Why not just remove gender restrictions on sport
Discussion
Randy Winkman said:
FredericRobinson said:
Was wondering why curling is split by sex when watching the winter olympics
Fair question. My suggestion is that it's simply because it doubles the opportunity to compete and win stuff. Everyone's a winner. 
As an aside - shouldn't shooting be fully mixed?
This is an increasingly tricky area for almost all sports. My youngest has just done an Extended Project Qualification on the subject looking at individuals, Olympic rules and in depth at rugby and swimming.
Rugby has very recently banned trans woman (men transitioned to women) from playing contact rugby at all levels. Previously it was based on IOC recommendations for testosterone levels in post puberty. Get the level low enough for a set time and you can compete, this is what swimming does at the moment. Rugby banned this on safety grounds as empirical evidence showed huge disparity in size and power for some trans woman versus some smaller women. Trans men are allowed as the risk is more likely to be for them rather than others.
Safety for sports like rugby or boxing is fairly easy for most people to understand.
Harder for other sports, especially power and endurance based events. You cannot stop it for being unsafe so do you ban it for being unfair? In that case is it unfair that Michael Phelps, 23 olympic gold medals was born with an enormous lung capacity and over 2m wing span (finger tip to finger tip)?
I think they will stop trans woman competing in womans sport as otherwise the sports will see a reduction in the number of competitors and participants as those born female may have far reduced chance of winning.
Not an easy topic to have one answer fits all unless you are a bit.........biased.
Rugby has very recently banned trans woman (men transitioned to women) from playing contact rugby at all levels. Previously it was based on IOC recommendations for testosterone levels in post puberty. Get the level low enough for a set time and you can compete, this is what swimming does at the moment. Rugby banned this on safety grounds as empirical evidence showed huge disparity in size and power for some trans woman versus some smaller women. Trans men are allowed as the risk is more likely to be for them rather than others.
Safety for sports like rugby or boxing is fairly easy for most people to understand.
Harder for other sports, especially power and endurance based events. You cannot stop it for being unsafe so do you ban it for being unfair? In that case is it unfair that Michael Phelps, 23 olympic gold medals was born with an enormous lung capacity and over 2m wing span (finger tip to finger tip)?
I think they will stop trans woman competing in womans sport as otherwise the sports will see a reduction in the number of competitors and participants as those born female may have far reduced chance of winning.
Not an easy topic to have one answer fits all unless you are a bit.........biased.
Randy Winkman said:
FredericRobinson said:
Was wondering why curling is split by sex when watching the winter olympics
Fair question. My suggestion is that it's simply because it doubles the opportunity to compete and win stuff. Everyone's a winner. RobbieTheTruth said:
Randy Winkman said:
FredericRobinson said:
Was wondering why curling is split by sex when watching the winter olympics
Fair question. My suggestion is that it's simply because it doubles the opportunity to compete and win stuff. Everyone's a winner. Unreal said:
popeyewhite said:
Unreal said:
It's a complex subject
It's really not. Either you want sport to be fair, or you're happy to let some have a clear and uncontested competitive advantage after transitioning. However, the gender issue under discussion isn't limited to transitioning athletes. We can see in the Semanya case that she is female yet still possesses an advantage over other females that is unconnected to transitioning. Unlike an athlete with long legs, that helps in an event like the high jump, she is prevented from competing because she has a high testosterone level. Where is the fairness in that?
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
andyA700 said:
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
IMO, this is the bit that simplifies everything. It’s simple, it’s clear, and it removes all doubt. It does not stop anyone doing anything, athletes are free to continue playing and competing but if they have XY they do not compete in XX categories.
The other arguments about natural advantages, Michael Phelps and his feet for example, are just part of what makes some people better at some sports than others. It used to be the same for a rugby union team - you could tell which position they played simply by their physique, not quite so clear these days. Pole vaulters tend to be quite different to shot putters. There aren’t many short basketball players. Pick a sport and there are generally favourable physical attributes.
PomBstard said:
andyA700 said:
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
IMO, this is the bit that simplifies everything. It’s simple, it’s clear, and it removes all doubt. It does not stop anyone doing anything, athletes are free to continue playing and competing but if they have XY they do not compete in XX categories.
The other arguments about natural advantages, Michael Phelps and his feet for example, are just part of what makes some people better at some sports than others. It used to be the same for a rugby union team - you could tell which position they played simply by their physique, not quite so clear these days. Pole vaulters tend to be quite different to shot putters. There aren’t many short basketball players. Pick a sport and there are generally favourable physical attributes.
PomBstard said:
andyA700 said:
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
IMO, this is the bit that simplifies everything. It’s simple, it’s clear, and it removes all doubt. It does not stop anyone doing anything, athletes are free to continue playing and competing but if they have XY they do not compete in XX categories.
The other arguments about natural advantages, Michael Phelps and his feet for example, are just part of what makes some people better at some sports than others. It used to be the same for a rugby union team - you could tell which position they played simply by their physique, not quite so clear these days. Pole vaulters tend to be quite different to shot putters. There aren’t many short basketball players. Pick a sport and there are generally favourable physical attributes.
8.4L 154 said:
PomBstard said:
andyA700 said:
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
IMO, this is the bit that simplifies everything. It’s simple, it’s clear, and it removes all doubt. It does not stop anyone doing anything, athletes are free to continue playing and competing but if they have XY they do not compete in XX categories.
The other arguments about natural advantages, Michael Phelps and his feet for example, are just part of what makes some people better at some sports than others. It used to be the same for a rugby union team - you could tell which position they played simply by their physique, not quite so clear these days. Pole vaulters tend to be quite different to shot putters. There aren’t many short basketball players. Pick a sport and there are generally favourable physical attributes.
But its still a clear and simple determination - if you want to play this sport at this level you will need to take this test.
8.4L 154 said:
PomBstard said:
andyA700 said:
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
IMO, this is the bit that simplifies everything. It’s simple, it’s clear, and it removes all doubt. It does not stop anyone doing anything, athletes are free to continue playing and competing but if they have XY they do not compete in XX categories.
The other arguments about natural advantages, Michael Phelps and his feet for example, are just part of what makes some people better at some sports than others. It used to be the same for a rugby union team - you could tell which position they played simply by their physique, not quite so clear these days. Pole vaulters tend to be quite different to shot putters. There aren’t many short basketball players. Pick a sport and there are generally favourable physical attributes.
andyA700 said:
Have you ever heard of a comic character called "Wilson of the Wizard"? This was a sports person who excelled at any sport they took part in, nobody could beat them. In my post above I gave the example of Francine Niyonsaba from Burundo whi has a list of records, the like of which has probably not been witnessed before. The reason for Francine's achievements are because they have XY chromosomes and they are competing against women.
There is a UK swimmer who held 22 national titles, one Olympic silver medal, six commonwealth medals, (two of each) a commonwealth record for 18 years and a master's record and a long list of national records.So I take your one silver medal and a list of national records and raise you one Sharron Davies.
andyA700 said:
8.4L 154 said:
PomBstard said:
andyA700 said:
No athlete with XY chromosomes should ever be competing in the women's category.
IMO, this is the bit that simplifies everything. It’s simple, it’s clear, and it removes all doubt. It does not stop anyone doing anything, athletes are free to continue playing and competing but if they have XY they do not compete in XX categories.
The other arguments about natural advantages, Michael Phelps and his feet for example, are just part of what makes some people better at some sports than others. It used to be the same for a rugby union team - you could tell which position they played simply by their physique, not quite so clear these days. Pole vaulters tend to be quite different to shot putters. There aren’t many short basketball players. Pick a sport and there are generally favourable physical attributes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francine_Niyonsaba
A slight diversion since I'm not by any means suggesting that she doesn't have an unfair advantage, she still never matched the 1980s 400m and 800m records which goes to show how messed up things were back then.
8.4L 154 said:
There is a UK swimmer who held 22 national titles, one Olympic silver medal, six commonwealth medals, (two of each) a commonwealth record for 18 years and a master's record and a long list of national records.
So I take your one silver medal and a list of national records and raise you one Sharron Davies.
The phrase in poker is "I'll raise you...", you don't 'take' anything. Regarding your point that Davies won a number of titles - you seem to have missed the point entirely. It took Davies 14 years to do that, from the European championships in '76 to The Olympics in Auckland in '90, with no world records. The individual you are comparing Davies to had a rather more meteoric rise, unsurprisingly, as she/he was intersex. In 9 years she left her running counterparts trailing (literally) and claimed a world record. Davies put in the work, basically, the runner from Burundi had a huge advantage over their direct competitors. I'd suggest the two scenarios are completely different.So I take your one silver medal and a list of national records and raise you one Sharron Davies.
popeyewhite said:
8.4L 154 said:
There is a UK swimmer who held 22 national titles, one Olympic silver medal, six commonwealth medals, (two of each) a commonwealth record for 18 years and a master's record and a long list of national records.
So I take your one silver medal and a list of national records and raise you one Sharron Davies.
The phrase in poker is "I'll raise you...", you don't 'take' anything. Regarding your point that Davies won a number of titles - you seem to have missed the point entirely. It took Davies 14 years to do that, from the European championships in '76 to The Olympics in Auckland in '90, with no world records. The individual you are comparing Davies to had a rather more meteoric rise, unsurprisingly, as she/he was intersex. In 9 years she left her running counterparts trailing (literally) and claimed a world record. Davies put in the work, basically, the runner from Burundi had a huge advantage over their direct competitors. I'd suggest the two scenarios are completely different.So I take your one silver medal and a list of national records and raise you one Sharron Davies.
However I'd suggest you missed the point entirely that unless the gold medalist is from the same nation any olympic silver medalist is likely to dominate their sport nationally and hold a lot of national titles, especially in sports where there are a lot of similar events which the same athlete can compete in, ie running and swimming.
Fundamentally though the history of sex testing in women's sports is littered with Human rights abuse, sexual abuse, discrimination, public ridicule and in some cases leading to attempted suicides. And this is just referring to cis women who the policies are to protect.
That history includes nude parades, gynaecological tests, chromosome tests which included men but excluded women, testosterone tests which allow certain women with high testosterone and an ability to make use of it and it give an advantage to compete but excludes those with high levels and insensitivity and limited advantage. enforced non medically necessary treatments and surgeries which in some cases leading to infertility,.and we are not even talking about trans inclusion here, these are cis women registered female at birth being abused, excluded and humiliated.
source
If you want to see what women are really capable of then campaign for equal pay/prizes, equal representation, equal access to training and top coaches, not put them off with sexual abuse if someone thinks they are too successful and look too strong, walk the wrong way, don't meet stereotypes. I think i posted this previously on one of the now deleted threads on trans inclusion, that we have not seen the best of women's sport yet, we haven't found the very best and that is shown up no more starkly than fast developing sports like the Snowboard Big Air. where the women in the 2022 winter olympics were landing jumps equivalent to the mens X-games gold in 2015.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff