What do you think of the trans gendered woman who won the cycling championship?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

How is it different from having a Special Olympics? Serious athletes all around with competitive adjustments for differences.

[Anonymous]

If there are going to separate sports events for males and females, then biology has to determine participation.

One option would be to go the way of rowing, where for some events there are "lightweight" and "open" events. Following this analogy, there could be "female" and "open" sports. The standard for participation in the female events would be testosterone below a certain level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

How is it different from having a Special Olympics? Serious athletes all around with competitive adjustments for differences.

Are you saying transgendered people should have to compete in the special olympics? Wouldn't they dominate there too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well maybe we are due for a larger conversation about the value of sports in our society. If it’s to bring people together, then competition is just a fun side show and it shouldn’t matter who wins. It’s just for fun.. If it’s about identifying the best woman or man, then we probably need a trans category. What is the point of being the best at something? Does it add to our society or is it another source of division?

OP here. This post is the closest to anyone on dcum that seems to 'get it'. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

I agree that the high school level is most important, but disagree that it should be about inclusivity.

At the high schoolnlevel it should be a strict literal interpretation of Title IX and focused on providing biological girls the opportunity to compete on a fair playing field, with other girls, and not made to take second fiddle to boys who happen to identify as girls at this point in their life.

This is about fairness at a basic level.

It is also about safety. A biological male has so many natural physical advantages over girls of the same age that are separate from just testosterone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

I agree that the high school level is most important, but disagree that it should be about inclusivity.

At the high schoolnlevel it should be a strict literal interpretation of Title IX and focused on providing biological girls the opportunity to compete on a fair playing field, with other girls, and not made to take second fiddle to boys who happen to identify as girls at this point in their life.

This is about fairness at a basic level.

It is also about safety. A biological male has so many natural physical advantages over girls of the same age that are separate from just testosterone.

and a biological female has natural physical advantages of boys of the same age. Why are we not talking about this fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If there are going to separate sports events for males and females, then biology has to determine participation.

One option would be to go the way of rowing, where for some events there are "lightweight" and "open" events. Following this analogy, there could be "female" and "open" sports. The standard for participation in the female events would be testosterone below a certain level.

The testoretone standard still does not take into account advantages males have in their skeletal structure, their muscles, and their lung capacity

Female category should be biological female.

Male category should be biological male.

Open could be available to transgendered (with or without transitioning).

[Anonymous]

Transgenders deny science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

I agree that the high school level is most important, but disagree that it should be about inclusivity.

At the high schoolnlevel it should be a strict literal interpretation of Title IX and focused on providing biological girls the opportunity to compete on a fair playing field, with other girls, and not made to take second fiddle to boys who happen to identify as girls at this point in their life.

This is about fairness at a basic level.

It is also about safety. A biological male has so many natural physical advantages over girls of the same age that are separate from just testosterone.

and a biological female has natural physical advantages of boys of the same age. Why are we not talking about this fact?

Unless you are talking about a sport like gymnastics, horse racing or the coxswain, biological females do not have anatomical advantages against males. That is a fact. That is why no one is talking about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If there are going to separate sports events for males and females, then biology has to determine participation.

One option would be to go the way of rowing, where for some events there are "lightweight" and "open" events. Following this analogy, there could be "female" and "open" sports. The standard for participation in the female events would be testosterone below a certain level.

Yeah, I don't pretend to know what the determining factor should be to be female enough to compete in the women's events, but there has to be a hard line somewhere or else there is no point in having women compete separately from men in the first place. Either it's all open, in which case no women will be able to compete in most sports, or we clearly define who can compete as a woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

How is it different from having a Special Olympics? Serious athletes all around with competitive adjustments for differences.

Are you saying transgendered people should have to compete in the special olympics? Wouldn't they dominate there too?

Not what I was saying. Just responding to the bolded and noting that we already do make similar competitive distinctions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is an interesting discussion and I don't know where I stand on it yet. Having a "trans" category for sports, probably wouldn't solve everything. Are you going to need 2 (or more) trans categories -- male to female and female to male? And what about people with gender issues that exist at birth (ex. ambiguous genitalia)? And are there enough trans people competing in sports to fill this new category?

To me the issue is perhaps most important at the high school level. I think at that level, inclusivity should be one goal.

The latest figure I've seen is that an estimated 0.6 percent of the adult US population identifies as transgender. While it is likely a larger percentage for younger people (say teens to 20s), its still a very small segment of the population. So, I'm I just wondering how big of issue transgender individuals in sports really is.

I agree that the high school level is most important, but disagree that it should be about inclusivity.

At the high schoolnlevel it should be a strict literal interpretation of Title IX and focused on providing biological girls the opportunity to compete on a fair playing field, with other girls, and not made to take second fiddle to boys who happen to identify as girls at this point in their life.

This is about fairness at a basic level.

It is also about safety. A biological male has so many natural physical advantages over girls of the same age that are separate from just testosterone.

and a biological female has natural physical advantages of boys of the same age. Why are we not talking about this fact?

Because this is a thread specifically about sports, and men have natural physical advantages in virtually all sports.

[Anonymous]

Why do men's and women's gymnastics have completely different events?

[Anonymous]

Transgender people are literally in a fight for their lives, with a government administration that wants to deny their existence and make it so that they can be discriminated against and denied jobs, housing, etc. because of their gender identity, have a 40+% rate of suicide if they are not supported and affirmed, are murdered at alarming rates because they are constantly dehumanized by fellow human beings. But yes, it's just so unfair that a transgender person won a bike race. Let's all post and rant about that.

You people are despicable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In general, I support the rights of trans people, but I think this is just wrong. If that means that trans people can't compete at such levels in sports, than be it.

I respect your wish to be identified as whatever gender you choose, use the bathroom of your choice, and live however you please provided others aren't affected (this goes for all people, not just trans people). But this is biologically unfair to women in sports.

+1