Trans athletes make great gains, yet resentment still flares (3 Viewers)

I look forward to reading/repeating the same arguments for the…4th time now
What arguments? Just pointed out a factual observation. I think it's great that women will no longer be able to compete and eventually we'll just have one unified open gender category for each event.
 
What arguments? Just pointed out a factual observation. I think it's great that women will no longer be able to compete and eventually we'll just have one unified open gender category for each event.
No, you did not.

You don't see any trans athletes 'competing at the highest level and dominating their opponents'. This is literally the first openly transgender athlete to compete at the Olympics at all. Literally. The. First.

Trans men athletes absolutely exist, and the first US transgender international athlete was a trans man, Chris Mosier, as I mentioned before.

And on that basis, "women will no longer be able to complete" is such hyperbolic panic, driven by what? One transgender athlete being selected for the Olympics? The first trans woman athlete to compete in professional tennis was Renée Richards who appeared in the US Open in 1977. Do you see hordes of trans women dominating the Opens now? No, you see literally zero trans women even competing in the Opens.

You can absolutely have an opinion on whether the potential advantage of being born a different gender is unfair compared to the other advantages top athletes might have over their competition, but your notion that "women will no longer be able to compete" is absolute hyperbole backed up by diddly squat.

And those are the arguments.
 
No, you did not.

You don't see any trans athletes 'competing at the highest level and dominating their opponents'. This is literally the first openly transgender athlete to compete at the Olympics at all. Literally. The. First.

Trans men athletes absolutely exist, and the first US transgender international athlete was a trans man, Chris Mosier, as I mentioned before.

And on that basis, "women will no longer be able to complete" is such hyperbolic panic, driven by what? One transgender athlete being selected for the Olympics? The first trans woman athlete to compete in professional tennis was Renée Richards who appeared in the US Open in 1977. Do you see hordes of trans women dominating the Opens now? No, you see literally zero trans women even competing in the Opens.

You can absolutely have an opinion on whether the potential advantage of being born a different gender is unfair compared to the other advantages top athletes might have over their competition, but your notion that "women will no longer be able to compete" is absolute hyperbole backed up by diddly squat.

And those are the arguments.
I agree and disagree with your post. Pretending that the social acceptance of transgender people is the same today as it was in 1977 will not lead to an increase in athlete participation is quite misleading. >99% of men can't compete with a professional women's tennis player so it hasn't been an issue yet. However, I think it is just as naive to think that a transgender athlete dominating women's sports isn't coming just like it is naive to think that women's sports will be overrun by transgender athletes.

I also can't sit here and make fun of the conspiracy theorists from the far right for ignoring science and then pretend that a transgender athlete competing in women's sports doesn't have a significant biological advantage.

The very person that you mention, Renee Richards, also thinks it is not fair despite her legacy.
And Richards has come to believe that her past as a man did provide her advantages over competitors. “Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I’d had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I’ve reconsidered my opinion.” She adds, “There is one thing that a transsexual woman unfortunately cannot expect to be allowed to do, and that is to play professional sports in her chosen field. She can get married, live as woman, do all of those other things, and no one should ever be allowed to take them away from her. But this limitation—that’s just life. I know because I lived it.”



Where we can absolutely agree, there is no easy or "right" answer.
 
I agree and disagree with your post. Pretending that the social acceptance of transgender people is the same today as it was in 1977 will not lead to an increase in athlete participation is quite misleading. >99% of men can't compete with a professional women's tennis player so it hasn't been an issue yet.
Granted to an extent, but given that back then the arguments were remarkably similar (e.g. "Women's sports will be taken over by a giant race of surgically created women" - NYTimes, 1976), the unarguable fact that it turned out, despite being able to compete, no 'giant race of surgically created women' actually turned up to do so on the WTA Tour and still hasn't to this date remains a fair point to underscore the hyperbole.

However, I think it is just as naive to think that a transgender athlete dominating women's sports isn't coming just like it is naive to think that women's sports will be overrun by transgender athletes.
I'm sure a transgender athlete will do so at some point, but that in itself doesn't mean much, because for that to never be the case, we would have to assume that they're at an overwhelming universal and consistent disadvantage.

Transgender people are a very small minority, but even if we assume estimates of 0.6% of the US population are out by a factor of ten globally (so say 0.06% instead), that number of people globally would still be the equivalent of the population of a country like New Zealand.

That is, saying, "one day, a top athlete will be transgender," isn't, in and of itself, saying much more than, "One day, a top athlete will be from New Zealand." That is, it's not significant by itself. A disproportionate number of top athletes being transgender would be illustrative, but I don't think we'd ever get to that (see next point).

I also can't sit here and make fun of the conspiracy theorists from the far right for ignoring science and then pretend that a transgender athlete competing in women's sports doesn't have a significant biological advantage.
As I've said before in this thread, the rights of transgender athletes to compete are regulated by the various sports governing authorities, who are all taking into account the science as it stands. As the science develops, or not, so the regulations are inevitably going to follow. If they see transgender athletes being disproportionately and provably at an advantage in their sports, there is pretty much zero chance those sports regulating authorities aren't going to regulate that.

The very person that you mention, Renee Richards, also thinks it is not fair despite her legacy.
I was aware of that. But it's a bit, "I could have been a contender," isn't it. There's a lot of retired athletes who think they could have been world champions in their sport 'if only'; it doesn't surprise me that there's retired athletes who are convinced they could have been world champions if they'd only been competing on a transgender basis at the age of 24. How many, if any, would be right is at least debatable.

Where we can absolutely agree, there is no easy or "right" answer.
It's complex, for sure. At the same time, "Let the sporting regulatory authorities get on with regulating their sports to the best of their ability, listening to the science and taking into account both accessibility and fairness, while maybe not panicking wildly about a 'giant race of surgically created women' taking over women's sport" sure seems like a right approach to me.
 
Granted to an extent, but given that back then the arguments were remarkably similar (e.g. "Women's sports will be taken over by a giant race of surgically created women" - NYTimes, 1976), the unarguable fact that it turned out, despite being able to compete, no 'giant race of surgically created women' actually turned up to do so on the WTA Tour and still hasn't to this date remains a fair point to underscore the hyperbole.
to me.
we do moral panic exceptionally well
it does not seem to phase us that moral panics prove to be 99.99% incorrect - we jump for them next chance we get
to me, a sensible stance is doing the exact opposite of the moral panic - the odds will ever be in our favor
 
Strange how you never see trans men competing at the highest level and dominating their opponents. Very. Odd. It's almost like there's a biological unfairness baked in.

Well, it does look like Hubbard is still quite a bit away from breaking the women's world record for the snatch and clean and jerk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhou_Lulu - who i assume is cis gender, owns that, by quite a bit more than anything I've see that Hubbard has done in competition.

Weightlifting should be the most obvious event where the biological gender would make the most difference, so we will see. If Hubbard shatters all world records at the Olympics, i think it is going to be an uphill battle going forward for trans sports.
 
Granted to an extent, but given that back then the arguments were remarkably similar (e.g. "Women's sports will be taken over by a giant race of surgically created women" - NYTimes, 1976), the unarguable fact that it turned out, despite being able to compete, no 'giant race of surgically created women' actually turned up to do so on the WTA Tour and still hasn't to this date remains a fair point to underscore the hyperbole.


I'm sure a transgender athlete will do so at some point, but that in itself doesn't mean much, because for that to never be the case, we would have to assume that they're at an overwhelming universal and consistent disadvantage.

Transgender people are a very small minority, but even if we assume estimates of 0.6% of the US population are out by a factor of ten globally (so say 0.06% instead), that number of people globally would still be the equivalent of the population of a country like New Zealand.

That is, saying, "one day, a top athlete will be transgender," isn't, in and of itself, saying much more than, "One day, a top athlete will be from New Zealand." That is, it's not significant by itself. A disproportionate number of top athletes being transgender would be illustrative, but I don't think we'd ever get to that (see next point).


As I've said before in this thread, the rights of transgender athletes to compete are regulated by the various sports governing authorities, who are all taking into account the science as it stands. As the science develops, or not, so the regulations are inevitably going to follow. If they see transgender athletes being disproportionately and provably at an advantage in their sports, there is pretty much zero chance those sports regulating authorities aren't going to regulate that.


I was aware of that. But it's a bit, "I could have been a contender," isn't it. There's a lot of retired athletes who think they could have been world champions in their sport 'if only'; it doesn't surprise me that there's retired athletes who are convinced they could have been world champions if they'd only been competing on a transgender basis at the age of 24. How many, if any, would be right is at least debatable.


It's complex, for sure. At the same time, "Let the sporting regulatory authorities get on with regulating their sports to the best of their ability, listening to the science and taking into account both accessibility and fairness, while maybe not panicking wildly about a 'giant race of surgically created women' taking over women's sport" sure seems like a right approach to me.
We are in complete agreement.

Secretly though, I'm waiting for someone like a young Lebron James to announce that they are transgender and will be competing in female sports for my entertainment purposes only. You have to admit, it's the perfect clash of politics that the internet will be sure to take full advantage of.
 
Well, it does look like Hubbard is still quite a bit away from breaking the women's world record for the snatch and clean and jerk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhou_Lulu - who i assume is cis gender, owns that, by quite a bit more than anything I've see that Hubbard has done in competition.

Weightlifting should be the most obvious event where the biological gender would make the most difference, so we will see. If Hubbard shatters all world records at the Olympics, i think it is going to be an uphill battle going forward for trans sports.

Hubbard is 43 and will be the oldest competitor, so if she medals it would be pretty shocking, trans or no.

EDIT

I take it back - just looked up her wikipedia - she's already won several international competitions since she started competing as a woman, including the 2020 World Cup.
 
It seems like a lot of proponents in favor of trans athletes being able to compete on sports teams of their self-declared identity, are saying that it will only be a handful of people. And not enough to create a wide-scale disparity.

But if it does start to occur on a regular basis, would your POV change? At what point, if any, do you declare that women are at a disdvantage?
---
Should this really become a 'thing', to me it'd be another example of the male perspective being imposed upon women (with a wildly ironic twist, of course). Just another way for men to win - literally and figuratively.

Because everyone knows trans males aren't going to have the same successes.

It's a perfect example of "The more things change, the more they stay the same."
 
Hubbard is 43 and will be the oldest competitor, so if she medals it would be pretty shocking, trans or no.

EDIT

I take it back - just looked up her wikipedia - she's already won several international competitions since she started competing as a woman, including the 2020 World Cup.
Well, it's weightlifting. Brian Shaw won the world strongest man competition when he was 40ish i believe.

So I am not sure that being 44 is as big a detriment in weightlifting as it might be in other sports like gymnastics or swimming.

I am dubious to trans women who transitioned post-puberty competing against cis women. i think if someone went through puberty as a male, they probably have an unfair advantage over people who went through puberty as a female in most physical competitions.

But since Hubbard isn't shattering world records, maybe it's not as cut and dry as i thought. We will see i guess. It should be obvious eventually, and i am sure they will change course if we have every women's world record held by trans women in 10 years.
 
It seems like a lot of proponents in favor of trans athletes being able to compete on sports teams of their self-declared identity, are saying that it will only be a handful of people. And not enough to create a wide-scale disparity.

But if it does start to occur on a regular basis, would your POV change? At what point, if any, do you declare that women are at a disdvantage?
---
Should this really become a 'thing', to me it'd be another example of the male perspective being imposed upon women (with a wildly ironic twist, of course). Just another way for men to win - literally and figuratively.

Because everyone knows trans males aren't going to have the same successes.

It's a perfect example of "The more things change, the more they stay the same."
i am on record in here of being both pro-competition and pro-civil rights
i think the either/or is a false binary and we need to find better/more scientific ways to achieve fairness
 
i am on record in here of being both pro-competition and pro-civil rights
i think the either/or is a false binary and we need to find better/more scientific ways to achieve fairness
But isn't biology a form of science?
 
But since Hubbard isn't shattering world records, maybe it's not as cut and dry as i thought. We will see i guess. It should be obvious eventually, and i am sure they will change course if we have every women's world record held by trans women in 10 years.

I can't think of a more fitting quip: maybe she's showing just enough to win the bet :hihi:
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom