchronised swimming
(sorry I get passionate when it's about olympic sports). "I’m afraid, as I said earlier, I’m a very non competitive person. I prefer to lose on purpose to be able to drop out of the competition. I’m also 51. | |||
" But if you’ve transitioned from one sex to another you shouldn’t be allowed to compete in either category in my opinion. You should have a choice. Compete fairly as the sex you were born in, or transition and not compete. When you choose to transition, (that’s the one bit you do choose, as I didn’t choose to be trans) you open yourself up to more discrimination than pretty much anyone else. The simple ‘ you choose to transition so that bars you from competitive sport’ is a pretty big blanket discrimination. " Call it what you want. You made the decision and that shouldn’t effect people that want to compete fairly in your sport. If you wanna look amazing and decide use to take steroids you can’t compete. Same thing. You have to decide what’s more important. Competing in your sport. Or transitioning. No ones forcing you to compete. No ones forcing you to transition. Accept the consequences. You can’t have you cake and eat it too | |||
"There is an example in MMA of a trans woman fighting and destroying the eye of her apponent. She got a detatched retina, broken socket etc etc. I believe we should be accepting in society but that also comes with honesty and openess. A trans woman can't carry a baby, is generally more physically strong. There arr biological differences between sexes you can't deny. Gender and sex to me are 2 different things. Be who you want to be and everyone be honest and open society is flexible biology isn't. " I agree with that... But professional sport is neither honest nor open and is almost entirely about money... And as we know money motivates people to do dishonest things at times. It's more about getting caught than integrity now. | |||
"I'm quite poorly informed on this so please forgive any inaccuracies. Im not sure that professional sports is a bell weather of what's happening in society and it needs to maintain a level of fair competition or it ceases to be relevant to anyone and you may as well have the clean Olympics and the drug enhanced Olympics as an example. As a linked but slight aside. Just to illustrate the finances and life changing benefits of performing well at elite sports.... Was there not a controversial episode where the Spanish basketball team that won the paralymlics about 20 years ago had a few able bodied athletes to bolster their chances. I know we are not talking about disability but just wanted to highlight the fact that unless there is a level playing field, it's not worth a damn. I do wonder if this is as prevalent in women to men transition and elite sport.... And if not... Why... Perhaps the answer lies there.? " I don't think disability sport is a good comparator, especially not wheelchair basketball. There's very little benefit to fielding AB players versus, say, someone like me who is a 4.5 or 4.0 player (single leg disability, including below the knee amputees). In all honesty, me lacking full use of my left leg is irrelevant once I get into a wheelchair. I might as well be AB because I have full trunk control and incredibly strong upper body. I lack height, but in a single gender professional basketball team, your height would be relative to your gender. Wheelchair sports are actually a great leveller. I explained in part 1 of this discussion last night about how the points allocation system allows wheelchair basketball to be pretty fair at giving people of varying disabilities (and AB people, in amateur sport) a level playing field. I'd challenge some ABs to get in a chair and perform better than, say, Patrick Anderson (double below the knee amputee). | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. " Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making " I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. " Even better, look at football. I can’t remember exactly who it was, but a football male youth team beat the top female team by a ridiculous amount. I do Brazilian jiu-jitsu and while a male purple belt would literally man handle me, a female purple belt can still struggle with me even though I’m still somewhat if a beginner | |||
" But if you’ve transitioned from one sex to another you shouldn’t be allowed to compete in either category in my opinion. You should have a choice. Compete fairly as the sex you were born in, or transition and not compete. When you choose to transition, (that’s the one bit you do choose, as I didn’t choose to be trans) you open yourself up to more discrimination than pretty much anyone else. The simple ‘ you choose to transition so that bars you from competitive sport’ is a pretty big blanket discrimination. Call it what you want. You made the decision and that shouldn’t effect people that want to compete fairly in your sport. If you wanna look amazing and decide use to take steroids you can’t compete. Same thing. You have to decide what’s more important. Competing in your sport. Or transitioning. No ones forcing you to compete. No ones forcing you to transition. Accept the consequences. You can’t have you cake and eat it too" I’m very aware I don’t get to eat my cake. By transitioning I lost my male privilege. When I went anywhere with my boyfriend when he was working for me, if it were a builders merchant or a garage, even booking into a caravan site, people tended to address him and ignore me. I’d have to make extra effort for them to talk to me, the one in charge, rather than him, the assistant. Women still face discrimination, much of it quite subtle. Trans people face even more of it. I kinda accept that. As I said several times now; I’m not arguing trans women should be allowed to compete in female sports. I feel we become uncompetitive physically with the men we would have been on par with quite quickly. Does it set me level physically with cis women? Most of them, no. With prime athletic specimens? Definitely not. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. " The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. Even better, look at football. I can’t remember exactly who it was, but a football male youth team beat the top female team by a ridiculous amount. I do Brazilian jiu-jitsu and while a male purple belt would literally man handle me, a female purple belt can still struggle with me even though I’m still somewhat if a beginner " I think it was a college football under 15s and the US national team a few years ago? Stand to be corrected. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. " The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules | |||
"I'm quite poorly informed on this so please forgive any inaccuracies. Im not sure that professional sports is a bell weather of what's happening in society and it needs to maintain a level of fair competition or it ceases to be relevant to anyone and you may as well have the clean Olympics and the drug enhanced Olympics as an example. As a linked but slight aside. Just to illustrate the finances and life changing benefits of performing well at elite sports.... Was there not a controversial episode where the Spanish basketball team that won the paralymlics about 20 years ago had a few able bodied athletes to bolster their chances. I know we are not talking about disability but just wanted to highlight the fact that unless there is a level playing field, it's not worth a damn. I do wonder if this is as prevalent in women to men transition and elite sport.... And if not... Why... Perhaps the answer lies there.? I don't think disability sport is a good comparator, especially not wheelchair basketball. There's very little benefit to fielding AB players versus, say, someone like me who is a 4.5 or 4.0 player (single leg disability, including below the knee amputees). In all honesty, me lacking full use of my left leg is irrelevant once I get into a wheelchair. I might as well be AB because I have full trunk control and incredibly strong upper body. I lack height, but in a single gender professional basketball team, your height would be relative to your gender. Wheelchair sports are actually a great leveller. I explained in part 1 of this discussion last night about how the points allocation system allows wheelchair basketball to be pretty fair at giving people of varying disabilities (and AB people, in amateur sport) a level playing field. I'd challenge some ABs to get in a chair and perform better than, say, Patrick Anderson (double below the knee amputee)." The point I was trying to make was that there is so much money involved in elite level sports that it drove the Spanish team to field ineligible players.. They obviously felt there was an advantage. Elite sports is not this corinthian level playing field, it is rammed full of people trying to cheat, coached by cheats with national organisations (eg Russia) encouraging people to cheat. That maps onto the discussion about trans women sports. It's another opportunity to gain an unfair advantage, I think.... But as I've said... Ive only superficial understanding. | |||
" But if you’ve transitioned from one sex to another you shouldn’t be allowed to compete in either category in my opinion. You should have a choice. Compete fairly as the sex you were born in, or transition and not compete. When you choose to transition, (that’s the one bit you do choose, as I didn’t choose to be trans) you open yourself up to more discrimination than pretty much anyone else. The simple ‘ you choose to transition so that bars you from competitive sport’ is a pretty big blanket discrimination. Call it what you want. You made the decision and that shouldn’t effect people that want to compete fairly in your sport. If you wanna look amazing and decide use to take steroids you can’t compete. Same thing. You have to decide what’s more important. Competing in your sport. Or transitioning. No ones forcing you to compete. No ones forcing you to transition. Accept the consequences. You can’t have you cake and eat it too I’m very aware I don’t get to eat my cake. By transitioning I lost my male privilege. When I went anywhere with my boyfriend when he was working for me, if it were a builders merchant or a garage, even booking into a caravan site, people tended to address him and ignore me. I’d have to make extra effort for them to talk to me, the one in charge, rather than him, the assistant. Women still face discrimination, much of it quite subtle. Trans people face even more of it. I kinda accept that. As I said several times now; I’m not arguing trans women should be allowed to compete in female sports. I feel we become uncompetitive physically with the men we would have been on par with quite quickly. Does it set me level physically with cis women? Most of them, no. With prime athletic specimens? Definitely not. " Again, sorry if I sound like an idiot, but I kinda dunno what your saying. I’m not discussing outside of sports at all. I’m aware of the discrimination different genders face. But we are talking about sports and to mr it’s fairly black or white. Sports don’t care about your feelings. If you have transitioned you have forfeited your right to compete. Play all you want. But you can’t compete and call it fair | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! " No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules" If my argument fails, yours too then. As you are talking about rules, we have to keep in mind that the one who are making the rules, are always the first beneficiaries of those. And the status quo is more important to protect than equality and ultimately equity. Because it is not about equality per se, but about equity. And I do agree with you that competition should be fair. Like you said, we can't make ppl who are totally opposite from each others in terms of strength, that should be fair in terms of chances of winning even if it would be fair in terms of equality. Yet equality doesn't necessarily means equity. So I do agree with you there. But arguing that men are stronger than women, have not any scientific basis, because the research study that argue that there is, contain a confirmation bias that will push the researchers to look for extremes body frame in order to valid their preconceptions. And plus you can't really isolate the sexual variable which is arguing here. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules If my argument fails, yours too then. As you are talking about rules, we have to keep in mind that the one who are making the rules, are always the first beneficiaries of those. And the status quo is more important to protect than equality and ultimately equity. Because it is not about equality per se, but about equity. And I do agree with you that competition should be fair. Like you said, we can't make ppl who are totally opposite from each others in terms of strength, that should be fair in terms of chances of winning even if it would be fair in terms of equality. Yet equality doesn't necessarily means equity. So I do agree with you there. But arguing that men are stronger than women, have not any scientific basis, because the research study that argue that there is, contain a confirmation bias that will push the researchers to look for extremes body frame in order to valid their preconceptions. And plus you can't really isolate the sexual variable which is arguing here. " Sorry we have the end the convo there until you’ve done your research. It’s a scientific and biological fact that men are stronger and faster than women. It’s not an argument. There’s plenty of science in the subject and you can even read the science behind why a guys muscles are stronger. We can literally identify the gender if a person from examining their muscles because there are physical differences | |||
" I’m not discussing outside of sports at all. I’m aware of the discrimination different genders face. But we are talking about sports and to mr it’s fairly black or white. Sports don’t care about your feelings. If you have transitioned you have forfeited your right to compete. Play all you want. But you can’t compete and call it fair " You are correct again. And that is why "female" with XY chromosomes shouldn't be competing in female events as well. If they are allowed, the trans-women with testosterone level below the permitted level should be allowed as well. . And that's why I said female events should only be for XX chromosome females. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. " See, the things are just given do not make it true though. It is not because it is a granted knowledge that it is scientifically true. Truth cannot be objective and it is always subjected to to the subjectivity of the teller. But as you seem to want to argue that it is a reality, if that reality is shattered by counter arguments of women being more agressive, stronger and so on than some men, does you reality still stand or not ? | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. See, the things are just given do not make it true though. It is not because it is a granted knowledge that it is scientifically true. Truth cannot be objective and it is always subjected to to the subjectivity of the teller. But as you seem to want to argue that it is a reality, if that reality is shattered by counter arguments of women being more agressive, stronger and so on than some men, does you reality still stand or not ? " No sorry it doesn’t. Are cars faster than dogs? Yes. That’s why we wouldn’t race a dog in a car Are some dogs faster than some cars? Almost certainly, go to a 3rd world country and you’ll find plenty of cars that aren’t that fast running on 3 wheels. Exceptions don’t make rules. The science is clear cut and I’d suggest you go read up on it. Men are the physically dominate gender in our biology and we base our idea of fairness in sports around thatv | |||
| |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules If my argument fails, yours too then. As you are talking about rules, we have to keep in mind that the one who are making the rules, are always the first beneficiaries of those. And the status quo is more important to protect than equality and ultimately equity. Because it is not about equality per se, but about equity. And I do agree with you that competition should be fair. Like you said, we can't make ppl who are totally opposite from each others in terms of strength, that should be fair in terms of chances of winning even if it would be fair in terms of equality. Yet equality doesn't necessarily means equity. So I do agree with you there. But arguing that men are stronger than women, have not any scientific basis, because the research study that argue that there is, contain a confirmation bias that will push the researchers to look for extremes body frame in order to valid their preconceptions. And plus you can't really isolate the sexual variable which is arguing here. Sorry we have the end the convo there until you’ve done your research. It’s a scientific and biological fact that men are stronger and faster than women. It’s not an argument. There’s plenty of science in the subject and you can even read the science behind why a guys muscles are stronger. We can literally identify the gender if a person from examining their muscles because there are physical differences " Ok so what you are saying that you can identified the gender of a person because muscles are physically different? Right ? Is that identification is telling you that one muscle is superior from the others ? | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. See, the things are just given do not make it true though. It is not because it is a granted knowledge that it is scientifically true. Truth cannot be objective and it is always subjected to to the subjectivity of the teller. But as you seem to want to argue that it is a reality, if that reality is shattered by counter arguments of women being more agressive, stronger and so on than some men, does you reality still stand or not ? " I’m sorry but you’re coming across as delusional. As stated by others - the exception does not make the rule. You can deny the reality and the settled science of the differences between men and women all you want, but you’re losing credibility rapidly  | |||
 | |||
"I'm quite poorly informed on this so please forgive any inaccuracies. Im not sure that professional sports is a bell weather of what's happening in society and it needs to maintain a level of fair competition or it ceases to be relevant to anyone and you may as well have the clean Olympics and the drug enhanced Olympics as an example. As a linked but slight aside. Just to illustrate the finances and life changing benefits of performing well at elite sports.... Was there not a controversial episode where the Spanish basketball team that won the paralymlics about 20 years ago had a few able bodied athletes to bolster their chances. I know we are not talking about disability but just wanted to highlight the fact that unless there is a level playing field, it's not worth a damn. I do wonder if this is as prevalent in women to men transition and elite sport.... And if not... Why... Perhaps the answer lies there.? I don't think disability sport is a good comparator, especially not wheelchair basketball. There's very little benefit to fielding AB players versus, say, someone like me who is a 4.5 or 4.0 player (single leg disability, including below the knee amputees). In all honesty, me lacking full use of my left leg is irrelevant once I get into a wheelchair. I might as well be AB because I have full trunk control and incredibly strong upper body. I lack height, but in a single gender professional basketball team, your height would be relative to your gender. Wheelchair sports are actually a great leveller. I explained in part 1 of this discussion last night about how the points allocation system allows wheelchair basketball to be pretty fair at giving people of varying disabilities (and AB people, in amateur sport) a level playing field. I'd challenge some ABs to get in a chair and perform better than, say, Patrick Anderson (double below the knee amputee). The point I was trying to make was that there is so much money involved in elite level sports that it drove the Spanish team to field ineligible players.. They obviously felt there was an advantage. Elite sports is not this corinthian level playing field, it is rammed full of people trying to cheat, coached by cheats with national organisations (eg Russia) encouraging people to cheat. That maps onto the discussion about trans women sports. It's another opportunity to gain an unfair advantage, I think.... But as I've said... Ive only superficial understanding. " I think you're referring to the intellectual disability basketball team, which did field ineligible players, yes, but that was a long time ago (2000) and practices in supervising disability sports have come a long way. Some might say too far. There's been a whole hoo-haa in wheelchair basketball about the classification of 4.0 and 4.5 point players. Those with "obvious" impairment like below knee amputation are fine, but those like me with injuries that cannot be photographed or pointed to easily on a scan are in fact being discriminated against by IPC rules, which would rule me ineligible and classify me as able bodied. I have a mechanical nerve injury (lumbosacral plexus injury) which has given me substantially reduced power in all muscle groups in my left leg and hip. I can only walk any distance with aids, cannot run or jump and absolutely definitely cannot play running basketball. But my injury is deemed ineligible by the IPC. How does that work? Fortunately at amateur level, the considerations are different and there's a new league that seeks to recognise more wholly the range of disabilities that mean people cannot compete in AB sports but may also not fit the very narrow IPC criteria. Several athletes have been disqualified from playing wheelchair sports due to IPC rules, people with genuine and we'll documented disability. Look up the case of Alfie Hewitt (wheelchair tennis), for example. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules If my argument fails, yours too then. As you are talking about rules, we have to keep in mind that the one who are making the rules, are always the first beneficiaries of those. And the status quo is more important to protect than equality and ultimately equity. Because it is not about equality per se, but about equity. And I do agree with you that competition should be fair. Like you said, we can't make ppl who are totally opposite from each others in terms of strength, that should be fair in terms of chances of winning even if it would be fair in terms of equality. Yet equality doesn't necessarily means equity. So I do agree with you there. But arguing that men are stronger than women, have not any scientific basis, because the research study that argue that there is, contain a confirmation bias that will push the researchers to look for extremes body frame in order to valid their preconceptions. And plus you can't really isolate the sexual variable which is arguing here. Sorry we have the end the convo there until you’ve done your research. It’s a scientific and biological fact that men are stronger and faster than women. It’s not an argument. There’s plenty of science in the subject and you can even read the science behind why a guys muscles are stronger. We can literally identify the gender if a person from examining their muscles because there are physical differences Ok so what you are saying that you can identified the gender of a person because muscles are physically different? Right ? Is that identification is telling you that one muscle is superior from the others ? " Yeah. One will have larger muscle fibres, which allows for more strength and faster movements | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. See, the things are just given do not make it true though. It is not because it is a granted knowledge that it is scientifically true. Truth cannot be objective and it is always subjected to to the subjectivity of the teller. But as you seem to want to argue that it is a reality, if that reality is shattered by counter arguments of women being more agressive, stronger and so on than some men, does you reality still stand or not ? No sorry it doesn’t. Are cars faster than dogs? Yes. That’s why we wouldn’t race a dog in a car Are some dogs faster than some cars? Almost certainly, go to a 3rd world country and you’ll find plenty of cars that aren’t that fast running on 3 wheels. Exceptions don’t make rules. The science is clear cut and I’d suggest you go read up on it. Men are the physically dominate gender in our biology and we base our idea of fairness in sports around thatv" It is not because you want to think so that it makes it a reality. If you fail to see that we are not subjective being and that our knowledge is biased by our preconceptions and perspectives, I can't help you. By knowledge I even mean our scientific knowledge. Math is one of the only objective science. Math is pure facts, the rest is somehow fictional and highly dependent on our perspectives. Life isn't binary. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules If my argument fails, yours too then. As you are talking about rules, we have to keep in mind that the one who are making the rules, are always the first beneficiaries of those. And the status quo is more important to protect than equality and ultimately equity. Because it is not about equality per se, but about equity. And I do agree with you that competition should be fair. Like you said, we can't make ppl who are totally opposite from each others in terms of strength, that should be fair in terms of chances of winning even if it would be fair in terms of equality. Yet equality doesn't necessarily means equity. So I do agree with you there. But arguing that men are stronger than women, have not any scientific basis, because the research study that argue that there is, contain a confirmation bias that will push the researchers to look for extremes body frame in order to valid their preconceptions. And plus you can't really isolate the sexual variable which is arguing here. Sorry we have the end the convo there until you’ve done your research. It’s a scientific and biological fact that men are stronger and faster than women. It’s not an argument. There’s plenty of science in the subject and you can even read the science behind why a guys muscles are stronger. We can literally identify the gender if a person from examining their muscles because there are physical differences Ok so what you are saying that you can identified the gender of a person because muscles are physically different? Right ? Is that identification is telling you that one muscle is superior from the others ? Yeah. One will have larger muscle fibres, which allows for more strength and faster movements " Ok even if you examine the muscle of a woman with bigger muscles than the ones of a man ? | |||
 | |||
"Anyway I am off to work so don't take my silence as a sign of me agreeing with you "Don't work too hard. | |||
"So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. " You are correct and incorrect at the same time. When comparing against the general population, you get that variability. But when talking sports you are taking the higher end of the population (in regards to sports) - I refer you to Gabby Garcia. When comparing extremes the difference between the sexes start to stand out. As an example, Clarissa Shields - phenomenal female boxer and all round gold medalist; if she boxed with her male counterparts, depending on the weight class, she would be in the ring with Canelo Alveres or Gennady Golovkin, both of whom would cream her. That advantage comes physiological make up of males and from the recovery benefit of male hormones, just like what steroids do. M2F athletes in effect have a similiar advantage to a PED users then when comparing them to XX. As overall they would have had more training, in the same time frame due to better recovery. Its not cheating, but the comparison is what it is. | |||
"Anyway I am off to work so don't take my silence as a sign of me agreeing with you "Don’t worry we will all take it as you disagreeing with decades (centuries maybe) of scientific research and literature | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making I am not sure what part of my message wasn't clear enough but I'll try to be more specific. My statement above was about body frame, as the argument of women and men being different in terms of what you have enumerated above. So if your argument is 100 % accurate, how do you explain that there are some women who are physically stronger than men ? I am 5'9, 75kg, there are women taller, with more muscles than me...so they are actually advantaged compared to me so to speak. Based on that mere observation, which is biased because I am using my body frame and the extreme opposite as comparison. The reason you argument fails is because we don’t work in specifics. Some women are stronger than some men, but in general men are stronger than women. We have bigger bones, bigger muscles, wider shoulders, our muscle are more effective lb for lb. Your argument fails because where do we draw the line? Some women are taller and bigger and stronger than some men. So should we abolish all genders in sports and make women compete against men? Obviously not, because the exception doesn’t make the rules If my argument fails, yours too then. As you are talking about rules, we have to keep in mind that the one who are making the rules, are always the first beneficiaries of those. And the status quo is more important to protect than equality and ultimately equity. Because it is not about equality per se, but about equity. And I do agree with you that competition should be fair. Like you said, we can't make ppl who are totally opposite from each others in terms of strength, that should be fair in terms of chances of winning even if it would be fair in terms of equality. Yet equality doesn't necessarily means equity. So I do agree with you there. But arguing that men are stronger than women, have not any scientific basis, because the research study that argue that there is, contain a confirmation bias that will push the researchers to look for extremes body frame in order to valid their preconceptions. And plus you can't really isolate the sexual variable which is arguing here. Sorry we have the end the convo there until you’ve done your research. It’s a scientific and biological fact that men are stronger and faster than women. It’s not an argument. There’s plenty of science in the subject and you can even read the science behind why a guys muscles are stronger. We can literally identify the gender if a person from examining their muscles because there are physical differences Ok so what you are saying that you can identified the gender of a person because muscles are physically different? Right ? Is that identification is telling you that one muscle is superior from the others ? Yeah. One will have larger muscle fibres, which allows for more strength and faster movements Ok even if you examine the muscle of a woman with bigger muscles than the ones of a man ? " And yes, even if the woman’s muscle was bigger. Men have larger muscle fibres. Not from training, it’s a biological difference. Like men have a penis and women have a vagina. These are biological differences | |||
" There’s plenty of science in the subject and you can even read the science behind why a guys muscles are stronger. We can literally identify the gender if a person from examining their muscles because there are physical differences Ok so what you are saying that you can identified the gender of a person because muscles are physically different? Right ? Is that identification is telling you that one muscle is superior from the others ? " When we dig up skeletons on archaeological digs, we can identify the males and the females by looking at bone structure, size and evidence of muscle attachment sites, yes. The male skeleton is fundamentally different to the female (ignoring the different appearance of the pelvis as a separate issue). So yes, males and females have fundamentally different muscle and bone structure due to the influence of testosterone. Men who have the XXY karyotype (Klinefelter syndrome) generally produce less testosterone and more oestrogen and have far less muscle mass, on average, than the average man, despite having a Y chromosome. The difference would be obvious just by looking at their skeletons and observing the muscle attachment sites etc. | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. See, the things are just given do not make it true though. It is not because it is a granted knowledge that it is scientifically true. Truth cannot be objective and it is always subjected to to the subjectivity of the teller. But as you seem to want to argue that it is a reality, if that reality is shattered by counter arguments of women being more agressive, stronger and so on than some men, does you reality still stand or not ? No sorry it doesn’t. Are cars faster than dogs? Yes. That’s why we wouldn’t race a dog in a car Are some dogs faster than some cars? Almost certainly, go to a 3rd world country and you’ll find plenty of cars that aren’t that fast running on 3 wheels. Exceptions don’t make rules. The science is clear cut and I’d suggest you go read up on it. Men are the physically dominate gender in our biology and we base our idea of fairness in sports around thatv It is not because you want to think so that it makes it a reality. If you fail to see that we are not subjective being and that our knowledge is biased by our preconceptions and perspectives, I can't help you. By knowledge I even mean our scientific knowledge. Math is one of the only objective science. Math is pure facts, the rest is somehow fictional and highly dependent on our perspectives. Life isn't binary. " That’s perfectly because you can mathematically prove these by testing the muscles. You can measure the larger muscle fibres and increased force output that males have. I know your trying to appear different and open minded and stuff but your conjecture doesn’t actually do anything here. We have decades of scientific data that is all measurable and repeatable that shows men have a great potential for strength and speed. We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men | |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men " Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level | |||
" When we dig up skeletons on archaeological digs, we can identify the males and the females by looking at bone structure, size and evidence of muscle attachment sites, yes. The male skeleton is fundamentally different to the female (ignoring the different appearance of the pelvis as a separate issue). So yes, males and females have fundamentally different muscle and bone structure due to the influence of testosterone. Men who have the XXY karyotype (Klinefelter syndrome) generally produce less testosterone and more oestrogen and have far less muscle mass, on average, than the average man, despite having a Y chromosome. The difference would be obvious just by looking at their skeletons and observing the muscle attachment sites etc." 
Maybe that's why IAAF totally disregard the chromosomes and outline only 3 criteria:
1. recognised as female or intersex by law.
2. testosterone level 5 nmol/l (correction for my previous mistakes of using nanogram instead of nanomol).
3. Maintenance of this level for the whole period off and in-season.
If a trans woman has her "sex" changed to 'female' (in ID card/ passport) and manage to maintain her testosterone level, by law, she shouldn't be banned (in track and field at least). | |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level "Funnily enough there’s a woman endurance running that wins all the time too. Can’t remember her name but she does crazy 100-200 miles races, races where you run for 24h and whoever goes further win etc and she’s an absolute kill at it! Look her up she’s quite interesting | |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level
Funnily enough there’s a woman endurance running that wins all the time too. Can’t remember her name but she does crazy 100-200 miles races, races where you run for 24h and whoever goes further win etc and she’s an absolute kill at it!
Look her up she’s quite interesting "Katie Wright? Perhaps women's ability to store more energy reserves helps with the endurance stuff? Also there's the mental side of things like that which perhaps women have an advantage in? It's certainly interesting. | |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level
Funnily enough there’s a woman endurance running that wins all the time too. Can’t remember her name but she does crazy 100-200 miles races, races where you run for 24h and whoever goes further win etc and she’s an absolute kill at it!
Look her up she’s quite interesting
Katie Wright? Perhaps women's ability to store more energy reserves helps with the endurance stuff? Also there's the mental side of things like that which perhaps women have an advantage in? It's certainly interesting."I think it’s just a crazy high pain tolerance or something. Those races aren’t about fitness. They’re about running until your hurt then running more. Pure determination and grit | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. Well it is, unfortunately. On average, pound for pound is what I’m talking about. There are exceptions to this general rule as in all things in life. The size and shape of a born woman might give her advantages amongst her peers (those born biologically female), but she’ll still struggle to physically compete against even mediocre athletes that were born male. Look at tennis ‘battle of the sexes’ matches. The battle of the sexes matches mentioned above, were they scientific research that isolated every single variables to be sure that the only difference between the result of those matches was due to the biologically differences of sexes ?! No, the women competitors were given points advantages to start the match and still got beaten by male players seeded over 200 in some cases tho. I’m not aware of any truly scientific study that factors or quantifies exactly what it is that makes male athletes dominate when playing against women. It’s just a given. To deny that, on average, men are stronger and faster than their female counterparts, as well as more aggressive and competitive, is to deny reality I’m afraid. See, the things are just given do not make it true though. It is not because it is a granted knowledge that it is scientifically true. Truth cannot be objective and it is always subjected to to the subjectivity of the teller. But as you seem to want to argue that it is a reality, if that reality is shattered by counter arguments of women being more agressive, stronger and so on than some men, does you reality still stand or not ? No sorry it doesn’t. Are cars faster than dogs? Yes. That’s why we wouldn’t race a dog in a car Are some dogs faster than some cars? Almost certainly, go to a 3rd world country and you’ll find plenty of cars that aren’t that fast running on 3 wheels. Exceptions don’t make rules. The science is clear cut and I’d suggest you go read up on it. Men are the physically dominate gender in our biology and we base our idea of fairness in sports around thatv It is not because you want to think so that it makes it a reality. If you fail to see that we are not subjective being and that our knowledge is biased by our preconceptions and perspectives, I can't help you. By knowledge I even mean our scientific knowledge. Math is one of the only objective science. Math is pure facts, the rest is somehow fictional and highly dependent on our perspectives. Life isn't binary. That’s perfectly because you can mathematically prove these by testing the muscles. You can measure the larger muscle fibres and increased force output that males have. I know your trying to appear different and open minded and stuff but your conjecture doesn’t actually do anything here. We have decades of scientific data that is all measurable and repeatable that shows men have a great potential for strength and speed. We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men " I’d have to agree with this. The conjecture doesn’t serve a purpose. Colour me stupid but I’ve never had the opportunity to interact with someone who genuinely believes the intersectional/post modern view point of everything being a social construct. I’m legitimately curious as to why anyone can deny scientific, empirical evidence. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone categorically state ‘all women are weaker than men’ anywhere in this thread. The concept of scientifically provable generalisations seems to have been lost on fabulous here. | |||
| |||
| |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level
Funnily enough there’s a woman endurance running that wins all the time too. Can’t remember her name but she does crazy 100-200 miles races, races where you run for 24h and whoever goes further win etc and she’s an absolute kill at it!
Look her up she’s quite interesting
Katie Wright? Perhaps women's ability to store more energy reserves helps with the endurance stuff? Also there's the mental side of things like that which perhaps women have an advantage in? It's certainly interesting.
I think it’s just a crazy high pain tolerance or something. Those races aren’t about fitness. They’re about running until your hurt then running more. Pure determination and grit"Possibly true. I've given birth twice with zero pain relief. I'd like to think my pain tolerance is crazy high! | |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level
Funnily enough there’s a woman endurance running that wins all the time too. Can’t remember her name but she does crazy 100-200 miles races, races where you run for 24h and whoever goes further win etc and she’s an absolute kill at it!
Look her up she’s quite interesting
Katie Wright? Perhaps women's ability to store more energy reserves helps with the endurance stuff? Also there's the mental side of things like that which perhaps women have an advantage in? It's certainly interesting.
I think it’s just a crazy high pain tolerance or something. Those races aren’t about fitness. They’re about running until your hurt then running more. Pure determination and grit
Possibly true. I've given birth twice with zero pain relief. I'd like to think my pain tolerance is crazy high!"From people I know who do ultras it certainly seems to be very much a base level of fitness and then a MASSIVE mental game. She was very funny when she was interviewed on Joe Rogan. Particularly when asked what she normally does for rave day nutrition and she replied that she has some tacos and a corona | |||
| |||
" We also have centuries of evidenced within sports. Look at world records within sports, 99.8% of them are owned by men Apart from discus!! Woo hoo! (Please ignore the fact that we women throw a lighter discus than the guys, give us that one record!!) I used to love beating the lads at discus when I competed at county level
Funnily enough there’s a woman endurance running that wins all the time too. Can’t remember her name but she does crazy 100-200 miles races, races where you run for 24h and whoever goes further win etc and she’s an absolute kill at it!
Look her up she’s quite interesting
Katie Wright? Perhaps women's ability to store more energy reserves helps with the endurance stuff? Also there's the mental side of things like that which perhaps women have an advantage in? It's certainly interesting.
I think it’s just a crazy high pain tolerance or something. Those races aren’t about fitness. They’re about running until your hurt then running more. Pure determination and grit
Possibly true. I've given birth twice with zero pain relief. I'd like to think my pain tolerance is crazy high!
From people I know who do ultras it certainly seems to be very much a base level of fitness and then a MASSIVE mental game.
She was very funny when she was interviewed on Joe Rogan. Particularly when asked what she normally does for rave day nutrition and she replied that she has some tacos and a corona "I love how joe was searching for the amazing answer he wanted like “kale and elm meat” and she was just having none of it! Tacos beer and sweets! Loved her interview she’s so humble too | |||
| |||
"@Rachael, I understand your journey and you mirror what my two trans friends say almost to a T, and you look cute as cute as I said some time ago . But I’m not going to be convinced without a hell of a lot of convincing that it’s fair and equitable in women’s sports. Cece Telfer going 300 th ish to first ish cannot be equitable " "Telfer explained that her height, which is 6' 2", put her at a disadvantage as her size gives her wind resistance and because the women's hurdles, her chosen event, are placed much closer together than the men's hurdles were, over half a meter closer together." There may be events that it makes no difference... Snooker.. Darts maybe. It amazes me that the IAAF have been so weak. As training as a man, with elevated testosterone levels for let's say 10 years... Is going to be similar to training using PEDs for years... And yet if the other female athletes were caught they would be banned. If the are going to let them compete surely it has to be after longer than a year? They should not be allowed in my opinion. | |||
 | |||
"I’m not going to say any more now that this, and peace to you all . We have Olympics and paralympics We have amateur sports and pro sports We have adult teams and youth teams We have men’s sports and women’s sports . Let’s cheerfully have trans sports but let’s not think for one second that putting the Man united who’ve suddenly all transitioned up against the under 13,s scumbag college girl 5 a side team is ever going to be fair on Shanade, Leticia , Marie - Kylie, Amber and Jade" Agreed. When you’ve had the benefit of male hormones and musculature for 20 years or so, competing against women is in no way a level playing field. Trans sports are the way forward. As are trans or gender neutral spaces. One oppressed minority should never be oppressed by another. Leave women's spaces for women. I'll wait to be called a transphobic TERF.... | |||
"One oppressed minority should never be oppressed by another. Leave women's spaces for women. " Well I agree that an oppressed minority like trans women shouldn’t be oppressed by anyone, so thanks for your support. As a woman I’m quite happy to be in women’s spaces too but I have no issue with gender neutral ones either.  | |||
"Same as the majority of the other thread - there needs to be a ban I’m sorry. I’m happy to identify anyone by whatever gender the choose to be identified by, but there’s no escaping evolutionary science. Those born men have a clear and distinct physiological advantage to women when it comes to anything physical. I’d not even thought about it until the Fallon Fox debate in the UFC. That's not entirely true though ! Men seem to have a physiological advantage compared to your body frame, but it is not true to all women body frames. If I compare my body frame with the body frame of women who are the totally opposite of me, I'd conclude that women have psysiological advantages from men. That's not a fact just a biased observation. I’ll be honest, I don’t exactly understand what your saying. Men have a physical advantage in sports when it compared to women. These aren’t just “bigger” either. Higher bone density, bigger muscle but also more effective muscles lb for lb etc etc. If you could explain what you meant I could try to response but I don’t wanna approach a sensitive subject if I’m not 100% sure of the points your making " The lb for lb is a major point but if you think of it a 55kg biological woman carrying an full army kit (45kg) is only 10kg in difference so lb for lb she is stronger, but often not taller, lesser arm span too which makes large heavy object more difficult for a biological woman for one. For myself, i've always done some form of sports, have quite a masculine attitude tbh so i recon i prob have higher testosterone levels than say my sister since most of my mates are men, id play, fight & compete against them, i actually never took up competitive partly because it was unfair as my very active & strength pushed (horses from young age & old skool hard nosed cadets) lifestyle made me better than most of other females, except speed, still not bad but not first either, better at long distance. (other than having a child young too.) So in summary it really depends how they spent their teen years, if the spent them in sports (which most did) then their body grew to the best it could do, contact sports....well a bigger frame (typically biological male) can cause more damage with less effort. We cant match opponents purely on size on all sports but on those we can we should. (Thinking Hound vs Breanne matched quite evenly in size & upbringing i.e. contact sports). Otherwise a category would be better suited. | |||
| |||
"One oppressed minority should never be oppressed by another. Leave women's spaces for women. Well I agree that an oppressed minority like trans women shouldn’t be oppressed by anyone, so thanks for your support. As a woman I’m quite happy to be in women’s spaces too but I have no issue with gender neutral ones either. "Really? Arent we dividing the rainbow and putting each colour in its box? we are going to have spaces for men who dont want women in their space? because men only cubs were banned... women who dont want trans in their space? trans who dont want men in their space? below 4ft 11 inches, mexican trans space? ...... disabled..... | |||
| |||
"One oppressed minority should never be oppressed by another. Leave women's spaces for women. Well I agree that an oppressed minority like trans women shouldn’t be oppressed by anyone, so thanks for your support. As a woman I’m quite happy to be in women’s spaces too but I have no issue with gender neutral ones either.
Really? Arent we dividing the rainbow and putting each colour in its box? we are going to have spaces for men who dont want women in their space? because men only cubs were banned... women who dont want trans in their space? trans who dont want men in their space? below 4ft 11 inches, mexican trans space? ...... disabled..... "Don't drag us dizzies into this! We're very inclusive actually. Wheelchair basketball allows able bodied people to join in (classified 5 points) and they can compete at amateur level, only 1 AB allowed on court at once. The majority of disability sports welcome able bodied people to join in, even if just for training/recreation. Obviously a non amputee is going to struggle to compete in classifications for amputees etc! | |||
| |||
| |||
"Original OP: So the USA have introduced legislation to ban transgender girls and women to participate in female sports on the basis of protecting biological girls and women in an industry that is already biased in favour of men. Women's sports doesn't have the same coverage, financial support and backing that their male counterparts have. And the reasoning for the legislation is because transwomen are biologically male and things like testosterone, skeletal and heart structure are different than biological women, which in turn would likely lead to an unfair advantage to the trans women. Do you agree with the banning of trans women in female sports? I'm conflicted on the idea personally." I would say I’m conflicted with it too. While I see the point of it having some advantage, however how they’ve gone about it so far to make it fair hasn’t achieved what it was meant to do. A while ago a trans lady won weight lifting in the woman’s category. There was a lot of focus on this, testosterone and them previously been male. Sounds logical but it didn’t take into account the fact that the level of testosterone in woman can very quite a bit and some woman have a naturally higher level than expected and so female athletes, who had been female from birth and hadn’t used substance enhancers also got banned from participating. To me that even more damaging to female sports and taking a big step back by holding athletes that could inspire kids, attract public interest and investors. I don’t really know what the exact right answer is and do agree it can provide an unfair advantage however excluding some for the sake of others is probably not the best solution. Instead maybe something like categories within each sport, like boxing? So there light, middle and heavy weight based off a reliable, determine factor. Failing that, create a trans woman and men category to compete in? Not only does it give them their own platform to reach kids and adults going through the same thing, it also pushes for a more open and understanding society towards trans people hopefully. xx | |||
"Original OP: So the USA have introduced legislation to ban transgender girls and women to participate in female sports on the basis of protecting biological girls and women in an industry that is already biased in favour of men. Women's sports doesn't have the same coverage, financial support and backing that their male counterparts have. And the reasoning for the legislation is because transwomen are biologically male and things like testosterone, skeletal and heart structure are different than biological women, which in turn would likely lead to an unfair advantage to the trans women. Do you agree with the banning of trans women in female sports? I'm conflicted on the idea personally. I would say I’m conflicted with it too. While I see the point of it having some advantage, however how they’ve gone about it so far to make it fair hasn’t achieved what it was meant to do. A while ago a trans lady won weight lifting in the woman’s category. There was a lot of focus on this, testosterone and them previously been male. Sounds logical but it didn’t take into account the fact that the level of testosterone in woman can very quite a bit and some woman have a naturally higher level than expected and so female athletes, who had been female from birth and hadn’t used substance enhancers also got banned from participating. To me that even more damaging to female sports and taking a big step back by holding athletes that could inspire kids, attract public interest and investors. I don’t really know what the exact right answer is and do agree it can provide an unfair advantage however excluding some for the sake of others is probably not the best solution. Instead maybe something like categories within each sport, like boxing? So there light, middle and heavy weight based off a reliable, determine factor. Failing that, create a trans woman and men category to compete in? Not only does it give them their own platform to reach kids and adults going through the same thing, it also pushes for a more open and understanding society towards trans people hopefully. xx" This is the best response in this thread. Just to build on it: It is a complex topic that requires a lot of consideration. Ethically, it is wrong to outright ban Trans people from sport categories that align with their gender identity because with Trans/Open categories not currently popularised and/or in development in many places, it would prevent them from competing professionally and making a living from their profession, which is basically stopping them from participating in society in the same way everyone else can. HOWEVER, there need to be clear guidelines on a sport-by-sport and case-by-case basis to determine whether an individual's place in the competition is fair and these guidelines will vary between team sports and individual sports. The guidelines should take into account: age of transition, physical advantages the individual has compared to the average player in the league of their gender identity (maybe even a physical exam would be necessary based on the level people are competing at and type of sport), hormone levels, amount of time the person has been on hormones...maybe some other things too, but those are the main ones that spring to mind that are practical and workable. Then you would score the athlete in each category using a points system and if they fall within certain parameters they are allowed to compete in the sport category that align with their gender identity and if they don't they'll be encouraged to compete in Mixed/Open/Trans categories instead. Whilst utilising and essentially trialing these systems to fine-tune their fairness, sports can also start the decades-long process of developing Open categories right through from amateur to professional level. Regarding injuries: Anyone, of any gender, playing at any level, who is consistently injuring other players deliberately in contact sports, should be politely asked to step down or banned if necessary. Especially if it is deliberate. Treating Trans people (particularly Trans Women) like we are all a danger to Cisgender Women, on the sole basis that most of us (not all, some people are Intersex) are born Male is discrimination. Having a conversation about us participating in sports using language that denies us of our gender identities is disrespectful, and if you are using biological sex considerations of sport categories to discriminate against and misgender Trans people, you are an arse. By all means, participate in a conversation on this topic, but please do so respectfully. And yes, that does include misgendering Trans people. Is that really too much to ask? | |||
"I will probably get called transphobic for saying no because I feel I can't say anything about subjects like those without someone having a go about it. I have to say no its definitely not fair. There use to be a transexual cage fighter ffs that's not fair. " Fallon Fox... She fractured another woman's skull... | |||
| |||
"Original OP: So the USA have introduced legislation to ban transgender girls and women to participate in female sports on the basis of protecting biological girls and women in an industry that is already biased in favour of men. Women's sports doesn't have the same coverage, financial support and backing that their male counterparts have. And the reasoning for the legislation is because transwomen are biologically male and things like testosterone, skeletal and heart structure are different than biological women, which in turn would likely lead to an unfair advantage to the trans women. Do you agree with the banning of trans women in female sports? I'm conflicted on the idea personally. I would say I’m conflicted with it too. While I see the point of it having some advantage, however how they’ve gone about it so far to make it fair hasn’t achieved what it was meant to do. A while ago a trans lady won weight lifting in the woman’s category. There was a lot of focus on this, testosterone and them previously been male. Sounds logical but it didn’t take into account the fact that the level of testosterone in woman can very quite a bit and some woman have a naturally higher level than expected and so female athletes, who had been female from birth and hadn’t used substance enhancers also got banned from participating. To me that even more damaging to female sports and taking a big step back by holding athletes that could inspire kids, attract public interest and investors. I don’t really know what the exact right answer is and do agree it can provide an unfair advantage however excluding some for the sake of others is probably not the best solution. Instead maybe something like categories within each sport, like boxing? So there light, middle and heavy weight based off a reliable, determine factor. Failing that, create a trans woman and men category to compete in? Not only does it give them their own platform to reach kids and adults going through the same thing, it also pushes for a more open and understanding society towards trans people hopefully. xx This is the best response in this thread. Just to build on it: It is a complex topic that requires a lot of consideration. Ethically, it is wrong to outright ban Trans people from sport categories that align with their gender identity because with Trans/Open categories not currently popularised and/or in development in many places, it would prevent them from competing professionally and making a living from their profession, which is basically stopping them from participating in society in the same way everyone else can. HOWEVER, there need to be clear guidelines on a sport-by-sport and case-by-case basis to determine whether an individual's place in the competition is fair and these guidelines will vary between team sports and individual sports. The guidelines should take into account: age of transition, physical advantages the individual has compared to the average player in the league of their gender identity (maybe even a physical exam would be necessary based on the level people are competing at and type of sport), hormone levels, amount of time the person has been on hormones...maybe some other things too, but those are the main ones that spring to mind that are practical and workable. Then you would score the athlete in each category using a points system and if they fall within certain parameters they are allowed to compete in the sport category that align with their gender identity and if they don't they'll be encouraged to compete in Mixed/Open/Trans categories instead. Whilst utilising and essentially trialing these systems to fine-tune their fairness, sports can also start the decades-long process of developing Open categories right through from amateur to professional level. Regarding injuries: Anyone, of any gender, playing at any level, who is consistently injuring other players deliberately in contact sports, should be politely asked to step down or banned if necessary. Especially if it is deliberate. Treating Trans people (particularly Trans Women) like we are all a danger to Cisgender Women, on the sole basis that most of us (not all, some people are Intersex) are born Male is discrimination. Having a conversation about us participating in sports using language that denies us of our gender identities is disrespectful, and if you are using biological sex considerations of sport categories to discriminate against and misgender Trans people, you are an arse. By all means, participate in a conversation on this topic, but please do so respectfully. And yes, that does include misgendering Trans people. Is that really too much to ask? "To be fair I think most trans folk just want a level playing field to continue in the chosen sport they love. I don't think it's fair to strip them of that at all... But it has to remain equal. And if someone transitions late in life then physically it's never going to be the same in regard to bone density, natural lung capacity, nor numerous other born biological features whether you're bio male/fem. Biological born women who transition very rarely look to compete against bio males in sport? There is a reason for that?... Just the same as the number of MTF folk who do seek to? | |||
| |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc " I'm pretty sure that already happens in weekly Parkruns across the UK, and men always still come 1st place? | |||
| |||
"Reading the thread, it appears that the pros and cons (mostly cons) are based around trans people who have transitioned as adults. My query is that the younger generation is more aware of gender identity, and significantly more teenagers are identifying as trans than, say, 5-10 years ago. In another thread it was suggested that the earlier transition takes place, or at least the hormone therapy, the physiological changes are more significant and therefore the trans person is more likely to pass. In the future are we going to see trans sports competitors who started transition much younger and therefore the physiological debate of the sexes becomes weaker? (No pun I tended, I do not subscribe to a weaker sex construct) " I suspect the greater question isn't sports related?... Its are we going to see children prescribed life changing hormones at such a very young age? Should a 5yr old be ethically prescribed hormones that are potentially life changing? But not necessarily medical need? | |||
| |||
" I suspect the greater question isn't sports related?... Its are we going to see children prescribed life changing hormones at such a very young age? Should a 5yr old be ethically prescribed hormones that are potentially life changing? But not necessarily medical need? " I think that that is a whole new topic. | |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc I'm pretty sure that already happens in weekly Parkruns across the UK, and men always still come 1st place? " Yeah and when I ran my pb 21:19 plenty of women my age also also beat me. Overall men are biologically faster stronger and have better spatial awareness , they have a massive advantage - but that doesn’t mean women who train exceptionally hard cannot beat plenty of men. To split into two camps and then let biplocal males compete as female is ridiculous | |||
| |||
| |||
"Reading the thread, it appears that the pros and cons (mostly cons) are based around trans people who have transitioned as adults. My query is that the younger generation is more aware of gender identity, and significantly more teenagers are identifying as trans than, say, 5-10 years ago. In another thread it was suggested that the earlier transition takes place, or at least the hormone therapy, the physiological changes are more significant and therefore the trans person is more likely to pass. In the future are we going to see trans sports competitors who started transition much younger and therefore the physiological debate of the sexes becomes weaker? (No pun I tended, I do not subscribe to a weaker sex construct) I suspect the greater question isn't sports related?... Its are we going to see children prescribed life changing hormones at such a very young age? Should a 5yr old be ethically prescribed hormones that are potentially life changing? But not necessarily medical need? " 5 year olds aren't getting hormones. | |||
"Ok, so what happens when a non binary or gender fluid person wants to compete at top level in their chosen sport? They have no inclination to be trans. How will they fit into the binary model of sport? " Maybe they won't be able to for some sports. That's life isn't it? Sometimes you cant have the things you want. Either that or start a category for non binary participants but can't imagine that will be affordable or desirable for many. | |||
| |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc " Men are stronger on average, yes. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I am stronger in the upper body than my husband, for example and also stronger than quite a number of men I compete alongside/against. I use my shoulders to get around Parkrun (small muscles) yet finish ahead of some men (and women) on most occasions. | |||
"Ok, so what happens when a non binary or gender fluid person wants to compete at top level in their chosen sport? They have no inclination to be trans. How will they fit into the binary model of sport? " Has it happened yet? How likely is it to ever happen? How about we just treat these once in a lifetime occurrences as and when they crop up rather than rearranging the whole order of things just to cater for something that may never happen? | |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc Men are stronger on average, yes. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I am stronger in the upper body than my husband, for example and also stronger than quite a number of men I compete alongside/against. I use my shoulders to get around Parkrun (small muscles) yet finish ahead of some men (and women) on most occasions." Once again, exceptions don't prove the rule. Men are, in the overwhelming main, much stronger and faster than women. There is no debate over this. In any sport that relies on physical prowess, trans people should only compete in the gender of their birth. Either that or create a specific category but we know thats not going to take off in any shape or form | |||
"Ok, so what happens when a non binary or gender fluid person wants to compete at top level in their chosen sport? They have no inclination to be trans. How will they fit into the binary model of sport? Has it happened yet? How likely is it to ever happen? How about we just treat these once in a lifetime occurrences as and when they crop up rather than rearranging the whole order of things just to cater for something that may never happen? " | |||
"Original OP: So the USA have introduced legislation to ban transgender girls and women to participate in female sports on the basis of protecting biological girls and women in an industry that is already biased in favour of men. Women's sports doesn't have the same coverage, financial support and backing that their male counterparts have. And the reasoning for the legislation is because transwomen are biologically male and things like testosterone, skeletal and heart structure are different than biological women, which in turn would likely lead to an unfair advantage to the trans women. Do you agree with the banning of trans women in female sports? I'm conflicted on the idea personally. I would say I’m conflicted with it too. While I see the point of it having some advantage, however how they’ve gone about it so far to make it fair hasn’t achieved what it was meant to do. A while ago a trans lady won weight lifting in the woman’s category. There was a lot of focus on this, testosterone and them previously been male. Sounds logical but it didn’t take into account the fact that the level of testosterone in woman can very quite a bit and some woman have a naturally higher level than expected and so female athletes, who had been female from birth and hadn’t used substance enhancers also got banned from participating. To me that even more damaging to female sports and taking a big step back by holding athletes that could inspire kids, attract public interest and investors. I don’t really know what the exact right answer is and do agree it can provide an unfair advantage however excluding some for the sake of others is probably not the best solution. Instead maybe something like categories within each sport, like boxing? So there light, middle and heavy weight based off a reliable, determine factor. Failing that, create a trans woman and men category to compete in? Not only does it give them their own platform to reach kids and adults going through the same thing, it also pushes for a more open and understanding society towards trans people hopefully. xx This is the best response in this thread. Just to build on it: It is a complex topic that requires a lot of consideration. Ethically, it is wrong to outright ban Trans people from sport categories that align with their gender identity because with Trans/Open categories not currently popularised and/or in development in many places, it would prevent them from competing professionally and making a living from their profession, which is basically stopping them from participating in society in the same way everyone else can. HOWEVER, there need to be clear guidelines on a sport-by-sport and case-by-case basis to determine whether an individual's place in the competition is fair and these guidelines will vary between team sports and individual sports. The guidelines should take into account: age of transition, physical advantages the individual has compared to the average player in the league of their gender identity (maybe even a physical exam would be necessary based on the level people are competing at and type of sport), hormone levels, amount of time the person has been on hormones...maybe some other things too, but those are the main ones that spring to mind that are practical and workable. Then you would score the athlete in each category using a points system and if they fall within certain parameters they are allowed to compete in the sport category that align with their gender identity and if they don't they'll be encouraged to compete in Mixed/Open/Trans categories instead. Whilst utilising and essentially trialing these systems to fine-tune their fairness, sports can also start the decades-long process of developing Open categories right through from amateur to professional level. Regarding injuries: Anyone, of any gender, playing at any level, who is consistently injuring other players deliberately in contact sports, should be politely asked to step down or banned if necessary. Especially if it is deliberate. Treating Trans people (particularly Trans Women) like we are all a danger to Cisgender Women, on the sole basis that most of us (not all, some people are Intersex) are born Male is discrimination. Having a conversation about us participating in sports using language that denies us of our gender identities is disrespectful, and if you are using biological sex considerations of sport categories to discriminate against and misgender Trans people, you are an arse. By all means, participate in a conversation on this topic, but please do so respectfully. And yes, that does include misgendering Trans people. Is that really too much to ask?
To be fair I think most trans folk just want a level playing field to continue in the chosen sport they love. I don't think it's fair to strip them of that at all... But it has to remain equal. And if someone transitions late in life then physically it's never going to be the same in regard to bone density, natural lung capacity, nor numerous other born biological features whether you're bio male/fem. Biological born women who transition very rarely look to compete against bio males in sport? There is a reason for that?... Just the same as the number of MTF folk who do seek to? "Someone transitioning late in life is covered by the outlined suggestion above. They'd score low-0 in that category in a points-based system, thus meaning they'd be relying on other factors being heavily in their favour to allow them to compete. If biological females who transition to become men want to compete in men's sport, and fall within safe parameters to do so (essentially the same points-based system, but with the opposite concern where if they fell outside of safe parameters, they would be more at risk of injury etc) then they should be allowed to do so. It is as much a question of ethics as it is of sporting fairness. Sport is a not a level playing field to begin with, so there will always be cisgender athletes who outstrip their peers physically and as someone has pointed out, using testosterone levels to determine whether or not a woman can compete in women's sports always ends up harming cis women who just have naturally higher levels. Feminising hormones lower bone density and muscle mass, which is why the length of time someone has been on hormones is an important consideration. Something people are really failing to consider here is that there are so few Trans Athletes that categories simply could not be filled yet. And yeah hopefully society gets there one day, but in the meantime we should make an effort to not discriminate against Trans people and allow sports and leagues to develop policies to try and include them. Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion. It is clearly a topic with many gray areas and a black and white approach will not work. | |||
| |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc Men are stronger on average, yes. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I am stronger in the upper body than my husband, for example and also stronger than quite a number of men I compete alongside/against. I use my shoulders to get around Parkrun (small muscles) yet finish ahead of some men (and women) on most occasions." Your husband must be weak if women are stronger then him lmao | |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc Men are stronger on average, yes. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I am stronger in the upper body than my husband, for example and also stronger than quite a number of men I compete alongside/against. I use my shoulders to get around Parkrun (small muscles) yet finish ahead of some men (and women) on most occasions. Your husband must be weak if women are stronger then him lmao" Hilarious. You must sleep well at night, taking the piss out of people  | |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc Men are stronger on average, yes. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I am stronger in the upper body than my husband, for example and also stronger than quite a number of men I compete alongside/against. I use my shoulders to get around Parkrun (small muscles) yet finish ahead of some men (and women) on most occasions. Your husband must be weak if women are stronger then him lmao Hilarious. You must sleep well at night, taking the piss out of people "Sleep like a baby with my two ferrets curled up next to me  | |||
"I don’t think it’s fair - men are stronger , faster and have more spacial awareness. Anyone who denies this denies science. Let them have their own category that would be fairer or have non gender sports where all the men will win. It would be interesting to see them all compete together and could still award 1,2,3 womens places etc Men are stronger on average, yes. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I am stronger in the upper body than my husband, for example and also stronger than quite a number of men I compete alongside/against. I use my shoulders to get around Parkrun (small muscles) yet finish ahead of some men (and women) on most occasions. Your husband must be weak if women are stronger then him lmao Hilarious. You must sleep well at night, taking the piss out of people
Sleep like a baby with my two ferrets curled up next to me "Good for you | |||
"The whole world has gone mad over this stuff. To answer the question: NO! To have a biologically born man declare himself female and compete against women is completely stupid! " Damn! You must have a super high necromancy level to bring this back to life! | |||
| |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? " Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? " Plenty of female mma fighters complained about fallon fox I’ve heard plenty of female athletes complain don’t know Where you’re getting this information from lmao | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' " and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd "How many pro women athletes have lost sponsorship deals by coming second to a trans woman? Does that really happen? (I know it could potentially but that's a different thing). | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? " Any failing male athlet can go trans and in 6 months compeat against women to Mr that's just not right. Oh I got 4th place but want a gold oh I no ill have a boob job and make some changes and oh I love my gold medal. | |||
"" Any failing male athlet can go trans and in 6 months compeat against women to Mr that's just not right. Oh I got 4th place but want a gold oh I no ill have a boob job and make some changes and oh I love my gold medal." I'm sure that's the reason for transitioning. Not. | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Any failing male athlet can go trans and in 6 months compeat against women to Mr that's just not right. Oh I got 4th place but want a gold oh I no ill have a boob job and make some changes and oh I love my gold medal." | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Any failing male athlet can go trans and in 6 months compeat against women to Mr that's just not right. Oh I got 4th place but want a gold oh I no ill have a boob job and make some changes and oh I love my gold medal." Excellent idea, then they can re-transition when they fancy having a stand up wee | |||
| |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd
How many pro women athletes have lost sponsorship deals by coming second to a trans woman? Does that really happen? (I know it could potentially but that's a different thing). "Quite a few,one famous one who spoke out against it,will find her name | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd
How many pro women athletes have lost sponsorship deals by coming second to a trans woman? Does that really happen? (I know it could potentially but that's a different thing). "It isn't just established professional women athletes who are being affected by this issue though, it's also younger, up and coming female athletes who are being shunted out of their rankings and potential very lucrative sport's university scholarships by this issue. Mostly in the US, but more and more UK scholarships are being offered to potential sports stars of the future. Here's a pertinent article:- https://nypost.com/2019/10/13/justice-for-trans-athletes-is-unfair-to-girls-like-my-daughter/ | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Any failing male athlet can go trans and in 6 months compeat against women to Mr that's just not right. Oh I got 4th place but want a gold oh I no ill have a boob job and make some changes and oh I love my gold medal. Excellent idea, then they can re-transition when they fancy having a stand up wee "Who stands up to wee any more? We got seats now it's unisex. | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd
How many pro women athletes have lost sponsorship deals by coming second to a trans woman? Does that really happen? (I know it could potentially but that's a different thing).
It isn't just established professional women athletes who are being affected by this issue though, it's also younger, up and coming female athletes who are being shunted out of their rankings and potential very lucrative sport's university scholarships by this issue. Mostly in the US, but more and more UK scholarships are being offered to potential sports stars of the future.
Here's a pertinent article:-
https://nypost.com/2019/10/13/justice-for-trans-athletes-is-unfair-to-girls-like-my-daughter/"Oh I agree with that. But the comment was made about losing sponsorships by coming second to a trans woman. It's a tricky and emotive enough subject matter so worth making observations as accurate as possible | |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd
How many pro women athletes have lost sponsorship deals by coming second to a trans woman? Does that really happen? (I know it could potentially but that's a different thing).
It isn't just established professional women athletes who are being affected by this issue though, it's also younger, up and coming female athletes who are being shunted out of their rankings and potential very lucrative sport's university scholarships by this issue. Mostly in the US, but more and more UK scholarships are being offered to potential sports stars of the future.
Here's a pertinent article:-
https://nypost.com/2019/10/13/justice-for-trans-athletes-is-unfair-to-girls-like-my-daughter/
Oh I agree with that. But the comment was made about losing sponsorships by coming second to a trans woman. It's a tricky and emotive enough subject matter so worth making observations as accurate as possible "Fair point | |||
| |||
""Most female athletes don't have a problem competing with Trans Women and that is often lost in this discussion" Where did that fact come from? Indeed. What utter nonsense. 'being afraid to say anything for fear of being hounded' does not equate to 'dont have a problem' and loosing sponsorship deals because they've come 2nd
How many pro women athletes have lost sponsorship deals by coming second to a trans woman? Does that really happen? (I know it could potentially but that's a different thing).
It isn't just established professional women athletes who are being affected by this issue though, it's also younger, up and coming female athletes who are being shunted out of their rankings and potential very lucrative sport's university scholarships by this issue. Mostly in the US, but more and more UK scholarships are being offered to potential sports stars of the future.
Here's a pertinent article:-
https://nypost.com/2019/10/13/justice-for-trans-athletes-is-unfair-to-girls-like-my-daughter/
Oh I agree with that. But the comment was made about losing sponsorships by coming second to a trans woman. It's a tricky and emotive enough subject matter so worth making observations as accurate as possible
Fair point "imagine school sports days in Scotland now kids can choose gender identity at 16. | |||
"This is going to be my last post in this thread. A blanket ban on trans women competing in women's sports is not equity. As I mentioned before, the up coming generations are more fluid with gender identity, and if we cannot develop a fair working strategy for trans men and women in sport now, after decades of trans, then what hope for the non binaries and gender fluid. To assume that it will not be an issue at some point is at best naive, at worst plain ignorant. Enjoy your day, people. "Is there a blanket ban? I must have missed that. I think bringing up children in the naivity that life is fair and equitable is going to be an abject failure in their education. Life isn't fair. It's how we deal with it that allows to have happy fruitful lives, cope well or not cope well. Sometimes things arent as hard as we like to think. Competitive sports require and depend on fairness. Participative sports are a different matter. | |||
| |||
"This is going to be my last post in this thread. A blanket ban on trans women competing in women's sports is not equity. As I mentioned before, the up coming generations are more fluid with gender identity, and if we cannot develop a fair working strategy for trans men and women in sport now, after decades of trans, then what hope for the non binaries and gender fluid. To assume that it will not be an issue at some point is at best naive, at worst plain ignorant. Enjoy your day, people. "Sorry, but it's the very definition of equity. Trans women are welcome to compete in mens sports, seeing as they are biologically male. Once again, equity | |||
| |||
"This is going to be my last post in this thread. A blanket ban on trans women competing in women's sports is not equity. As I mentioned before, the up coming generations are more fluid with gender identity, and if we cannot develop a fair working strategy for trans men and women in sport now, after decades of trans, then what hope for the non binaries and gender fluid. To assume that it will not be an issue at some point is at best naive, at worst plain ignorant. Enjoy your day, people. "Cool...the fair equality is that men/women who compete in sport and trans either way, can compete in that sport alongside trans either way. Sorted
You don't tend to see newly transitioned ftm folk in sport do you? Why is that?... I doubt its less because its accepted vs they'd do shit at it | |||
"This is going to be my last post in this thread. A blanket ban on trans women competing in women's sports is not equity. As I mentioned before, the up coming generations are more fluid with gender identity, and if we cannot develop a fair working strategy for trans men and women in sport now, after decades of trans, then what hope for the non binaries and gender fluid. To assume that it will not be an issue at some point is at best naive, at worst plain ignorant. Enjoy your day, people. "Why transwoman (male to women) compete in mans category rather than womens? Is it because easy to compete with women due to an advantage? | |||
| |||
"Sebastien coe of the world athletics organisation as excluded trans male to female athletes effective 31st march" Can't complain about that | |||
"Sebastien coe of the world athletics organisation as excluded trans male to female athletes effective 31st march Can't complain about that " Nope | |||
