First transgender athlete to compete at Olympics
Discussion
chrispmartha said:
Wether you agree or not Trans People exist and they deserve respect as much as anyone else
Sure thing - and I contain my disrespect for Laurel to precisely the issue of taking a woman's opportunity to represent her country (and herself) at the Olympics.Is it not also disrespectful to assert that your beliefs are supreme within a conversation and that the conversation will only happen if other people adopt your belief system?
ZedLeg said:
wst said:
nly to people that subscribe to your specific worldview. To those who don't, the concept is as bizarre as the idea of "taking the Lord's name in vain" is to an atheist.
Not reallyThe lord is an abstract concept that some people believe in. Laurel Hubbard is an actual person who lives. It’s not a semantic argument.
wst said:
chrispmartha said:
Wether you agree or not Trans People exist and they deserve respect as much as anyone else
Sure thing - and I contain my disrespect for Laurel to precisely the issue of taking a woman's opportunity to represent her country (and herself) at the Olympics.Is it not also disrespectful to assert that your beliefs are supreme within a conversation and that the conversation will only happen if other people adopt your belief system?
ZedLeg said:
wst said:
nly to people that subscribe to your specific worldview. To those who don't, the concept is as bizarre as the idea of "taking the Lord's name in vain" is to an atheist.
Not reallyThe lord is an abstract concept that some people believe in. Laurel Hubbard is an actual person who lives. It’s not a semantic argument.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2021/jun/22...
By conflating gender and sex, I would argue we fudge the very reason we have sex categories in sport: the male performance advantage. Without a separate category for females, there would be no women in Olympic finals. Even in the 100m, one of the events with the smallest performance gap, approximately 10,000 men worldwide have personal bests faster than the current Olympic female champion, Elaine Thompson-Herah (10.70sec). And it’s not just track and field. While the smallest attainment gap between the sexes comes in running, rowing and swimming events (11-13%), this moves up to 16%-22% in track cycling, and between 29% and 34% when it comes to bowling cricket balls and weightlifting. The difference in punch power between men and women is a whopping 162%. Not, then, to be sniffed at. But the International Olympic Committee tweaked its guidelines in 2015 to allow athletes such as Hubbard to compete in the women’s category, provided their total testosterone level in serum is kept below 10 nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months. Transgender men face no restrictions in the male category for obvious reasons.
Increasingly, however, research is showing that these testosterone guidelines do not guarantee the “fair competition” the IOC was hoping for. Ross Tucker, a sports scientist and expert on testosterone advantage in sport, succinctly sums it up: “Lowering of testosterone is almost completely ineffective in taking away the biological differences between males and females.” There is just no proof that reducing testosterone takes away the advantage of muscle mass, strength, lean body mass, muscle size or bone density. Despite this new evidence from Drs Emma Hilton and Tommy Lundberg, the IOC has put off any further decisions making until after Tokyo and left it up to individual sports federations to decide their own transgender policies. Some have been bold, others have written their policies alongside trans lobby groups without consulting women’s organisations or sports scientists. Those questioning the narrative are accused of transphobia – as Martina Navratilova and Nicola Adams have discovered.
By conflating gender and sex, I would argue we fudge the very reason we have sex categories in sport: the male performance advantage. Without a separate category for females, there would be no women in Olympic finals. Even in the 100m, one of the events with the smallest performance gap, approximately 10,000 men worldwide have personal bests faster than the current Olympic female champion, Elaine Thompson-Herah (10.70sec). And it’s not just track and field. While the smallest attainment gap between the sexes comes in running, rowing and swimming events (11-13%), this moves up to 16%-22% in track cycling, and between 29% and 34% when it comes to bowling cricket balls and weightlifting. The difference in punch power between men and women is a whopping 162%. Not, then, to be sniffed at. But the International Olympic Committee tweaked its guidelines in 2015 to allow athletes such as Hubbard to compete in the women’s category, provided their total testosterone level in serum is kept below 10 nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months. Transgender men face no restrictions in the male category for obvious reasons.
Increasingly, however, research is showing that these testosterone guidelines do not guarantee the “fair competition” the IOC was hoping for. Ross Tucker, a sports scientist and expert on testosterone advantage in sport, succinctly sums it up: “Lowering of testosterone is almost completely ineffective in taking away the biological differences between males and females.” There is just no proof that reducing testosterone takes away the advantage of muscle mass, strength, lean body mass, muscle size or bone density. Despite this new evidence from Drs Emma Hilton and Tommy Lundberg, the IOC has put off any further decisions making until after Tokyo and left it up to individual sports federations to decide their own transgender policies. Some have been bold, others have written their policies alongside trans lobby groups without consulting women’s organisations or sports scientists. Those questioning the narrative are accused of transphobia – as Martina Navratilova and Nicola Adams have discovered.
wst said:
ZedLeg said:
I thought for a second you might have been discussing in good faith but I think I was mistaken
It is ironic for you to be pointing this out.I wonder how many of the other contributors could say the same.
8.4L 154 said:
I can however think of several cisgender athletes
How do you know they're - particularly applicable to female athletes - not closeted trans?Eg. Kumi Yokoyama, recently came out as a trans man, is a female footballer. Interestingly, is going to put off affirming treatments such as hormone therapy, in order to fulfil lifelong goals of being successful within female sports (for which purpose, of course, testosterone is considered a performance enhancing drug).
I'm curious why a "full" (within whatever criteria - hormonal? I know constructive surgery is not up to snuff so it makes sense to not include that as criteria) transition is not being considered, followed by a success as an affirmed man in male football?
Why is it only possible to be an "ok" athlete as a man, and then transition, and become a world class woman athlete... but not go from being a world class woman athlete and then transition to become a world class male athlete?
8.4L 154 said:
If there was a gap to her competitors they couldn't overcome then she would hold the world record, which she doesn't. She would win every event she enters, which she doesn't.
I can however think of several cisgender athletes who have genetic advantages and who did win every event they entered, held world records and won multiple and record numbers of olympic golds. yet that is accepted as within fair sport. Sport is never a level playing field utopia, and if it was it would be very boring.
this is such a stupid argument - the only logical conclusion of it is that you get rid of women's sport.I can however think of several cisgender athletes who have genetic advantages and who did win every event they entered, held world records and won multiple and record numbers of olympic golds. yet that is accepted as within fair sport. Sport is never a level playing field utopia, and if it was it would be very boring.
rover 623gsi said:
8.4L 154 said:
If there was a gap to her competitors they couldn't overcome then she would hold the world record, which she doesn't. She would win every event she enters, which she doesn't.
I can however think of several cisgender athletes who have genetic advantages and who did win every event they entered, held world records and won multiple and record numbers of olympic golds. yet that is accepted as within fair sport. Sport is never a level playing field utopia, and if it was it would be very boring.
this is such a stupid argument - the only logical conclusion of it is that you get rid of women's sport.I can however think of several cisgender athletes who have genetic advantages and who did win every event they entered, held world records and won multiple and record numbers of olympic golds. yet that is accepted as within fair sport. Sport is never a level playing field utopia, and if it was it would be very boring.
ZedLeg said:
It was from her own wiki and the wikis for the tournaments. I won't be responding to you again if you keep misgendering her.
He’s a man. There’s nothing wrong with continuing to use the words associated with sex rather than with what someone wants. Would you call someone Dr if they just identified as one? It’s no different.8.4L 154 said:
If there was a gap to her competitors they couldn't overcome then she would hold the world record, which she doesn't. She would win every event she enters, which she doesn't.
Hubbard's 43, despite that one woman lifted more total weight at the last world's - a woman who has previously tested positive for steroids.The record holder in the events prior to the world's? A Russian who failed a drug test at the age of 15 in 2006 and isn't eligible for Tokyo because... doping policy violations covering the time period in which she set the records.
Not very inspiring for women. Before you'd finish behind those between doping bans, now you finish behind those between doping bans and those born as a man.
ShoooRn said:
I think I'm in the mindset that either this happens or this woman is put to shame by a woman (from birth female) who has been competing in this category for years. I guess we will see.
I think more likely is that she will win Gold. And then the other athletes will have to either complain it is unfair or resign themselves to losing from now on. wst said:
t does make the sincerity of your participation in a conversation questionable if you threaten to flounce unless your specific interpretation of reality is laid out to be the only interpretation valid for use in the conversation. Would you accept those terms from somebody else, or are you just going to only talk with people who will happily concede a point right from the beginning without you having made any actual persuasive point to convince them of your point of view?
It’s the only way people like him aren’t left floundering from the start, and end up tearing their own viewpoint apart. Insisting that the conversation is only allowed if you concede their points from the off is ludicrous.It’s the same reason he refuses to say what his definition of a woman is. If he did he’d be left without a leg to stand on. The standards response when cornered is to just go for the circular / meaningless one that a woman is anyone that says they are a woman.
8.4, that’s a strange argument.
Elite sport isn’t inclusive. It’s not meant to be. At the top level, you need to be an amazing specimen biologically, then work with extreme dedication to be the best in the world. Of course some people are biologically amazeballs (bolt, phelps, in his own way Linford) but that’s something to be celebrated.
This thread isn’t showing that though. The athlete in question is not a biologically amazing version of a woman, and from current physique doesn’t seem to have worked harder than their counterparts. The athlete in question has used wokery to somehow enter a ginetta G50 into a Ginetta junior race. If she does a decent job then a podium is guaranteed, which would then potentially dishearten the rest of the grid and in the long run potentially ruin the entire ladder.
Of course, this thread is full of the normal 2 camps entrenched miles apart, but IMO it’s not about trans rights, it’s about women’s rights, and fairness. It’s visibly neither right nor fair.
Elite sport isn’t inclusive. It’s not meant to be. At the top level, you need to be an amazing specimen biologically, then work with extreme dedication to be the best in the world. Of course some people are biologically amazeballs (bolt, phelps, in his own way Linford) but that’s something to be celebrated.
This thread isn’t showing that though. The athlete in question is not a biologically amazing version of a woman, and from current physique doesn’t seem to have worked harder than their counterparts. The athlete in question has used wokery to somehow enter a ginetta G50 into a Ginetta junior race. If she does a decent job then a podium is guaranteed, which would then potentially dishearten the rest of the grid and in the long run potentially ruin the entire ladder.
Of course, this thread is full of the normal 2 camps entrenched miles apart, but IMO it’s not about trans rights, it’s about women’s rights, and fairness. It’s visibly neither right nor fair.
king hell what a pointless word.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff