Transgender athletes (and related stuff)

[kwackers]

How much bigger are men than women, actually? And how much of the heavier is because men are encouraged to develop their muscles, engage in manual labour, play football and rugby, while women are discouraged from doing such things?

Re the book I've read the synopsis and the review posted above, that obviously doesn't make me an expert but I'm not convinced the book sounds like it's making the same arguments you are.

Weight difference is typically 10-15kg, height about 4 inches.
If you assume a that height difference is reflected in width and depth then the weigh difference isn't far off.

As I pointed out though, the difference between the best sportsperson and a mere elite is fractional percentage points. Being merely "very good" wont get you close to being placed.
You don't need a huge advantage to be the best, just a bit is all it takes and exponential laws push more and more people into each fraction drop in performance.

Ten thousand people separate the best male and female 100m sprinter.
There are plenty of female runners, some have run all their lives and get plenty of support and encouragement to be the best. I find it difficult to believe that pretty much every elite woman runner is 10,000+ places behind the men simply because she didn't start early enough, wasn't pushed or was told she couldn't do it.
IMO if what you claimed was true then there'd be enough women around with the determination and drive to have made far bigger inroads than that.

[landsurfer]

As fascinating as the debate and medical details have been the OP mentioned "Transgender" not Transexual.
They are different;
"Transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their assigned sex."
Somewhat different definition from the raging debate on the last few pages.

Now, back to that woman hating cheat McKinnon .........


https://twitter.com/noanodyne/status/663095095663550464

[pwa]

The "transgender woman in a woman's event" issue is really a cultural issue; an issue of stereotyping; an issue of hoary old traditions past their sell-by date by some decades. Personally I've always liked the notion of The Open Society. This means: no closures for non-reasons once dreamt up by an uptight Victorian or even a C17th Puritan.

Cugel

Nonsense. At a moment in history when an effort is being made to lift women's sport to something like the prominence of men's sport, there is a danger that females born female may be pushed aside by females born male. If you call that inclusive, I don't. Look at women's football, rugby and golf. With your suggested open doors approach females born as female might just as well forget it. Is it puritanical of me to want females born as female to have a hope of competing?

I think you are confusing attitudes towards gender identity in normal life, in work, in pubs and on the street, with the quite different question of eligibility for physical sports. I don't have any objection to the person sitting to my right in the pub being a female who was born male. Whatever makes them feel better has to be a good thing. But I do want to see competitive sport opportunities for females born as female preserved and enhanced.

[landsurfer]

The "transgender woman in a woman's event" issue is really a cultural issue; an issue of stereotyping; an issue of hoary old traditions past their sell-by date by some decades. Personally I've always liked the notion of The Open Society. This means: no closures for non-reasons once dreamt up by an uptight Victorian or even a C17th Puritan.

Cugel

Nonsense. At a moment in history when an effort is being made to lift women's sport to something like the prominence of men's sport, there is a danger that females born female may be pushed aside by females born male. If you call that inclusive, I don't. Look at women's football, rugby and golf. With your suggested open doors approach females born as female might just as well forget it. Is it puritanical of me to want females born as female to have a hope of competing?

I think you are confusing attitudes towards gender identity in normal life, in work, in pubs and on the street, with the quite different question of eligibility for physical sports. I don't have any objection to the person sitting to my right in the pub being a female who was born male. Whatever makes them feel better has to be a good thing. But I do want to see competitive sport opportunities for females born as female preserved and enhanced.

+1 pwa ... with you on this ...
But no female was born male ... a male was born male ...

[Ben@Forest]

How much bigger are men than women, actually? And how much of the heavier is because men are encouraged to develop their muscles, engage in manual labour, play football and rugby, while women are discouraged from doing such things?

But bigger women are encouraged to take up sports that may suit them, shot put, rugby and so on and train for those sports, they do not achieve the mass of their male contemporaries though - not even close. In shot put women weigh around two-thirds of male competitors and throw a shot half the weight of men's competition (though achieve similar distances).

[pwa]

+1 pwa ... with you on this ...
But no female was born male ... a male was born male ...

For the purposes of normal life, outside sport, there is no reason why someone born male should not opt to live as a female if it will make them feel better about themselves, and I for one would be happy to go along with their wishes and treat them as female. Why wouldn't I?

But in physical sport we cannot get away from the fact that as yet there is no way to completely transform a male into a female with no male advantage remaining. If we could flick a switch and make that complete physical transformation happen, that would solve the problem. But we can't. Medical science does not have the ability.

[landsurfer]

+1 pwa ... with you on this ...
But no female was born male ... a male was born male ...

For the purposes of normal life, outside sport, there is no reason why someone born male should not opt to live as a female if it will make them feel better about themselves, and I for one would be happy to go along with their wishes and treat them as female. Why wouldn't I?

My son opted to live as Katie full time for over 3 years, it did not make him feel better about himself.
It posed countless questions and caused a massive rift with his loving family, his only contact with the family was myself for over 12 months.
He moved to spend time with 3 girls he was at Uni with and over a 6 month period realised he was happier as a man. He came home to us as Katie one evening with his girlfriends and the next morning i took him to Primark to buy him some mens clothes.
He is now a happy balanced man , with his partner Zac. They have our grand children for weekends (yes !!) and he has returned to his career at EON and still promotes his Drag Queen club nights.
More and more we read about individuals who enter transition only to realise their mistake too late, luckily our man made his choice on time. The side effects of the drugs still effect his life .........

[pwa]

+1 pwa ... with you on this ...
But no female was born male ... a male was born male ...

For the purposes of normal life, outside sport, there is no reason why someone born male should not opt to live as a female if it will make them feel better about themselves, and I for one would be happy to go along with their wishes and treat them as female. Why wouldn't I?

My son opted to live as Katie full time for over 3 years, it did not make him feel better about himself.

It takes some people a while to find out who and what they are, and the best we can do is support them and hope they come out of it okay. But it sounds like you know that.

[Vorpal]

How much bigger are men than women, actually? And how much of the heavier is because men are encouraged to develop their muscles, engage in manual labour, play football and rugby, while women are discouraged from doing such things?

But bigger women are encouraged to take up sports that may suit them, shot put, rugby and so on and train for those sports

Really? I'm not huge, but I'm 5'8" and have a build and muscle more suited to playing rugby than tennis, I was not only not given encouragement (sorry about the double negative) growing up, but I was told outright that I wasn't allowed to play because I was a girl. While this was in the USA, rather than the UK, I didn't find that the reception was much better (years later) in the UK.

[Vorpal]

Nonsense. At a moment in history when an effort is being made to lift women's sport to something like the prominence of men's sport, there is a danger that females born female may be pushed aside by females born male. If you call that inclusive, I don't. Look at women's football, rugby and golf. With your suggested open doors approach females born as female might just as well forget it. Is it puritanical of me to want females born as female to have a hope of competing?

I think that you vastly overestimate the numbers of people who are willing to be or become transgender and compete at a high level in sport. Both groups are a tiny minority already. Is it really such a big deal for the handful of people that this is likely to apply to?

I also think that you also underestimate the capability of women to compete against transgender men.

[thelawnet]

Nonsense. At a moment in history when an effort is being made to lift women's sport to something like the prominence of men's sport, there is a danger that females born female may be pushed aside by females born male. If you call that inclusive, I don't. Look at women's football, rugby and golf. With your suggested open doors approach females born as female might just as well forget it. Is it puritanical of me to want females born as female to have a hope of competing?

I think that you vastly overestimate the numbers of people who are willing to be or become transgender and compete at a high level in sport. Both groups are a tiny minority already. Is it really such a big deal for the handful of people that this is likely to apply to?

It's a massive deal if you are denied your medals, sponsorship, scholarships, etc. due to a cheating male.

1st & 2nd here in the girls' sprint are both males. http://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -sprinter/

They say transgender, but that doesn't have any meaning in this context - at least one of them competed as a male the previous season, and neither are taking any kind of hormones.

For the girls who would otherwise get university scholarships, etc., but are not going to get them because they are finishing third and fourth to male cheats, it's an outrage. If you trained for years to be the best girl and suddenly a boy says he's a girl and beats you and everything you trained for is gone, that's a very big deal.

I also think that you also underestimate the capability of women to compete against transgender men.

What do you mean by transgender men? People born with testicles who now identify as female, or people born with ovaries who now identify as male?

In the former case, whether or not women can compete is not particularly interesting as they are not in the same biological category, and in the latter case they are presumably taking testosterone, which while you can probably get a therapeutic exemption on the basis of it being treatment for gender dysphoria in sporting terms is blatant cheating.

[thelawnet]

More and more we read about individuals who enter transition only to realise their mistake too late, luckily our man made his choice on time. The side effects of the drugs still effect his life .........

The drugs and surgery are the key for me. We went from 'girls can do anything' to 'girls should change their bodies to match a gender stereotype'.

It strikes me that this stuff is a boon for corporations as you create this new 'trans healthcare' market worth billions of dollars from nothing.

And not only for medicine but for many other industries too - corporations have seen that so-called virtue signalling is very lucrative. All these teenagers being drugged, breasts being removed, etc. create opportunities for clothing, music, etc.

I don't think a backlash is likely because it's clearly so profitable. Why give £5 to a homeless person when you can take £50,000 for facial feminization, breast enlargement, and so on? Far more profitable.

The fact that the doctor who invented the medical gender ideology was a paedophile who drove a boy to suicide is not going to register on people's radar when it's much easier to sell this as 'progressive', as if castrating 16 year old boys in the manner of Iran or 18th century Europe is somehow more progressive than denying that there is such a concept as a 'gendered essence'.

[Cugel]

The "transgender woman in a woman's event" issue is really a cultural issue; an issue of stereotyping; an issue of hoary old traditions past their sell-by date by some decades. Personally I've always liked the notion of The Open Society. This means: no closures for non-reasons once dreamt up by an uptight Victorian or even a C17th Puritan.

Cugel

Nonsense. At a moment in history when an effort is being made to lift women's sport to something like the prominence of men's sport, there is a danger that females born female may be pushed aside by females born male. If you call that inclusive, I don't. Look at women's football, rugby and golf. With your suggested open doors approach females born as female might just as well forget it. Is it puritanical of me to want females born as female to have a hope of competing?

I think you are confusing attitudes towards gender identity in normal life, in work, in pubs and on the street, with the quite different question of eligibility for physical sports. I don't have any objection to the person sitting to my right in the pub being a female who was born male. Whatever makes them feel better has to be a good thing. But I do want to see competitive sport opportunities for females born as female preserved and enhanced.

You keep wanting to believe that there is some natural order that makes all men superior at some things compared to all women. It just ain't so .... except where we suppress the womenfolk with them Puritan and Victorian rules that provide a self-fulfilling prophecy. No women will be as good as a bloke at sport X if we don't let any of them them try to actually beat the blokes. (Where we do allow then to, they sometimes do win - how do you square that one away)?

If blokes and women are allowed to compete together, the "issue" of transex or transgender becomes moot, irrelevant, meaningless. Gender may have an effect .... just like the 100 biological variations between blokes in a blokes-only competition do. So what? Best person at the sport wins.

Once it was thought that women couldn't think, so no vote or access to many jobs; or were too weak to do "a man's job", but then came World War II with Rosy the Riveter and Mary the Machinist.

**********
But now I am wondering .... what other differentiation atween various historically classified groups of humans, with associated exclusions, do you adhere to? Is it only aristocrats who should rule, for example? Should only the palefaces be allowed to join the golf club? Must we prevent the non-hetrosexuals from working in The Foreign Office? Is it madness to allow women to be members of certain posh people's London clubs?

Cugel

[pwa]

I believe top level male tennis players hit the ball harder and faster than their female counterparts. I believe that top level male 100 metre sprinters cover that distance quicker than their female counterparts. Or is it just my Victorian prejudice making me imagine these things? Do you really think, Cugel, that women racing against men would suddenly up their game and become as fast as the men? Or is it that you know the men would still be faster, but it wouldn't matter because the "best person" would win. The "best person" being a man, every time? Can you really mean that?

[pete75]

How much bigger are men than women, actually? And how much of the heavier is because men are encouraged to develop their muscles, engage in manual labour, play football and rugby, while women are discouraged from doing such things?

But bigger women are encouraged to take up sports that may suit them, shot put, rugby and so on and train for those sports

Really? I'm not huge, but I'm 5'8" and have a build and muscle more suited to playing rugby than tennis, I was not only not given encouragement (sorry about the double negative) growing up, but I was told outright that I wasn't allowed to play because I was a girl. While this was in the USA, rather than the UK, I didn't find that the reception was much better (years later) in the UK.

More muscle than Serena?