Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Laurel Hubbard

145791013

Comments

  • Options
    Leuth said:
    As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have. 

    My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.

    The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.
    I know fuck all about this sort of stuff but can hormone therapy be reversed? i.e child wants to be opposite gender, then a few years down the line wants to revert back to original gender. Is there a reverse hormone therapy treatment?
    See the article below re Keira Bell

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/06/keira-bell-lawyer-warns-on-internet-coverage-of-transgender-issues

  • Options
    Mametz said:
    I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.

    But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.

    It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete. 

    If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?

    It has to be spoken of, it has to be.
    Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has. 

    The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete? 
    The difference here is that the examples you have cited above, reference people who have a natural inborn advantage. In the Lauren Hubbard case she is only competing with women after very significant medical and surgical intervention. 

    There is the freedom to and the freedom from. Lauren’s wants to have the freedom to compete against other women and other women want to have the freedom from competing against someone whose advantages, in this particular arena, have come about by surgical intervention. The reason that sport is usually split between men and women is not because of genitalia, menstruation or different pitched voices but because being born of one gender usually confers a definite advantage of speed and strength over the other. Given that, it would actually more sense for Lauren to compete against those born with  similar advantages.
    She also has the natural inborn advantage of having a man's body for the entirely of her natural development. Only trans women and biological men have that advantage.

    How many trans men compete effectively against biological men in power sports? I'll bet the answer is none
  • Options
    I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.

    But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.

    It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete. 

    If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?

    It has to be spoken of, it has to be.
    Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has. 

    The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete? 
    The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.
    Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing? 
    Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.
    Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too? 
    You do come out with some shit.
    If your only contribution to a discussion is to post an insult - it’s probably best not to post at all.
    You can take it as an insult, I posted it as a fact.
    I will continue to post what I like until one of the mods think I have broken a rule then I am sure they will tell me.  o:)

    Just because you say “I was saying it is a fact” doesn’t make it a fact or less of an insult. It clearly was an insult and you should apologise. 
    I'll apologise when you stop posting shit.

    AND THAT'S A FACT.
    and let me guess, you’re the gatekeeper of that are you? Again, just a bit sad to just comment on a discussion just to troll. 
  • Options
    I’m convinced that there is no solution to this issue. 
    There a lots of solutions.......but there won't be one that is seen to be fair by all.


    There is a solution but one that is not pleasing to the trans community. 

    If you have a vulva you are female. If you have a penis you are male. That is simple biology. You can think / call yourself what you like but you can't change simple biology. 

    And no, you cant say what about no sex animals like ameobi. We are humans & there are only 2 sexes.
  • Options
    @kentaddick

    I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.


    No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people? 

    I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter? 
    That's ludicrous. I'm 47 and not particularly fit compared to most of the young lads I race my bike against week in week out. Yet - with about six months of proper training, there isn't a single woman I couldn't annihilate in a road race or a crit - should I then be able to qualify for the GB female Olympic team in the road race?. Just because YOU'RE shit, doesn't mean other people in elite sport are pal 😂
    You could beat an Olympic woman with six months of training? Bold claim. 
    I'm a shit 3rd cat rider and I regularly beat first cat and elite female riders in races (cycling at amateur levels is often co-ed). In fact I've never finished behind a woman in any of the races I've done that women have also entered. And - did I mention - I'm shit? There isn't a single 1st cat male rider who couldn't beat every single woman put in front of him in a bike race every single time. And those lads aren't even pro (they're unpaid). 

    I don't think you've thought this through...

    Edit - in fact, I 'beat' Sarah Storey in a race a few years ago - when I was a 4th cat (even shitter than I am now). No amateur cyclist ever thinks about that though, because it's completely unimportant. It BECOMES important when a young lad decides he quite fancies going to the Olympics, because then it absolutely is not a level playing field
    I know absolutely nothing about cycling - so this is interesting for me, and you certainly have a much more informed opinion than me. So I’ll take your opinion on this over my own.

    I just don’t know how you could legislate about this. At what point do you draw the line without discriminating and being unlawful against trans people?  
  • Options
    I’m convinced that there is no solution to this issue. 
    There a lots of solutions.......but there won't be one that is seen to be fair by all.


    There is a solution but one that is not pleasing to the trans community. 

    If you have a vulva you are female. If you have a penis you are male. That is simple biology. You can think / call yourself what you like but you can't change simple biology. 

    And no, you cant say what about no sex animals like ameobi. We are humans & there are only 2 sexes.
    Trans women can have a vulva and trans men can have a penis. There’s no way to legislate without cutting some one out unfairly. 
  • Options
    I'm slightly taller than AFKA.

    That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos

    AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.

    Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.  

    The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.


    But again, where do you draw the line - a 6 foot 5 woman has an unfair biological advantage at basketball than a 4 foot 8 woman. Should women above 6 foot be banned from competing because it’s unfair on the other women? It’s banning because of an accident of birth. 

    By any measurable metric - trans women are women. So why are they not allowed to compete because of something they had no control over at birth? 
  • Options
    There's no good way of dealing or even talking about this. 

    Separating out biological females and transgender females is essentially segregation and discrimination. Not exactly a very inclusive attitude and would outcast them and make them feel like a freak show. 

    On the other hand I do understand the sporting advantages they may benefit from with the increased testosterone from a young age aiding physical development. 

    Glad it's not up to me. 
    Exactly my point. And my point, equally, is that at what point do you draw a line between what is an unfair advantage and what isn’t? Some women will be naturally stronger and have higher muscle density than other women, so why is that not an unfair advantage? 
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    I'm slightly taller than AFKA.

    That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos

    AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.

    Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.  

    The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.


    But again, where do you draw the line - a 6 foot 5 woman has an unfair biological advantage at basketball than a 4 foot 8 woman. Should women above 6 foot be banned from competing because it’s unfair on the other women? It’s banning because of an accident of birth. 

    By any measurable metric - trans women are women. So why are they not allowed to compete because of something they had no control over at birth? 
    Any measureale metric other than genetic and physical ones. 
  • Options
    I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.

    But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.

    It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete. 

    If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?

    It has to be spoken of, it has to be.
    Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has. 

    The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete? 
    The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.
    Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing? 
    Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.
    Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too? 
    You do come out with some shit.
    If your only contribution to a discussion is to post an insult - it’s probably best not to post at all.
    You can take it as an insult, I posted it as a fact.
    I will continue to post what I like until one of the mods think I have broken a rule then I am sure they will tell me.  o:)

    Just because you say “I was saying it is a fact” doesn’t make it a fact or less of an insult. It clearly was an insult and you should apologise. 
    I'll apologise when you stop posting shit.

    AND THAT'S A FACT.
    and let me guess, you’re the gatekeeper of that are you? Again, just a bit sad to just comment on a discussion just to troll. 
    Troll?
    Says the guy who has posted in this thread over forty times in just a few hours.
    You’re at the very least somewhat weird.🧐🤨🧐
  • Options
    "In early childhood, prior to puberty, sporting participation prioritises team play and the development of fundamental motor and social skills, and is sometimes mixed sex. Athletic performance differences between males and females prior to puberty are often considered inconsequential or relatively small [18]. Nonetheless, pre-puberty performance differences are not unequivocally negligible, and could be mediated, to some extent, by genetic factors and/or activation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis during the neonatal period, sometimes referred to as “minipuberty”. For example, some 6500 genes are differentially expressed between males and females [19] with an estimated 3000 sex-specific differences in skeletal muscle likely to influence composition and function beyond the effects of androgenisation [3], while increased testosterone during minipuberty in males aged 1–6 months may be correlated with higher growth velocity and an “imprinting effect” on BMI and bodyweight [2021]. An extensive review of fitness data from over 85,000 Australian children aged 9–17 years old showed that, compared with 9-year-old females, 9-year-old males were faster over short sprints (9.8%) and 1 mile (16.6%), could jump 9.5% further from a standing start (a test of explosive power), could complete 33% more push-ups in 30 s and had 13.8% stronger grip [22]. Male advantage of a similar magnitude was detected in a study of Greek children, where, compared with 6-year-old females, 6-year-old males completed 16.6% more shuttle runs in a given time and could jump 9.7% further from a standing position [23]. In terms of aerobic capacity, 6- to 7-year-old males have been shown to have a higher absolute and relative (to body mass) VO2max than 6- to 7-year-old females [24]. Nonetheless, while some biological sex differences, probably genetic in origin, are measurable and affect performance pre-puberty, we consider the effect of androgenizing puberty more influential on performance, and have focused our analysis on musculoskeletal differences hereafter.

    Secondary sex characteristics that develop during puberty have evolved under sexual selection pressures to improve reproductive fitness and thus generate anatomical divergence beyond the reproductive system, leading to adult body types that are measurably different between sexes. This phenomenon is known as sex dimorphism. During puberty, testes-derived testosterone levels increase 20-fold in males, but remain low in females, resulting in circulating testosterone concentrations at least 15 times higher in males than in females of any age [425]. Testosterone in males induces changes in muscle mass, strength, anthropometric variables and hemoglobin levels [4], as part of the range of sexually dimorphic characteristics observed in humans.

    Broadly, males are bigger and stronger than females. It follows that, within competitive sport, males enjoy significant performance advantages over females, predicated on the superior physical capacity developed during puberty in response to testosterone. Thus, the biological effects of elevated pubertal testosterone are primarily responsible for driving the divergence of athletic performances between males and females [4]. It is acknowledged that this divergence has been compounded historically by a lag in the cultural acceptance of, and financial provision for, females in sport that may have had implications for the rate of improvement in athletic performance in females. Yet, since the 1990s, the difference in performance records between males and females has been relatively stable, suggesting that biological differences created by androgenization explain most of the male advantage, and are insurmountable [52627].

    Table 1 outlines physical attributes that are major parameters underpinning the male performance advantage [28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38]. Males have: larger and denser muscle mass, and stiffer connective tissue, with associated capacity to exert greater muscular force more rapidly and efficiently; reduced fat mass, and different distribution of body fat and lean muscle mass, which increases power to weight ratios and upper to lower limb strength in sports where this may be a crucial determinant of success; longer and larger skeletal structure, which creates advantages in sports where levers influence force application, where longer limb/digit length is favorable, and where height, mass and proportions are directly responsible for performance capacity; superior cardiovascular and respiratory function, with larger blood and heart volumes, higher hemoglobin concentration, greater cross-sectional area of the trachea and lower oxygen cost of respiration [343940]. Of course, different sports select for different physiological characteristics—an advantage in one discipline may be neutral or even a disadvantage in another—but examination of a variety of record and performance metrics in any discipline reveals there are few sporting disciplines where males do not possess performance advantage over females as a result of the physiological characteristics affected by testosterone."


    Percentile difference between Elite men and womens athletes for different sporting tasks/actions:

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3/figures/1

  • Options
    Sport, just like job interviews are supposed to be discriminatory. That's the whole point of them... To work out the best. But the discrimination must be fair. 

    A six foot five woman has an advantage over someone 4 feet at basketball which is why you don't see many 4 feet basketball players.

    I see the point but it's either going to be unfair to trans women or to "biological" women. So it's hard to draw the line I agree, but I draw it where it wouldn't be possible, if all else is equal, for a biological women to win the a women's competition
  • Options
    @kentaddick

    I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.


    No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people? 

    I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter? 
    That's ludicrous. I'm 47 and not particularly fit compared to most of the young lads I race my bike against week in week out. Yet - with about six months of proper training, there isn't a single woman I couldn't annihilate in a road race or a crit - should I then be able to qualify for the GB female Olympic team in the road race?. Just because YOU'RE shit, doesn't mean other people in elite sport are pal 😂
    You could beat an Olympic woman with six months of training? Bold claim. 
    I'm a shit 3rd cat rider and I regularly beat first cat and elite female riders in races (cycling at amateur levels is often co-ed). In fact I've never finished behind a woman in any of the races I've done that women have also entered. And - did I mention - I'm shit? There isn't a single 1st cat male rider who couldn't beat every single woman put in front of him in a bike race every single time. And those lads aren't even pro (they're unpaid). 

    I don't think you've thought this through...

    Edit - in fact, I 'beat' Sarah Storey in a race a few years ago - when I was a 4th cat (even shitter than I am now). No amateur cyclist ever thinks about that though, because it's completely unimportant. It BECOMES important when a young lad decides he quite fancies going to the Olympics, because then it absolutely is not a level playing field
    I know absolutely nothing about cycling - so this is interesting for me, and you certainly have a much more informed opinion than me. So I’ll take your opinion on this over my own.

    I just don’t know how you could legislate about this. At what point do you draw the line without discriminating and being unlawful against trans people?  
    You can flip the question and ask how you can legislate with out being unlawful against women as well.  Can you not?

    You knew that men and trans women who go through pubity as men have a biological advantage, why now the demascus moment?  You have acknowledged previous attempts to point this out by dishing out "lols". 
  • Options
    Leuth said:
    As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have. 

    My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.

    The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.
    I know fuck all about this sort of stuff but can hormone therapy be reversed? i.e child wants to be opposite gender, then a few years down the line wants to revert back to original gender. Is there a reverse hormone therapy treatment?
    It’s probably a bit too late for you now mate. I think you’re stuck with it.
  • Options
    Specifically on weightlifting:

    "Olympic Weightlifting

    In Olympic weightlifting, where weight categories differ between males and females, the performance gap is between 31 and 37% across the range of competitive body weights between 1998 and 2020 (Fig. 1). It is important to note that at all weight categories below the top/open category, performances are produced within weight categories with an upper limit, where strength can be correlated with “fighting weight”, and we focused our analysis of performance gaps in these categories.

    To explore strength–mass relationships further, we compared Olympic weightlifting data between equivalent weight categories which, to some extent, limit athlete height, to examine the hypothesis that male performance advantage may be largely (or even wholly) mediated by increased height and lever-derived advantages (Table 2). Between 1998 and 2018, a 69 kg category was common to both males and females, with the male record holder (69 kg, 1.68 m) lifting a combined weight 30.1% heavier than the female record holder (69 kg, 1.64 m). Weight category changes in 2019 removed the common 69 kg category and created a common 55 kg category. The current male record holder (55 kg, 1.52 m) lifts 29.5% heavier than the female record holder (55 kg, 1.52 m). These comparisons demonstrate that males are approximately 30% stronger than females of equivalent stature and mass. However, importantly, male vs. female weightlifting performance gaps increase with increasing bodyweight. For example, in the top/open weight category of Olympic weightlifting, in the absence of weight (and associated height) limits, maximum male lifting strength exceeds female lifting strength by nearly 40%. This is further manifested in powerlifting, where the male record (total of squat, bench press and deadlift) is 65% higher than the female record in the open weight category of the World Open Classic Records. Further analysis of Olympic weightlifting data shows that the 55-kg male record holder is 6.5% stronger than the 69-kg female record holder (294 kg vs 276 kg), and that the 69-kg male record is 3.2% higher than the record held in the female open category by a 108-kg female (359 kg vs 348 kg). This Olympic weightlifting analysis reveals key differences between male and female strength capacity. It shows that, even after adjustment for mass, biological males are significantly stronger (30%) than females, and that females who are 60% heavier than males do not overcome these strength deficits."

  • Options
    The thread that keeps on giving - odds on this going over 20 pages by 5.00pm tmrw - well gotta be low - lovely stuff - just knew this was a belter as soon as I read the first post !!!
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Boom said:
    Leuth said:
    As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have. 

    My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.

    The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.
    I know fuck all about this sort of stuff but can hormone therapy be reversed? i.e child wants to be opposite gender, then a few years down the line wants to revert back to original gender. Is there a reverse hormone therapy treatment?
    It’s probably a bit too late for you now mate. I think you’re stuck with it.
    Yep, will continue having to wear my hero pants G
  • Options
    McBobbin said:
    I'm slightly taller than AFKA.

    That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos

    AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.

    Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.  

    The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.


    But again, where do you draw the line - a 6 foot 5 woman has an unfair biological advantage at basketball than a 4 foot 8 woman. Should women above 6 foot be banned from competing because it’s unfair on the other women? It’s banning because of an accident of birth. 

    By any measurable metric - trans women are women. So why are they not allowed to compete because of something they had no control over at birth? 
    Any measureale metric other than genetic and physical ones. 
    So it comes down to chromosomes? As for physical, A trans woman can be physically the same as a female born woman. 
  • Options
    I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.

    But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.

    It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete. 

    If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?

    It has to be spoken of, it has to be.
    Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has. 

    The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete? 
    The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.
    Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing? 
    Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.
    Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too? 
    You do come out with some shit.
    If your only contribution to a discussion is to post an insult - it’s probably best not to post at all.
    You can take it as an insult, I posted it as a fact.
    I will continue to post what I like until one of the mods think I have broken a rule then I am sure they will tell me.  o:)

    Just because you say “I was saying it is a fact” doesn’t make it a fact or less of an insult. It clearly was an insult and you should apologise. 
    I'll apologise when you stop posting shit.

    AND THAT'S A FACT.
    and let me guess, you’re the gatekeeper of that are you? Again, just a bit sad to just comment on a discussion just to troll. 
    Troll?
    Says the guy who has posted in this thread over forty times in just a few hours.
    You’re at the very least somewhat weird.🧐🤨🧐
    So we’re not allowed to post on a discussion more than once? I’m not buying that, sorry. 

    And yes, a troll, his only contribution to this thread is to insult me. 
  • Options
    Addickted said:
    I'm slightly taller than AFKA.

    That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos

    AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.

    Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.  

    The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.


    But again, where do you draw the line - a 6 foot 5 woman has an unfair biological advantage at basketball than a 4 foot 8 woman. Should women above 6 foot be banned from competing because it’s unfair on the other women? It’s banning because of an accident of birth. 

    By any measurable metric - trans women are women. So why are they not allowed to compete because of something they had no control over at birth? 
    It's a biological advantage though, not an 'unfair' biological advantage.

    I suggest a trans woman has an unfair biological advantage by going through puberty as a male with all the inherent physical advantages that gives them.

    Can you not see or acknowledge that?
    So it wouldn’t be an unfair match up of a team of 6 ft 5 women to a team of 4ft 8 women? 

    Some female born women might have “unfair” hormanal and physical advantages to other women. Is that unfair or not? The fact is you have to put the metric against all women - not just trans women. 
  • Options
    If people wish to REALLY understand what the differences are and why they matter, then they'd do well to read the article I posted and then comment with an informed opinion, based on actual facts.
  • Options
    McBobbin said:
    I'm slightly taller than AFKA.

    That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos

    AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.

    Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.  

    The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.


    But again, where do you draw the line - a 6 foot 5 woman has an unfair biological advantage at basketball than a 4 foot 8 woman. Should women above 6 foot be banned from competing because it’s unfair on the other women? It’s banning because of an accident of birth. 

    By any measurable metric - trans women are women. So why are they not allowed to compete because of something they had no control over at birth? 
    Any measureale metric other than genetic and physical ones. 
    So it comes down to chromosomes? As for physical, A trans woman can be physically the same as a female born woman. 
    Not identical. You can tell the difference!

    I don't want to come across as transphobic because transphobic isn't something I want to be... But it really isn't as simple as "trans men are men" and that's the totality of the argument. There's a lot going on with genetics and development biology and none of it excuses being cruel to people, but it also doesn't mean you can ignore biology
  • Options
    Addickted said:
    I'm slightly taller than AFKA.

    That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos

    AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.

    Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.  

    The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.


    But again, where do you draw the line - a 6 foot 5 woman has an unfair biological advantage at basketball than a 4 foot 8 woman. Should women above 6 foot be banned from competing because it’s unfair on the other women? It’s banning because of an accident of birth. 

    By any measurable metric - trans women are women. So why are they not allowed to compete because of something they had no control over at birth? 
    It's a biological advantage though, not an 'unfair' biological advantage.

    I suggest a trans woman has an unfair biological advantage by going through puberty as a male with all the inherent physical advantages that gives them.

    Can you not see or acknowledge that?
    So it wouldn’t be an unfair match up of a team of 6 ft 5 women to a team of 4ft 8 women? 

    Some female born women might have “unfair” hormanal and physical advantages to other women. Is that unfair or not? The fact is you have to put the metric against all women - not just trans women. 
    What a load of bollox 
  • Options

    The wider relationship between sports and human rights is complex and often contradictory. No explicit right to participate in sport exists in international law. However, a number of core human rights are relevant: 

    As with all human rights, the right to participate in sport is underpinned by the right to be free from discrimination on grounds of sex, gender or other status. That includes gender identity and the right of trans people to be free from discrimination. 

    This broad principle informs much of the thinking on the issue. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, for example, has said the participation of girls and women in sport should not result in the arbitrary exclusion of transgender people.

    The rapporteur has also asked for a consensus by all international sporting bodies and national governments, in consultation with transgender organisations, with subsequent policies ideally reflecting international human rights norms. 

    The UN’s Independent Expert on “protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity” has highlighted the negative impact of exclusionary practices in sport, and noted the value of inclusive programs.

    The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women calls for equality between men and women in sports and includes gender identity among the forms of potential discrimination.

    Beyond these areas of broad agreement, however, the issue quickly becomes more complex. 

    In Aotearoa New Zealand, the Human Rights Act 1993 prohibits discriminationon the grounds of “sex” and “sexual orientation”. These prohibitions have been interpreted to encompass the legal right of trans people to be free from discrimination. 

    However, the act also says it is not discriminatory to exclude people of one sex from participating in any competitive sporting activity in which the strength, stamina or physique of competitors is relevant. 

    Unfortunately, this is where the arguments run into the limited help offered by science. There is still strong disagreement about whether transgender athletes have a competitive advantage or not.

    Research focusing on testosterone levels to justify the exclusion (or inclusion) of trans athletes has been criticised as an inappropriate oversimplification

    Whether testosterone even provides a competitive advantage is disputed, and commentators point to other factors that may be at play.

    One study of the available literatureconcluded that a consensus could not be reached due a lack of data. That finding was itself challenged, but both sides agreed more research was required.

    In the meantime, we need to recognise the limits of science and the law when it comes to setting demonstrably balanced guidelines for trans athletes’ participation in sport. 

    Progress will only come through listening to both sides in the short term, but broad support for the required research is also needed in the longer term. 

    Ultimately it is in everyone’s interests that this hugely complex issue is resolved properly. Given it goes to the heart of human identity, the potential benefits are not confined to the sporting world.


    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/the-debate-over-transgender-athletes-rights-is-testing-the-current-limits-of-science-and-the-law-162593



Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!