Banning Transgender Athletes From Women's Sports

In one event, not in the others, which at leas adds murkiness to the simple story that says she won that 1 event because she was trans.

One of the big problems with interpretation of the data with these athletes is that most cis women who were competitive athletes before their medical transition experienced considerable drop off in performance in the years before that. WRT Lia, when competing at the men at the college level she was mediocre, which makes her position against the women seem like a huge increase. But that comparison is drawing from a time when her performances were at their worst in her competitive life time. When you go back to the younger age groups she was performing at a level that wouldnt have made winning an NCAA title seem unreasonable (hence getting a scholarship to swim at Penn as a man in the first place).

The vast majority of positions are not reached as a result of a good faith analysis of data. The position is landed on due to other factors, such as the social grouping phenomenon you’ve pointed out, and then explanations for that are developed after the fact. You cannot argue someone out of a position with data who found themselves in their position without consideration in the first place.

In my 20 years as a scientist, I have found that to be the case even among scientists when discussing issues tangential to their topic, a group of people you’d think would be most attuned to reaching conclusions based on data.

2 Likes

Could be sandbagging.

For the record - only playing devils advocate.

Right, but that was the most recent event, which undercuts the idea that the elevated relative performance is a function of the transition. For that matter, it wasn’t just one competition, because the gap was even larger at the Ivy League championship.

Note - the university is Penn, not Penn State. Penn State is a middling power in swimming, but usually not top 25. U Penn hasn’t got a poll vote in years. Winning a scholarship to swim at Penn is a great deal (one of the few Ivy athletic scholarships) but in fact does make winning a NCAA title rather unlikely.

For event, I meant stroke/distance.

There is scant evidence to support the view that trans women have advantage in sports. Ergo there is scant evidence to reaerch that they don’t.
That is why the ban should remain until proper research proves that no gain is made by trans athletes.
In your attempt to protect the minority you may be disadvantaging the vast majority? How can this be fair?

Regarding social vs medical transitioning, I really dont appreciate your view regarding conflation. I know the difference.

The point I was making was that my views lean towards trans rights, and that I understand the need for such rights to be enshrined. However as a supporter of womens rights, I also recognise the need for clarity surrounding sports activities.

1 Like

I don’t know what point you think your comment was supposed to elucidate then. Who is advocating for non-medically transitioned trans women to compete with cis women?

1 Like

I explained to be fair.

Ok, treat me like Im an idiot then because I clearly missed it.

Saying that a trans woman who has not medically transition could beat up a cis women says what about rans women who have medically transitioned?

@Limiescouse
The point is that I have an understanding of the difference and was not attempting to conflate medical and social. Your incorrect assumption was that was my intention, whereas my point was made in respect of my personal experiences in this debate. To illustrate that my general support of trans people is not compromised by my views on female sports competition.

Regarding socially transitioning women competing in sports, if a person identifies with their non assigned gender then what rights has anyone to stop them competin with their chosen gender?
Its an awkward argument, but if and when the research proves that no advantage is noted for medically transitioned females, then this is the next discussion.

Actually, loads of activists. Veronica Ivy, formerly Rachel MacKinnon, a current women’s masters cycling champion has objected to the requirement to manage testosterone down - necessary because the transition has been entirely social otherwise. It is in a sense the logical extension of the idea that trans women are women because of how they identify.

The evidence, such as it is, is also starting to point away from the focus on testosterone levels.

My take on trans rights is largely that there are so few trans people, why are we even sweating it, if someone wants to compete as a women, go right ahead! It’s very unlikely that person will be a top ten athlete in the sport. And I’m just not that concerned if a college level runner is beaten by another college level runner who was born of a different sex.

Also, I have heard convincing arguments saying that all sporting competition has ‘unfairness’ due to the physical differences caused form people’s genetics, it’s kind of the nature of the game, so how is this any different? The much greater contributor to ‘fairness’ in sport or lack of it, would surely be access to funding.

Fair enough, there are always extreme positions and I should have been more couching with that comment, but it’s a position that isn’t really part of the general conversation and especially not what is being discussed here.

The testosterone one is a good point though because that is an extremely blunt tool to identify competitive advantage and so a really ineffective thing to focus on. Using that as a way to ensure fairness is a great example of administrators wanting some process they can implement regardless of the value of that process.

If that actually happened, I don’t think I would be. Transitioning and transitioning back would such an emotional roller coaster I think I could only feel sorry for that person. If they had actually done it on purpose (not sure if your are suggesting that), I would still feel sorry for them, that’s a pretty shitty ride to go on to get a scholarship.

*Obvs this is hypothetical, and I may actually be ragging mad, but since we are inventing a hypothetical situation I’m going to choose to be serene.
**Appreciate stakes are higher when it comes to college fee’s in the USA and other places, but still. That’s one hell of torrid path to take to sleep through three years of lectures. Do an online degree ffs!

My fairly strong feelings on the matter actually stem from seeing how this is playing out for women and girls’ sport, where it absolutely is de facto part of the general conversation. The focus on elite-level sport, targeting testosterone or otherwise, has been trying to strike a balance between fairness and inclusion, but fundamentally doing so using tools simply not available to lower level sport - where processes like testing for PEDs also doesn’t happen. A sport that allows trans women to compete at the highest levels with some sort of testing hoop to jump through is not likely have any restrictions at the community level. There, I am seeing inclusion translate into exclusion - teenage girls playing rugby don’t want to face a 6’3", 205 pound 2nd row, and walk away.

3 Likes

Does this really happen very often?? from inside my bubble I would guess that there are less than five trans girls playing rugby in the country at any one time. based on nothing other than the little bits of the world I have seen.

Is there any actual data?

Also maybe a better argument would be; if said 6’3", 205 pound 2nd row was born female, would that make any difference?

We could but that would be incorrect. I’ll tag @Limiescouse into this too. The trans population in the UK (as an example) is estimated to be between 200,000 to 500,000. Let’s take the highest number. Assuming the split is 50/50 which may or may not be correct but granting the highest number should mitigate that. That puts total trans population at approx 0.76% of the population. Further, trans women account for 0.38%. Let’s say that the percentage that compete in sport are half, those under 40 are a further half and that those at the higher levels are less than 5% We’re approaching vanishingly small numbers of people who are actually in a position to be in any way affected by this personally.

Most topics on this forum personally affect people on a day by day basis. Money, politics, war etc. This one doesn’t but it’s headline news. A group of men discussing it at length is pretty much pointless on multiple levels. Occurred to me earlier when Mrs was talking about it. Why is such a niche subject so very much the zeitgeist? Fashion? Seems you can’t be a Hollywood star right now without your kids having pronouns and contemplating pre puberty sex changes. It’s a pretty good world view IMHO to consider something that affects so few people (and we’re not talking being murdered or dying here) as verging on irrelevant. @Semmy points out a trans women battering the opposition. Perfectly valid. How often does it happen? About as often as a guy somersaulting off his bike and landing on a car roof but that video went round the world too.

I wish the conversation was had in a way that it only affected the small number of people looking to compete, or those they wish to compete against. But it doesn’t. The way these issues are debated affect the entire community given the red meat nature of them, anyone close to the community, or really anyone who just gives a shit about other people.

2 Likes

I think the battle for transgender rights for inclusivity is being undermined once you get campaigns for them to be included into an athletic competition.

You risk turning more people against the actual issue (transgender rights)

For good or for wrong , transgender people needing to be accepted into the entire community is a reality and a work in progress. And that gets to be undermined when you have someone(by participating in athletic competitions) who reinforces TERFs like rowling etc.