Current Events > Trans weightlifter Laurel Hubbard set to make history at Tokyo Olympics

(+) Yeah! (+)

Probably the one and only issue Trump got right was this issue in womens sports.

Once again, HGH and steroids in of itself, is illegal in every sport.

---

Josiah_Is_Back posted...

Do you think you can really reverse 35 years of testosterone-fueled muscular development?

aka "my feels dictate this, not your wicked science!"

Josiah_Is_Back posted...

Do you think you can really reverse 35 years of testosterone-fueled muscular development?

Hey if you've got a problem with their standards, take it up with the IOC, not us.

Agnostic420 posted...

Probably the one and only issue Trump got right

Honestly what am I supposed to think of people who frame the argument in this manner?

---

i think of all the sports people bring up where trans persons have an "advantage", weightlifting would probably be the most noticeable imo

---

Go strong woman, go:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig

---

CyricZ posted...

Hey if you've got a problem with their standards, take it up with the IOC, not us.

Honestly what am I supposed to think of people who frame the argument in this manner?

Have you ever seen Gone With the Wind?

Because frankly, my dear, I dont give a damn.

---

I hope she does well.

---

Musourenka posted...

I hope she does well.

i hope she wins it all

---

pinky0926 posted...

The issue is NOT that Laurel Hubbard is winning. She might just be a top tier elite athlete. The issue is, how good was she before she transitioned?

Because if we've worked out a fair playing field, then her stats should be roughly about the same (correcting for training, lifestyle etc) to before she transitioned, relative to the playing field. If not, questions are fair.

She never competed before transition.

Also they had a bad injury in 2018 and it's unknown if they're even going to compete. This may end up being a non-issue during this olympic run.

---

Funny how no one answered my question

---

Josiah_Is_Back posted...

Do you think you can really reverse 35 years of testosterone-fueled muscular development?

Science is showing yes. There is still the question of height and proportion of limbs though with a few other things; but yeah you kill your speed and power without the testosterone. After 2 years those all slope off and it's essentially equal footing.

---

I'm here for history in the making we should all be proud of ourselves for how far we have come in accepting others

---

Josiah_Is_Back posted...

Do you think you can really reverse 35 years of testosterone-fueled muscular development?

This is why we need to support people transitioning 20+ years earlier than that. Figure kids out early so they grow into their body as adults.

I know first hand that it really sucks when your physical and mental development are hampered well into your adult years. You wind up playing catchup and it feels like your entire life up to that point has been wasted.

---

ShyOx posted...

Science is showing yes. There is still the question of height and proportion of limbs though with a few other things; but yeah you kill your speed and power without the testosterone. After 2 years those all slope off and it's essentially equal footing.

So it's really a matter of how much time has passed

---

Agnostic420 posted...

Probably the one and only issue Trump got right was this issue in womens sports.

Once again, HGH and steroids in of itself, is illegal in every sport.

But no one is complaining about trans men. Trans women transitioning is all about getting rid of the manly advantages.

---

Josiah_Is_Back posted...

So it's really a matter of how much time has passed

Yep.

They used candidates from the army and other armed forces; they have to take tests every 6 months to prove fitness and therefore were a ready made solid metric for basic data. The general consensus is that after two years you've lost the benefits testosterone provides. You're also forced to keep your testosterone levels under like .05, while women generally have testosterone at around .12

So in a way you're hampered with even less testosterone.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

But no one is complaining about trans men. Trans women transitioning is all about getting rid of the manly advantages.

Exactly, trans men aren't showing to be any kind of issue, honestly they're getting stomped because they lack the benefit of competing in higher profile fields. It's not just the physical side, societally and culturally we push far less for women to be into sports; men's basketball is a much more developed game. Competing at a higher level makes you a better athlete.

---

Revnir posted...

The first to compete?

But wait Fox News told me trans athletes have smashed all olympic records already

I thought caitlyn jenner was the first

---

Maybe the olympics need a trans category?

---

skermac posted...

I thought caitlyn jenner was the first

I imagine the general consensus is that she doesn't count because she didn't compete post-transition.

---

CyricZ posted...

Hey if you've got a problem with their standards, take it up with the IOC, not us.

Didn't you spend a whole topic arguing with others about transgender women being in regular sports?

Like, what the fuck? Hypocrite much?
---

Slayer_22 posted...

Didn't you spend a whole topic arguing with others about transgender women being in regular sports?

Like, what the fuck? Hypocrite much?

If you paid attention in the previous topic, I'd mentioned that many sport organizations allow trans women with conditions and that the trans community has largely accepted those conditions.

The IOC is the same.

So by all means, what's the hypocrisy?

---

Trans women have been allowed to compete for over a decade. Let her.

---

ShyOx posted...

Science is showing yes. There is still the question of height and proportion of limbs though with a few other things; but yeah you kill your speed and power without the testosterone. After 2 years those all slope off and it's essentially equal footing.

There's science that says after 3 years transwomen still have more LBM, greater strength, and greater muscle cross section than ciswomen

---

skermac posted...

Maybe the olympics need a trans category?

So she wins by defualt. That wouldn't be a fair compramise if there were enough trans athletes to make it work.

---

Dathrowed1 posted...

There's science that says after 3 years transwomen still have more LBM, greater strength, and greater muscle cross section than ciswomen

Genuine question, do you have a source for this? I'd like to read it.

---

Dathrowed1 posted...

There's science that says after 3 years transwomen still have more LBM, greater strength, and greater muscle cross section than ciswomen

And more that says it's insignificant and not enough to give them a clear advantage

---

CyricZ posted...

If you paid attention in the previous topic, I'd mentioned that many sport organizations allow trans women with conditions and that the trans community has largely accepted those conditions.

The IOC is the same.

So by all means, what's the hypocrisy?

Because you care strongly about it, why don't you go up to major corporations with your issues?
---

NightMarishPie posted...

Genuine question, do you have a source for this? I'd like to read it.

Here is a systemic review:

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/28/bjsports-2020-103106

---

Again this has been allowed in the olympics for a while and I suppose their decision. I have a feeling she won't win a medal.

---

creativerealms posted...

And more that says it's insignificant and not enough to give them a clear advantage

where are links to all this science?

---

Laurel performed well below average pre-transition. The only good showing was in '98 juniors. Post-transition, she competed in her frist world championship and broke records. If you look at her record now, she's #1. Every time.

This gon' be great.

ShyOx posted...

She never competed before transition.

Absolutely false. She competed as Gavin Hubbard.

xGhostchantx posted...

Laurel performed well below average pre-transition. The only good showing was in '98 juniors. Post-transition, she competed in her frist world championship and broke records. If you look at her record now, she's #1. Every time.

Now that's what I call female empowerment!

---

xGhostchantx posted...

Laurel performed well below average pre-transition. The only good showing was in '98 juniors. Post-transition, she competed in her frist world championship and broke records. If you look at her record now, she's #1. Every time.

I remember her first championship. Her opponents' faces screamed "we got shafted"

---

I dont think she will win, but the principle still remains.
---

legendary_zell posted...

People don't care about any other type of unfairness when it comes to women's sports, this is the only thing they pay attention to. Because they know it's a soft spot and lets them express transphobia without giving away the game like if they wanted to deny a trans person education, employment, or housing.

No its just easier to recognize and address this than it is to talk about cis female athletes abusing SARMS, steroids, and other PEDs at increasing rates. One is easy to prove, the other isnt

---

Topics like these bring out bigots and transphobes.

There is no legit reason to be against this or any trans athlete competing. Your feelings aren't a legit reason either.

---

Dathrowed1 posted...

Here is a systemic review:

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/28/bjsports-2020-103106

Thanks
Results Twenty-four studies were identified and reviewed. Transwomen experienced significant decreases in all parameters measured, with different time courses noted. After 4 months of hormone therapy, transwomen have Hgb/HCT levels equivalent to those of cisgender women. After 12 months of hormone therapy, significant decreases in measures of strength, LBM and muscle area are observed. The effects of longer duration therapy (36 months) in eliciting further decrements in these measures are unclear due to paucity of data. Notwithstanding, values for strength, LBM and muscle area in transwomen remain above those of cisgender women, even after 36 months of hormone therapy.
Conclusion In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy

---

Dakimakura posted...

I can't believe so many people are against women's sports becoming entertaining.

This is weightlifting. Its never going to be entertaining.

Mr_Karate_II posted...

Topics like these bring out bigots and transphobes.

There is no legit reason to be against this or any trans athlete competing. Your feelings aren't a legit reason either.

You know except the innate advantage someone who has the frame and muscular remnants of a male giving an objective advantage over other women in the sports. Remember these people are competing in world class levels of weightlifting for money and titles. What this essentially equates to is an enhanced lifter competing in a non-enhanced class and then when they win it being accepted as legitimate; It is directly cheating.

Though I think its just going to take some MTF real world scenario where they come in and break all previous PRs for women for people to really start to put in rules for this sort of thing. So far such an example hasnt happened in the real practical world.

It is perfectly reasonable to believe in equality and accept and respect transgenders in society while also acknowledging innate physiological differences that effect physical performance at an elite level.
---

EndOfDiscOne posted...

It's transphobic to say "former man"

why?

ROOTFayth posted...

why?

Id imagine because it suggests that the MtF person was once 100% male, rather than a woman trapped in a mans body.

That said, if thats the case MtF should be equally offensive so Im not sure. Both just seem like shorthand alternatives to the more wordy options (like the one above), so I dont think either is inherently transphobic.

In conclusion: *shrugs*

Kami_no_Kami posted...

Id imagine because it suggests that the MtF person was once 100% male, rather than a woman trapped in a mans body.

That said, if thats the case MtF should be equally offensive so Im not sure. Both just seem like shorthand alternatives to the more wordy options (like the one above), so I dont think either is inherently transphobic.

In conclusion: *shrugs*

And "assigned male at birth" is how you're supposed to refer to cataloging what sex the person was born as, because they might be different gender later on, but then they'll correct you if you use gender and sex interchangeably. Ultimately the goal is to eliminate sex as a concept, because apparently that's a better world for trans people.

---

so it's not inherently transphobic but it's to avoid hurting their feelings, got it

The same people that want rules that prevent trans women from wrestling against cis women are inadvertently backing rules that say trans men should compete against cis women.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/25/transgender-wrestler-mack-beggs-wins-texas-girls-title

They don't care about women's sports. They just want to exclude trans people from something else.

@gunplagirl

---

Just let it happen

You can't give someone their female ID and tell them they can't compete. It would be unfair to them.

You also can't form a trans league because there's not enough trans athletes for it and why should they be segregated anyway, they're people.

So while science definitely says they have an advantage...it doesn't matter. They're people with human rights and those rights allow them to compete.

---

I guess best way to allow it would be to allow ciswomen to use steroids while trans are not allowed to, this would even out the field maybe

ROOTFayth posted...

I guess best way to allow it would be to allow ciswomen to use steroids while trans are not allowed to, this would even out the field maybe

Still a bad idea since those steroids will cause long term harm and possible early deaths.

---

Monolith1676 posted...

Still a bad idea since those steroids will cause long term harm and possible early deaths.

doesn't matter as long as they're aware of the risks, it's the same with all drugs, Advil can cause long term harm and possible early deaths, they'll just have to decide if the risk/reward is worth it

it's just unfair otherwise