Transgender Athletes

[NotThatSoph]

Do you feel that a mountain is being made out of a molehill regarding Lia Thomas?

Depends what you mean. If she has an unfair advantage, that is something that should be talked about.

In general, though, with people using her to talk about trans women dominating women's sports, then absolutely. Here we have one trans woman performing at a high level, and she's not dominating. Her 500m win was 9 seconds behind Ledecky's record.

 

[VorZakone]

Depends what you mean. If she has an unfair advantage, that is something that should be talked about.

In general, though, with people using her to talk about trans women dominating women's sports, then absolutely. Here we have one trans woman performing at a high level, and she's not dominating. Her 500m win was 9 seconds behind Ledecky's record.

I don't find this to be a convincing counter argument. Today a record isn't broken, tomorrow it might.

A Lia Thomas is already doing very well for herself. Should we really wait until an even better transwoman comes along and shatters all records before concerns about transwomen athletes are deemed valid?

I think the bigger point here is that the trend has been set that transwomen are competing with biological females and the question is whether this trend is good or bad. I myself am conflicted on it. But there are already biological females losing to transwomen at this moment.

 

[Stack]

I don't find this to be a convincing counter argument. Today a record isn't broken, tomorrow it might.

A Lia Thomas is already doing very well for herself. Should we really wait until an even better transwoman comes along and shatters all records before concerns about transwomen athletes are deemed valid?

I think the bigger point here is that the trend has been set that transwomen are competing with biological females and the question is whether this trend is good or bad. I myself am conflicted on it. But there are already biological females losing to transwomen at this moment.

One of the big battles is keeping the debates on this away from the vitriolic and keeping them sensible and balanced. Lots of people in this thread are doing exactly that. One fear I have is the longer the decision making process takes or the working out of how to handle this issue takes the easier it will be for the nasty side of the debate to appear. This needs to be an issue that is tackled coherently and also quickly by the authorities.

 

[NotThatSoph]

I don't find this to be a convincing counter argument. Today a record isn't broken, tomorrow it might.

A Lia Thomas is already doing very well for herself. Should we really wait until an even better transwoman comes along and shatters all records before concerns about transwomen athletes are deemed valid?

I think the bigger point here is that the trend has been set that transwomen are competing with biological females and the question is whether this trend is good or bad. I myself am conflicted on it. But there are already biological females losing to transwomen at this moment.

Given I already said the opposite I think you know my answer.

 

[Vitro]

Depends what you mean. If she has an unfair advantage, that is something that should be talked about.

In general, though, with people using her to talk about trans women dominating women's sports, then absolutely. Here we have one trans woman performing at a high level, and she's not dominating. Her 500m win was 9 seconds behind Ledecky's record.

What do you think would have to happen for you to change your mind on this issue? I assume by your answer, it could be if there was sufficient evidence to show there is an unfair advantage?

Note: For the purposes of clarity, I’m undecided on the issue. It’s very complex and will be hard to solve.

 

[NotThatSoph]

What do you think would have to happen for you to change your mind on this issue? I assume by your answer, it could be if there was sufficient evidence to show there is an unfair advantage?

Note: For the purposes of clarity, I’m undecided on the issue. It’s very complex and will be hard to solve.

Sure, something like that. I don't know enough to have a general opinion about trans women and sports, but I'm very uneasy about looking at specific trans athlethes to draw general conclusions.

 

[Carolina Red]

Here we have one trans woman performing at a high level, and she's not dominating.

Literally defeated 2 Olympic silver medalists en route to a national championship. That is a dominant performance.

If she has an unfair advantage, that is something that should be talked about.

She does.

Even if Thomas has a physical advantage, the fact that she was supposedly ranked 554 4+ years ago does not mean that she would be expected to finish at 554 today. These are clickbait numbers.

They’re not clickbait. They’re what we have to go on for comparison for that one individual. Can’t make numbers up that don’t exist.

 

[sullydnl]

Even if trans-women are allowed to compete, it's hard to see how they could be in any way exceptional without it being a constant issue.

Take the boxer Katie Taylor, for example. Undisputed lightweight champion, pound-for-pound the best female boxer in the world, holds all four world titles, etc. In her case, she's just regarded as an exceptional boxer. She may have physical advantages over some other competitors that helps her be exceptional, but that's just seen as part of the normal advantages some people are lucky to have in sport. Obviously if she was competing against male boxers she wouldn't do near as well, but that isn't an issue because nobody is thinking of her in terms of male boxers.

Whereas if she was a trans-woman achieving the exact same exceptional results it would be seen as a massive problem and would attract heavy criticism, with heavy focus then falling on any physical advantages she had over other competitors and less credit towards her skillset as a boxer. And the fact that she was nowhere near as good when compared to male boxers would then be highlighted, just as Thomas' results against male athletes have been.

In other words it isn't just whether trans athletes have a physical advantage that's the problem. Because there are a lot of non-trans athletes who hold physical advantages over their competitors and that's just seen as part of what makes people good as sport. It's the fact that this type of physical advantage is fundamentally seen as unfair in a way other sources of physical advantage aren't, even if it falls well within the realms of advantages "gifted" non-trans athletes may also have.

And even if trans athletes were freely allowed to compete, I'm not sure they'd ever get past that fundamental inequality. In a genuine equal competition they'd have as much right to be the best as anyone else, but that isn't really ever going to be the case.

 

[horsechoker]

Is all this just overblown in the sense that very few people are transgender and very few of those who are become professional athletes?

 

[Carolina Red]

Is all this just overblown in the sense that very few people are transgender and very few of those who are become professional athletes?

It isn’t overblown to the people who lose to them in athletic competition, as has been pointed out many times.

 

[horsechoker]

It isn’t overblown to the people who lose to them in athletic competition, as has been pointed out many times.

That's the nature of sports though isn't it? There's always someone bigger, faster, more skillful, more intelligent, more determined, richer, luckier.

I feel people are worrying that trans people will simply dominate every sport.

 

[Carolina Red]

That's the nature of sports though isn't it? There's always someone bigger, faster, more skillful, more intelligent, more determined, richer, luckier.

I feel people are worrying that trans people will simply dominate every sport.

No, not when the sport is supposed to be divided between biological men and biological women.

 

[horsechoker]

No, not when the sport is supposed to be divided between biological men and biological women.

But sport isn't divided as so because trans people are allowed to compete in various sports so it's a case by case basis.

 

[jojojo]

Is all this just overblown in the sense that very few people are transgender and very few of those who are become professional athletes?

It's overblown in terms of current numbers of transgender athletes competing - though it won't be for those involved in the competition or girls looking for inspiration/reassurance from the competition. The issue is that sport is attempting to become more inclusive - opening competitions to women who would previously have been excluded. We are seeing the start of the test cases, as rules are moved/eased, but with how the rules currently stand (or don't) there will be more high profile examples and more test cases.

Simultaneously, physical transitions are happening earlier and definitions of what constitutes physical transition (surgery? pharmaceutical?) are changing. Throw in more complex issues like self-declaration without any physical transition and gender fluidity - the lines aren't clear. The lines have been wobbly in the past, we're now looking at what happens when all the old lines are being deleted or questioned.

At the elite level, I believe women's sport needs boundaries to survive. Drawing fair (in a sporting sense) boundaries on a sport by sport, event by event, competitor by competitor basis is just about impossible. I think rules (and exclusions) are going to be needed in most sports at least at the elite/pro level - and I suspect they have to be simpler to apply, which will also mean fairly arbitrary and driven by birth sex or even chromosomes rather than individual capability.

 

[arnie_ni]

It's overblown in terms of current numbers of transgender athletes competing - though it won't be for those involved in the competition or girls looking for inspiration/reassurance from the competition. The issue is that sport is attempting to become more inclusive - opening competitions to women who would previously have been excluded. We are seeing the start of the test cases, as rules are moved/eased, but with how the rules currently stand (or don't) there will be more high profile examples and more test cases.

Simultaneously, physical transitions are happening earlier and definitions of what constitutes physical transition (surgery? pharmaceutical?) are changing. Throw in more complex issues like self-declaration without any physical transition and gender fluidity - the lines aren't clear. The lines have been wobbly in the past, we're now looking at what happens when all the old lines are being deleted or questioned.

At the elite level, I believe women's sport needs boundaries to survive. Drawing fair (in a sporting sense) boundaries on a sport by sport, event by event, competitor by competitor basis is just about impossible. I think rules (and exclusions) are going to be needed in most sports at least at the elite/pro level - and I suspect they have to be simpler to apply, which will also mean fairly arbitrary and driven by birth sex or even chromosomes rather than individual capability.

This here sums up my thoughts alot more eloquently than I ever could. Good post

 

[Bobski]

It isn’t overblown to the people who lose to them in athletic competition, as has been pointed out many times.

Yep, not going to blame trans athletes for wanting to compete or those who lose to them for feeling it is an unfair situation.

 

[Gandalf]

That's the nature of sports though isn't it? There's always someone bigger, faster, more skillful, more intelligent, more determined, richer, luckier.

I feel people are worrying that trans people will simply dominate every sport.

The worry is they will dominate women in every sport, men such as myself as always have nothing to be concerned about. Women have had a few thousand years of that already and having had the temerity to secure some rights for themselves over the last 100 years this is one of the ways those rights are already being eroded and the worst aspect of it all is that any attempt to open a dialogue about it typically ends with the social media mob screaming TERF and trying to cancel the women raising the issue. It is a sensitive subject I understand and I am fully in favour of people living their lives as they wish but I do feel that the current environment makes this a one way street with women as ever on the receiving end of all of the hate and abuse.

 

[Carolina Red]

But sport isn't divided as so because trans people are allowed to compete in various sports so it's a case by case basis.

And this case should have resulted in this individual not being allowed to compete.

 

[Carolina Red]

It's overblown in terms of current numbers of transgender athletes competing - though it won't be for those involved in the competition or girls looking for inspiration/reassurance from the competition. The issue is that sport is attempting to become more inclusive - opening competitions to women who would previously have been excluded. We are seeing the start of the test cases, as rules are moved/eased, but with how the rules currently stand (or don't) there will be more high profile examples and more test cases.

Simultaneously, physical transitions are happening earlier and definitions of what constitutes physical transition (surgery? pharmaceutical?) are changing. Throw in more complex issues like self-declaration without any physical transition and gender fluidity - the lines aren't clear. The lines have been wobbly in the past, we're now looking at what happens when all the old lines are being deleted or questioned.

At the elite level, I believe women's sport needs boundaries to survive. Drawing fair (in a sporting sense) boundaries on a sport by sport, event by event, competitor by competitor basis is just about impossible. I think rules (and exclusions) are going to be needed in most sports at least at the elite/pro level - and I suspect they have to be simpler to apply, which will also mean fairly arbitrary and driven by birth sex or even chromosomes rather than individual capability.

Well said

 

[Penna]

Great post @jojojo. Sums it up well.

 

[R'hllor]

 

[padr81]

I don't know why sport doesn't just switch to an xx and xy division at this stage honestly. Its not trampling on anyones rights and it keeps both trans men and trans women in with a shot. While trans women benefit heavily from the current rules, for trans men in some sports its just downright dangerous.

I'm a big mma/boxing dude and recently the Alanna McLouglin fight drummed up a bit of controversy. Clearly outskilled and outmatched but she won purely on genetics and an uneven playfield. While sport is always an uneven playfield to an extent genetically there is a clear difference in xy vs xx as we've seen everytime they've met in competitive sport. You only have to look at the Williams sisters vs the world no.200 man, the USWNT vs a team of kids etc...

I really don't see why sport isn't moving towards xy vs xx for division.

 

[Yorkeontop]

I don't know why sport doesn't just switch to an xx and xy division at this stage honestly. Its not trampling on anyones rights and it keeps both trans men and trans women in with a shot. While trans women benefit heavily from the current rules, for trans men in some sports its just downright dangerous.

I'm a big mma/boxing dude and recently the Alanna McLouglin fight drummed up a bit of controversy. Clearly outskilled and outmatched but she won purely on genetics and an uneven playfield. While sport is always an uneven playfield to an extent genetically there is a clear difference in xy vs xx as we've seen everytime they've met in competitive sport. You only have to look at the Williams sisters vs the world no.200 man, the USWNT vs a team of kids etc...

I really don't see why sport isn't moving towards xy vs xx for division.

It will happen eventually, the climate of political correctness has still to even itself out. This will be a non issue in the future.

 

[padr81]

It will happen eventually, the climate of political correctness has still to even itself out. This will be a non issue in the future.

Its a supremely tough one because you don't want to make people feel different or outcast or whatever and it feels harsh to tell one woman "You go here" while another is "You go here" but its very much the only solution that feels safe to me.

 

[The Purley King]

Its a supremely tough one because you don't want to make people feel different or outcast or whatever and it feels harsh to tell one woman "You go here" while another is "You go here" but its very much the only solution that feels safe to me.

It’s completely fair. If you want to be a professional sports person you compete in the category you were born into.
You want to complain about it go ahead but it won’t do any good and it’s not infringing any rights at all.
There are plenty of professions that you can’t join due to some quirk of genetics. Like if you are colour blind you can’t be an airline pilot. Until recently you had to be over a certain height to be a copper etc.
The whole thing is completely idiotic with a very straightforward solution and yet everyone skirts around it trying not to tread on any eggshells.

 

[Wibble]

I'm not sure there is a solution that works for all. The primary concern is that women's sport is potentially compromised if someone who has transitioned competes and has a big advantage due to them originally physically developing as a male. However, making transgender people compete in a special category is really saying that being transgender is a disability whereas para competitions is about showcasing ability, so this would be very different. I'm really not sure how you accommodate everyone in this circumstance. If you can't it will result in trans people losing out (again) which also not a great outcome.

 

[MadMike]

I'm not sure there is a solution that works for all. The primary concern is that women's sport is potentially compromised if someone who has transitioned competes and has a big advantage due to them originally physically developing as a male. However, making transgender people compete in a special category is really saying that being transgender is a disability whereas para competitions is about showcasing ability, so this would be very different. I'm really not sure how you accommodate everyone in this circumstance. If you can't it will result in trans people losing out (again) which also not a great outcome.

It's not. But is it worse than biological women (who are 50% of the population) losing out. Arguably not.

 

[Wibble]

It's not. But is it worse than biological women (who are 50% of the population) losing out. Arguably not.

I don't have the answers but the least shit option is never very satisfying. And it is such a hard thing to conceptualise as it invariably involves whataboutisms. Which in some cases are from genuinely wanting to examine the issues and in some cases are disingenuous and/or bigoted "its a bloke in a dress innit" attempts to insult and diminish.

 

[Arruda]

I don't think anyone has changed gender to win at sports.

It's worth noting that if someone realises they're trans early, are given proper care and support and they're allowed to transition, should they wish to do so, then they wouldn't have an advantage or disadvantage, compared to those who identify with the gender they were assigned at birth. The changes that set men and women apart in terms of physical capability happen during puberty, and we have the means to alter how a body develops.

I don't know what your scientific background is, if any, but I wouldn't trust a sweeping statement like that even if it came from an expert in the area.

Differences between sexes go far beyond a couple of hormones, which is essentialy the "means to alter how a body develops" you refer to in your last sentence. Plus, the administration of exogenous hormones (or hormone blocking) doesn't exactly replicate the "natural" rhythm of things anyway, as any insulin-dependent diabetic will tell you.

Men have a chromosome that codifies come 50 or 60 odd proteins which are absent in women. Women have different X chromosomes in different cells of their body (genetic mosaicism) by virtue of havint to inactivate - at random - half of their X chromosome material, which would otherwised be doubled. For somene that understands a bit of genetics, embryology, physiology and other medical sciences, it seems ver unlikely that the differences in physical capability don't stem from a multitude of genetic mechanisms (and others, though for this debate it's the genetics we care about).

 

[Halftrack]

I don't know what your scientific background is, if any, but I wouldn't trust a sweeping statement like that even if it came from an expert in the area.

Differences between sexes go far beyond a couple of hormones, which is essentialy the "means to alter how a body develops" you refer to in your last sentence. Plus, the administration of exogenous hormones (or hormone blocking) doesn't exactly replicate the "natural" rhythm of things anyway, as any insulin-dependent diabetic will tell you.

Men have a chromosome that codifies come 50 or 60 odd proteins which are absent in women. Women have different X chromosomes in different cells of their body (genetic mosaicism) by virtue of havint to inactivate - at random - half of their X chromosome material, which would otherwised be doubled. For somene that understands a bit of genetics, embryology, physiology and other medical sciences, it seems ver unlikely that the differences in physical capability don't stem from a multitude of genetic mechanisms (and others, though for this debate it's the genetics we care about).

Definitely not an expert by any means, so I'll happily retract that statement. I tried to find the articles I read (I'm pretty sure I had them bookmarked) but nothing so far. What I did find, though, was that we lack data, so those articles were likely speculative or drawing premature conclusions.

From what I've been reading, cross-hormone therapy in a MTF teenager generally results in the muscle and skeletal growth you'd expect to see in a cis girl (but they have lower bone density than the average girl, it seems) but we don't have the data to tell us how that translates to athletic performance.

 

[Arruda]

Definitely not an expert by any means, so I'll happily retract that statement. I tried to find the articles I read (I'm pretty sure I had them bookmarked) but nothing so far. What I did find, though, was that we lack data, so those articles were likely speculative or drawing premature conclusions.

From what I've been reading, cross-hormone therapy in a MTF teenager generally results in the muscle and skeletal growth you'd expect to see in a cis girl (but they have lower bone density than the average girl, it seems) but we don't have the data to tell us how that translates to athletic performance.

The bold part is almost certainly true, It's just that the fine margins in top level competition might mean that the differences that stem from other mechanisms and other phases of development (and not amenable to medical manipulation) may still mean this has the potential to distort some competititons. Unfortunately, I don't think conclusive evidence in this sort of complex biological issues can come from anywhere else but pure raw data from actual competition and these things can take years/decades. There are probably not enough transgender people competing yet to allow for well-designed research, but I expect this number to rise.

People who have to decide how to approach this in the meanwhile have a nearly impossible task in their hands. The disadvantages of other solutions (special categories, outright ban, etc) will have to be weighed against the risk that you "ruin" some top-level sports for a while until we have more data.

Like many posted above, sports is inherently "genetically unfair" and I don't think strongly either way in this particular issue, I just commented because quite a few lay people seem to oversimplify this.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22561975/

This is just a single study - clearly little - but nevertheless it seems to suggest that differences between prepubescent girls and boys are statistically significant, and confirms some empirical idea that girls are more flexible and have better balance whilst boys are stronger and more explosive.

 

[The Purley King]

I'm not sure there is a solution that works for all. The primary concern is that women's sport is potentially compromised if someone who has transitioned competes and has a big advantage due to them originally physically developing as a male. However, making transgender people compete in a special category is really saying that being transgender is a disability whereas para competitions is about showcasing ability, so this would be very different. I'm really not sure how you accommodate everyone in this circumstance. If you can't it will result in trans people losing out (again) which also not a great outcome.

So you feck over the 99% in order to accommodate the 1%?
Right
Some things you just have to accept you cannot do as A result of your genetics and your life decisions.
Transgender people are LITERALLY a different category
How hard is that for people to understand???
It beggars belief

 

[darko]

That's the nature of sports though isn't it? There's always someone bigger, faster, more skillful, more intelligent, more determined, richer, luckier.

I feel people are worrying that trans people will simply dominate every sport.

But it's the reason they have the advantage. That is they were a man. Show me a woman who's become a man and competed against men and won.

 

[Wibble]

So you feck over the 99% in order to accommodate the 1%?
Right

Did I say that? I'm thinking not.

Some things you just have to accept you cannot do as A result of your genetics and your life decisions.
Transgender people are LITERALLY a different category

So is skin colour and religion. Just because you can categorise something doesn't mean you should divide people in that way. Usually when you do it you do it to advantage and showcase people and not exclude them. However, I'm not advocating for or against inclusion of transgender people in elite sport as there is an obvious issue with transgender women having a physical advantage in many/most cases.

How hard is that for people to understand???
It beggars belief

Only to you but life is more nuanced than that. The fact that the world is struggling with the issue suggests that it isn't that simple. Nobody seems to have an issue with transgender men competing in elite male competition for example. So we are really talking about only creating a separate competition for transgender women to compete against each other. Given that this is in effect a ban it has to considered and deliberated upon as you are formalising discrimination in a couple of ways and if you have to do this you want to be very certain it is the best, or least shit, option. Or if you go down the regulating testosterone level route it strikes me that mandating such an intervention for non-medical reasons has significant ethical issues attached.

I can see both perspectives as I have a son playing elite sport and a transgender nephew, and it is a hard life especially as you transition and given that being recognised as the gender you are (not the sex) is a major step in healing the damage your gender dysphoria the world treating all transgender women as other in the way you suggest is harmful to all, and not just the odd person prevented from competing. It could be argued that the wellbeing of transgender women is more important than mere sport. I wouldn't argue this as I don't think sport is "mere" anything and at the elite level the time, effort and dedication is not only admirable but something we need to retain the integrity of. My son plays his sport at a fairly elite level. If he transitioned he would be easily the best female player in the world, by a significant margin. Such whataboutisms are however dangerous if that is all you consider.

As I have said repeatedly I don't know (or see) an easy solution and it may well be that the least shit option is not allowing transgender women to compete at the elite level. But I think the issue deserves more discussions and debate than "Its obviously a bloke".

And there is also far more to sport than the elite level. This is an interesting read.

https://www.insidehook.com/article/sports/trans-athletes-win-boys-sports

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The bold part is almost certainly true, It's just that the fine margins in top level competition might mean that the differences that stem from other mechanisms and other phases of development (and not amenable to medical manipulation) may still mean this has the potential to distort some competititons. Unfortunately, I don't think conclusive evidence in this sort of complex biological issues can come from anywhere else but pure raw data from actual competition and these things can take years/decades. There are probably not enough transgender people competing yet to allow for well-designed research, but I expect this number to rise.

People who have to decide how to approach this in the meanwhile have a nearly impossible task in their hands. The disadvantages of other solutions (special categories, outright ban, etc) will have to be weighed against the risk that you "ruin" some top-level sports for a while until we have more data.

Like many posted above, sports is inherently "genetically unfair" and I don't think strongly either way in this particular issue, I just commented because quite a few lay people seem to oversimplify this.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22561975/

This is just a single study - clearly little - but nevertheless it seems to suggest that differences between prepubescent girls and boys are statistically significant, and confirms some empirical idea that girls are more flexible and have better balance whilst boys are stronger and more explosive.

Which is absolutely no surprise to anyone who has coached young kids in sports. Obviously there’s a social conditioning element at play here. Boys are more likely to be encouraged to do sports that are require you to be strong/explosive (football, rugby) while girls are enrolled in sports that require balance/flexibility (gymnastics) but there are very clear differences between the sexes in terms of aptitude for various sports that begin long before the hormonal changes of puberty kick in.

And why shouldn’t there be? There are fundamental biological differences between the sexes. The idea that monitoring and manipulating testosterone levels alone can remove all the many and complex physiological/anatomical differences between those born with XX vs XY chromosomes was always a gross oversimplification.

 

[MadMike]

I don't have the answers but the least shit option is never very satisfying. And it is such a hard thing to conceptualise as it invariably involves whataboutisms. Which in some cases are from genuinely wanting to examine the issues and in some cases are disingenuous and/or bigoted "its a bloke in a dress innit" attempts to insult and diminish.

I know, I never argued it was satisfying. But when confronted with shit options, you invariably take the least shitty one. Until science finds a better way to resolve this.

I don't know, at certain level it also bothers me that athletes like Lia Thomas even want to compete at elite sport. It seems... a little selfish to me. She begun transitioning in adulthood, well past puberty, and has a demonstrable advantage over biologically female athletes as evidenced by the disparity in her rankings when competing vs males and females. There's 12,000+ thousand different careers to choose from and in 11,999 of those her gender or biology would have no significant bearing. But when you pick the one career where you compete against a protected segment of society that you have an unfair advantage over... then I don't know. I don't think it says good things about you. Like I said, it smacks of selfishness and opportunism.

 

[maniak]

Just curious, when people suggest transgender women competing in their own category, are there enough of them to actually compete? I remember in an interview a transgender woman saying she was literally the only one in her sport. I'm sure that with so many different sports and categories inside each sport, and so few transgender women professional athletes, this suggestion of having them compete each other is just not viable.

 

[Acheron]

So is skin colour and religion. Just because you can categorise something doesn't mean you should divide people in that way. Usually when you do it you do it to advantage and showcase people and not exclude them. However, I'm not advocating for or against inclusion of transgender people in elite sport as there is an obvious issue with transgender women having a physical advantage in many/most cases.

Being male sex is not something you can compare to religion and you already are aware how that has a direct impact in athletic performance.

Nobody seems to have an issue with transgender men competing in elite male competition for example.

Is because they, on the other hand, have a handicap. Is like when there are football teams with a certain age limit but they can incorporate younger players without a problem and it's not seen as an unfair advantage. So yeah, the problem is more specific to transgender men.

For example I'm not sure if it has already been brought upon but Lia Thomas wasn't the only transgender competing as there was also a transgender man, Iszac Henig, swimming with the girls. I'm not sure if they participated in the same events or heats at least once but no matter how you see it there was a man and a woman competing in the girls category.

All in all I think the issue with transgender women in sports is that legally they can acquire the woman status and thus should have the rights to participate as women, as they have that status. Then the problem is that biologically you're not really turning into a woman and the sports divisions should be strictly about you biological sex but this enters in conflict with granting the same rights of a biological woman.

 

[Wibble]

Being male sex is not something you can compare to religion and you already are aware how that has a direct impact in athletic performance.

Because of course that was the point

Which was (again) that merely being able to categorise something doesn't mean you automatically should categorise on this basis in various places, ways and contexts.

Is because they, on the other hand, have a handicap. Is like when there are football teams with a certain age limit but they can incorporate younger players without a problem and it's not seen as an unfair advantage. So yeah, the problem is more specific to transgender men.

I assume you mean "physical disadvantage on average" and not handicapped? And age groups are usually Under 12 or Under 16 (or whatever) so younger players can play up if they have the ability and physicality. What has that got to do with elite level sport? I also think viewing this as transgender men are ok because we allow kids to play in older age groups but transgender men aren't because they may have a physical advantage is a rather simplistic way of thinking about it.

For example I'm not sure if it has already been brought upon but Lia Thomas wasn't the only transgender competing as there was also a transgender man, Iszac Henig, swimming with the girls. I'm not sure if they participated in the same events or heats at least once but no matter how you see it there was a man and a woman competing in the girls category.

Iszac Henig identifies as a man but has had no hormone replacement treatment so is perfectly entitled to compete in the female categories. So I'm not sure what your problem with this is?

All in all I think the issue with transgender women in sports is that legally they can acquire the woman status and thus should have the rights to participate as women, as they have that status. Then the problem is that biologically you're not really turning into a woman and the sports divisions should be strictly about you biological sex but this enters in conflict with granting the same rights of a biological woman.

So what do you do about intersex people? Merely banning transgender people from participating in sport seems like a very blunt instrument just so that we don't have to look for a more complex or nuanced approach. Certainly at non-elite levels I think the harm far outweighs the benefit. The issue that needs to be resolved is really at elite levels of sport IMO.

 

[Wibble]

Just curious, when people suggest transgender women competing in their own category, are there enough of them to actually compete? I remember in an interview a transgender woman saying she was literally the only one in her sport. I'm sure that with so many different sports and categories inside each sport, and so few transgender women professional athletes, this suggestion of having them compete each other is just not viable.

In most cases it precludes transgender athletes from participating at all.