Current Events > Do you agree with Idaho banning trans-atheletes?

(+) Yeah! (+)

MICHALECOLE posted...

They have an advantage. They should have their own league. I do not think I am being transphobic when I say this.

---

ssjevot posted...

I would prefer it be weight classes like they have in MMA for instance, but it doesn't need to be weight per se

I used MMA as a specific example and clarified it after. You chopped up the quote to try to change what I said. If you can't argue in good faith, there is no point.

---

This debate often brings up the below takes:

-End gender segregation in sports: OK, so no females at the professional level and basically none at the D1 level. 99% of scholarships go to men, girls have no female athletes to look up to anymore.

-Have a bunch of different physical classes based on weight, height, etc.: Not practical for many sports. Being built like Shaq is not always ideal. People want to see the best players compete against each other, not a bunch of divisions.

-But some female athletes are better than male athletes: Yes, Serena Williams is better than everybody at your local tennis club by a massive margin. She would also lose easily to the #500 ranked man in the world.

---

tennisdude818 posted...

-Have a bunch of different physical classes based on weight, height, etc.: Not practical for many sports. Being built like Shaq is not always ideal. People want to see the best players compete against each other, not a bunch of divisions.

Yes it would need to be tailored to each sport, but that's already how it works. MMA and Boxing are massively popular along with many other sports that are already "a bunch of divisions", so it's not the simple. I personally enjoy that for example a featherweight and heavyweight fight differ substantially. It's not fair for a heavyweight to fight a featherweight (the beginnings of UFC actually did this though), but seeing the best within their own division is just as enjoyable because they don't fight the same way.

---

ssjevot posted...

Yes it would need to be tailored to each sport, but that's already how it works. MMA and Boxing are massively popular along with many other sports that are already "a bunch of divisions", so it's not the simple. I personally enjoy that for example a featherweight and heavyweight fight differ substantially. It's not fair for a heavyweight to fight a featherweight (the beginnings of UFC actually did this though), but seeing the best within their own division is just as enjoyable because they don't fight the same way.

It would be extremely complicated and unnecessary in a lot if sports. Is this just to accommodate trans athletes? A much simpler solution would be to have 2 divisions: a "Cis Female" division and an "Open" division.

---

ssjevot, I think it's time for you to accept that if gPb decided you didn't play sports, then clearly you didn't play sports.

Because he is absolutely the authority on the subject

---

I mean, compared to a ciswoman, a transwoman is a borderline superhero. Unless they started transitioning at age 5, they're going to have an unfair biological advantage.

It's unfair to transwomen and I hate that. (Life's already been unfair to them by sticking them in the wrong body from the get-go.) But if there's legitimately no way to level the playing field for everyone, then it's better to be unfair to a few than to be unfair to the majority of athletes.

---

tennisdude818 posted...

It would be extremely complicated and unnecessary in a lot if sports. Is this just to accommodate trans athletes? A much simpler solution would be to have 2 divisions: a "Cis Female" division and an "Open" division.

But that gets back to the woman in the very original article, that I am unsure how many read, who was born an XX female, but is banned from women's sports for having naturally high testosterone. That's the entire thing I am basing my argument around. Your solution you just proposed wouldn't fix this thing that is apparently perceived as unfair enough they said she has to take testosterone suppressing drugs to compete.

---

In a vacuum, the reasoning is solid; what bothers me is that this is just a pretext for bigotry in other areas.

Nobody can just fucking let it be in politics. Any inch is a mile waiting to happen.

---

Skye Reynolds posted...

I mean, compared to a ciswoman, a transwoman is a borderline superhero. Unless they started transitioning at age 5, they're going to have an unfair biological advantage.

It's unfair to transwomen and I hate that. (Life's already been unfair to them by sticking them in the wrong body from the get-go.) But if there's legitimately no way to level the playing field for everyone, then it's better to be unfair to a few than to be unfair to the majority of athletes.

I agree with this. Life is unfair to people who are forced to compete in the special Olympics too, but they found a way. Something similar might work.

---

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Alright so we got this ....

Lol okay

More funny stuff from you

Your entire post reads like you didnt play sports, or you werent good so you tried to come up with some nonsense to try to make yourself feel better.

You can keep telling the people that have played sports to reread what you wrote or whatever you want to say, but end of the day your entire post was garbage and Im guessing the people agreeing with you are either agreeing because they dont like sports or they just care about the subject and not the slightest care about sports.

It would be easy to explain why the person was wrong, but literally all you did was go bullet by bullet and say "no this is wrong, you don't care about sports"

The real simple answer is that the stuff that causes human zygotes to turn into males is the same stuff that gives them all the sports advantages. There's no separation of the two.

---

Evening_Dragon posted...

The real simple answer is that the stuff that causes human zygotes to turn into males is the same stuff that gives them all the sports advantages. There's no separation of the two.

Please read the original article about the woman born female with naturally high testosterone who was banned from competing with other women.

---

CyricZ posted...

ssjevot, I think it's time for you to accept that if gPb decided you didn't play sports, then clearly you didn't play sports.

Because he is absolutely the authority on the subject

Did you not read ssjevots posts? He wants sports to be fair lol. Sports are not fair and is why they are played, to crush the competition and be the best. However there are certain aspects of humanity, such as age, sex and intelligence that should always be taken into account if not for anything else but for moralistic purposes. He's advocating the removal of those barriers, which honestly, is pretty sad. But I guess some need to punch a chick in the face or steamroll a kid to feel better about themselves.

---

BarneyBosco posted...

Did you not read ssjevots posts? He wants sports to be fair lol.

Did you read my posts? Because I don't want that and explicitly say sports aren't fair. I mean you literally just reiterate what I said in my post and then say I advocate removing barriers that I talk explicitly about.

I really don't get how so many people can completely misinterpret my post. I felt like I was being clear and yet somehow many people take the opposite meaning from it.

---

ssjevot posted...

Did you read my posts? Because I don't want that and explicitly say sports aren't fair. I mean you literally just reiterate what I said in my post and then say I advocate removing barriers that I talk explicitly about.

I really don't get how so many people can completely misinterpret my post. I felt like I was being clear and yet somehow many people take the opposite meaning from it.

You weren't clear then. What exactly are you saying? Do you want trans athletes or not? Can you answer that without being convoluted or pretentious?

---

Here is the simplistic version.

Sports are inherently unfair.

People want to divide them into divisions for various reasons to have competition among those who wouldn't be able to compete if they didn't exist.

Gender is a poor variable for dividing athletes, because the things it's a proxy for can be measured and they don't distribute exactly with gender.

This causes situations like the XX female with naturally high testosterone not being allowed to compete with other females as well as the issue with what trans athletes should do.

Therefore if we are going to divide athletes we should use objective measures we believe influence performance (such as weight class is currently used in MMA and other sports or testosterone levels, or whatever other things we want to use) rather than gender which also happens to have a lot of politics wrapped up in it and is just a predictor variable for the actual variables that affect performance.

---

I am not transphobic but a girl who used to be a guy and still has the strength of a guy should not be allowed to compete against girls. Source: see the trans who fought in mma and cracked the poor girls skull. If they want to be trans in everyday life that is fine but competition wise that defeats the purpose of separating men and women sports.

---

I don't. Just let athletes compete as long as they're capable and are not known cheaters. Its just as dumb as banning women. Its just as dumb as banning races. Its just an excuse to discriminate.


---

SauI_Goodman posted...

I am not transphobic but a girl who used to be a guy and still has the strength of a guy should not be allowed to compete against girls. Source: see the trans who fought in mma and cracked the poor girls skull. If they want to be trans in everyday life that is fine but competition wise that defeats the purpose of separating men and women sports.

Which is bull. There are mixed sports. Why do we need to separate people in order to let them compete just because of gender and some archaic belief that one gender is automatically better then the other?

There are women out there who are better athletes then some men. Men who are better athletes then some women. And trans who are better athletes then some of either. It depends on how long they've been doing said sport and how much time they can devote to it.

It doesn't make sense to separate divisions on anything less then age and experience.

As an example, my relatives have been playing on mixed soccer teams for ages.

---

Lil_Bit83 posted...

Which is bull. There are mixed sports. Why do we need to separate people in order to let them compete just because of gender and some archaic belief that one gender is automatically better then the other

So if we got rid of the wnba and just had the nba where men and women can be on the same team, how many of those female players do you think would end up on pro teams?

---

Lil_Bit83 posted...

It depends on how long they've been doing said sport and how much time they can devote to it.

That's objectively wrong. Biology is a massive factor in every single sport. Which aspects matter and how much differ depending on the sport.

---

ssjevot is right in that an ideal world that we would break down sporta competitions based around more specific physical characteristics than simply gender. It is something that is already done in combat sports, by disaggregating by weight clas. to create more equitable competitive environments. If they didn't the there would only be heavyweight champions.

The problem is that there most sports can only be logistically disaggregated so far and be sustainable. I mean could we get ideal competition if we further divided out our competition levels by bone density or testosterone levels? Probably. But is that logistically feasible? Probably not. I mean even at a professional level they can only support the gender-divided leagues and even then those are hardly equitable. Dividing them up more would just create a bunch of sub-leagues that largely wouldn't gain attention or support.

The same issue applies at school levels. There are only so many facilities, available coaches, and students. Which means you can only disaggregate so far.

For the most part, gender-divided sports is a reasonable dividing point that creates mostly equitable and logistically-feasible leagues. The difficulty is that there is still a lot of learning as to how to incorporate athletes who are not cis-gendered in a way that is both fair and not demeaning.

I'm of the opinion that they should allow transitioned athletes compete in the league of their identified gender and see how it plays out. Then tweak it from there. I do not think making a sweeping ban is the right move.


---

Can someone who likes gender segregation please address the issue of the woman with naturally high testosterone banned from competing with women that the original article discusses? Going to sleep now, but hoping to read something insightful regarding that when I wake up.

---

Lil_Bit83 posted...

I don't. Just let athletes compete as long as they're capable and are not known cheaters. Its just as dumb as banning women. Its just as dumb as banning races. Its just an excuse to discriminate.

It is not discriminatory at all, in fact, it gives women a chance to excel and dominate in their field. I am sorry but no top female athlete in their sport is going to compete with the top male. This is just a fact. Gender has become such a taboo word for no reason, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with wanting to be the top male or top female and there are legit differences my man. As mean as it sounds but this is just the the nature of life, it is unfair, I believe Idaho made the right call here. They simply have too much biological advantages in order to make it a fair game.

For fun, mixed is fine. Mixed in your average Joe like me is fine. Hell, I grappled a lady and she kicked my ass and made me tap 6 times clean. Sports is a competition and inherently designed to discover the creme le crop of said activity and by separating it by gender it also allows Women to also bust their ass off, try their hardest and dominate. To be the top woman in the world is just as cool as being the top male and I'll even say it creates awesome variety in sports.

---

Transphobia on my CE? And like, well over a week late from the laws passing.

Jeez. Old CE at least would have talked this to death again with the same points that don't actually mean what they think it does because they don't understand the science behind gender to begin with.

"Trans women are smashing athletic records" yeah, no. The only categories where that's happening is them cutting a few seconds off things like bike races in the 40+ age categories. Heck, that one black girl from like 2 years back didn't even come close to the state record for track sprinting events for girls. And then she lost last year to both girls suing the disctrict and the girls refused to drop the cases because it was never about them actually losing to a trans girl, it was about discrimination.

As for other records. I mean. Hey, anyone wanna see a list of transgender women in the Olympics? Want me to post the list again?

Hell, committees ruled against Caster Semenya for most world events on the basis of her testosterone levels and she's intersex, not trans.

If we want to discuss people who were born with innate (yet somehow not unfair) advantages? Look at Michael Phelps. Wingspan was 6'7 while he's 6'4, and it was proven that he produces less than half as much lactic acid as his competition.

As for that bone density thing, being on testosterone blockers, as well as being on estrogen supplements? Generally, transgender women are at increased risks of osteoporosis in their lifetime than cis women in their same age group. :l Also the fact that historically, race science was big on pointing out that people of African descent had bigger skeletons than Caucasians. So like. Congrats on using race science as an argument against minorities?

---

For the record, if you say "I think this minority group isn't actually worth equal treatment" then you're full shit when you say you're not phobic against them. And if you say that trans women competing isn't fair to women, well. The issue is that you don't consider them women, which is explicit transphobia.

Don't bother @ing me by the way I have it blocked for anyone who isn't my friend on here because I get hounded with them way too much any time I post in these topics.

---

You're being far too aggressive and judgemental for an actual discussion to take place, reel it in a bit if you want people to engage you. This has been mostly a civil topic and now you're calling people a bunch of transphobics with no weight to your claims. Hate it or not, this is a hot topic and there are no clear answers to it yet. It still needs to be discussed.

Anyway, keep it civil.

---

no i dont agree. and i know that is the right answer

i dont blame the people who agree though, humans need to see each other progress slowly before they all come to the same bright conclusion. there's gonna be a time where a new youth looks back at us like how we look at our racist boomer parents history. and i hope by then y;all shifted attitudes, or yall be exactly like them hahaha

---

AirFresh posted...

You're being far too aggressive and judgemental for an actual discussion to take place, reel it in a bit if you want people to engage you. This has been mostly a civil topic and now you're calling people a bunch of transphobics with no weight to your claims. Hate it or not, this is a hot topic and there are no clear answers to it yet. It still needs to be discussed.

Anyway, keep it civil.

There's a pretty clear answer and it's to not discriminate against an entire group of minorities. And like, "we're being civil, just denying equality to an entire group of people based on one characteristic" is effing hilarious, cognitive dissonance is a hell of a thing.

What "weight" do you want, would you ask the same of someone if they said that a woman was being sexist for saying something about men and pigs?

---

Anyone remember when we had "Negro Leagues" because black people had an "unfair advantage"?

Still waiting on those numbers, by the way.

---

gunplagirl posted...

There's a pretty clear answer and it's to not discriminate against an entire group of minorities. And like, "we're being civil, just denying equality to an entire group of people based on one characteristic" is effing hilarious, cognitive dissonance is a hell of a thing.

What "weight" do you want, would you ask the same of someone if they said that a woman was being sexist for saying something about men and pigs?

So are you actually claiming the 179 people who voted in agreement are ignorant and transphobic?

It's a genuine physical advantage and it's not just one basic characteristic. It's also causing resentment and drama between feminists and the LGBTQ but that's just because they are all pigs, right?

It's pretty clear cut that I don't think you actually really care about sports, you care about inclusion but the simple fact is sports will never be all inclusive (on a professional level) because that goes against the very nature of the activity. There's for fun and there is world record based activities and that's why you saw no trans-athelete participate in the 2016 Olympics despite it being legal.

---

This dumb topic again

---

AirFresh posted...

So are you actually claiming the 179 people who voted in agreement are ignorant and transphobic?

It's a genuine physical advantage and it's not just one basic characteristic. It's also causing resentment and drama between feminists and the LGBTQ but that's just because they are all pigs, right?

It's pretty clear cut that I don't think you actually really care about sports, you care about inclusion but the simple fact is sports will never be all inclusive (on a professional level) because that goes against the very nature of the activity. There's for fun and there is world record based activities and that's why you saw no trans-athelete participate in the 2016 Olympics despite it being legal.

Ah, an argument ad populum. "It's a popular position, so it must be right!"
It's hilarious watching you scold a trans woman for being angry or undecorous or whatever because ya'll politely agreed discriminating against trans women was fine because it gives you good tummy feels or whatever.

Trans-woman Mary Gregory got her powerlifting records revoked after the USPA ruled it was unfair. When I ask powerlifting and Olympic lifting athlete girls how they feel about it they say it isnt fair to let transitioned men lift in their bracket.

They have more of a say than some out of shape, unathletic types here, whove never competed, talking when they have no idea what theyre saying.

---

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Ah, an argument ad populum. "It's a popular position, so it must be right!"
It's hilarious watching you scold a trans woman for being angry or undecorous or whatever because ya'll politely agreed discriminating against trans women was fine because it gives you good tummy feels or whatever.

She isn't really bringing much discussion to the table, just labeling people out of rage. It's a hot topic for discussion because it's something that needs to be discussed. There are genuine advantages and there is animosity being gained from that, and women are tending to be scared to say much because they will be labeled as biggots.

Personally, I think the Olympic guidelines are pretty fair.

The new guidelines require only that trans woman athletes declare their gender and not change that assertion for four years, and demonstrate a testosterone level of less than 10 nanomoles/liter for at least one year prior to competition and throughout the period of eligibility. Athletes who transitioned from female to male were allowed to compete without restriction.

However in the majority of highschool and early college affairs this is simply not the case. Exeptions, sure. Sports are not inclusive as much as people who don't care about them want them to be.

---

Yikearinos!!!

Lots of transphobes and their ilk ITT.

---

SH_expert44 posted...

Yikearinos!!!

Lots of transphobes and their ilk ITT.

Lots of idiots who don't understand how sports work and the huge differences between male and female biology.
---

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/15/mary-gregory-transgender-powerlifter-stripped-of-w/

Here is a good and fair read on the matter.

---

I used to train a little bit of BJJ, never seriously at all in a competitive sense, I never aspired to be anything more than an amateur hobbyist. But I went to a serious gym with people who competed in the UFC and international grappling like Abu Dhabi or the Mundials.

Anyway there if you're familiar with BJ Penn, he originally burst in the scene for winning Mundials as a black belt after only training for four years. One of the women at my gym did that in the same time frame. She finished third at Abu Dhabi, beating Megumi Fuji in the process. She was, I think, 44-4 against women in grappling. She wasn't just world class but probably the best in her weight class as a woman (maybe ever). She had a 9-8 record against middle competition dudes and that's not a knock on her it is really impressive.

---

ssjevot posted...

I think gender based divisions in sports is kind of dumb to begin with. I would prefer it be weight classes like they have in MMA for instance, but it doesn't need to be weight per se. It could be based on bone density, or androgens, or any number of criteria. The gender one is pretty bad, because all of the advantages that are associated with males are on a spectrum and a male isn't guaranteed to have high levels of testosterone, a larger heart, bigger lungs, denser bones, more muscle mass, etc.

The thing with athletics is they are inherently unfair and a form of social Darwinism in terms of success. You can't just say "oh this athlete trained hard and that's why they're the best", it's very disingenuous, because we know certain genetic advantages are required, because no pro-athletes aren't training very hard. People might pull out exceptions in basketball like Spud Webb, and say short people can compete too, genetics doesn't matter! Ignoring that this individual despite being exceptionally short by professional basketball standards, was only slightly below average height.

You can't make sports fair, because they are unfair by nature, and the whole gender division is just an arbitrary attempt at fairness. It's no different than having a short league for basketball or weight divisions for fighting.

Is this copypasta?

---

AirFresh posted...

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/15/mary-gregory-transgender-powerlifter-stripped-of-w/

Here is a good and fair read on the matter.

By good and fair read you mean the article is just repeating the facts, horrible as they are?

Jeez. Couldn't possibly imagine why your go to "fair article" is about a trans woman who had allegedly cheated on a drug test.

---

Politics posted...

Is this copypasta?

It is, I've seen that bjj opener before

---

gunplagirl posted...

By good and fair read you mean the article is just repeating the facts, horrible as they are?

Jeez. Couldn't possibly imagine why your go to "fair article" is about a trans woman who had allegedly cheated on a drug test.

How are they horrible?

---

AirFresh posted...

How are they horrible?

So is "separate yet equal" not horrible?

---