Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Laurel Hubbard
Comments
-
The last time I looked the general division in sport was between men and women - based on genetic strength as a result of presence of testosterone throughout puberty, not long arms or short arms, height or otherwise.kentaddick said:
I honestly missed the para part of the post - apologies, especially about the legs comment, I hope you realise I was using it as an example.KBslittlesis said:
Seeing as she has absolutely no feeling in her legs, hence being a para athlete, that wouldn’t matter would it.kentaddick said:
If she was transphobic she would have a problem with it, if she wasn’t, she won’t. Pretty simple really.KBslittlesis said:
I have recently become interested because our niece competes in para weightlifting tournaments for Wales.Chizz said:Good luck to her.
And I am surprised and delighted to see so many people interested in women's weightlifting. It's not a subject many on CL have shown much interest in, in the past.I was wondering how she would feel if she had been training all this time, finally got to an Olympics only to find one of the competitors was a trans woman 🤷♀️What if she went to the olympics only to find a competitor had longer legs, so had more muscles on her legs? It’s the same thing, different genetics give you an advantage and a disadvantage.
All the competitors in her weight category have differing para issues they all know about before they compete & are access properly because of it.
Being a trans athlete gives you an advantage, simple as.
That doesn’t make you transphobic if you’re not happy with that.
But it doesn’t surprise me that you think it is.
Does it give you an advantage? Surely there are other genetic factors that also give them an advantage? Why should trans people suddenly banned because of their biology?
Sorry (or maybe I'm not) but in my opinion biological sex and gender are two different things.
3 -
@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.
0 -
Then surely that’s discriminating against trans people unfairly. Can’t see that staying up in the courts.Covered End said:
No.kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
What characteristics are those? If it’s genitalia, then trans women can have a vagina - if it’s another characteristic then a woman who was born female could well come under the same umbrella.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Sports are segregated by sex on the basis of Male and female physical characteristics? Would you be happy for this to be scrapped?kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
What about trans women who took puberty blockers and transitioned at 18? Would they be allowed to compete?thenewbie said:kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
That's a false comparison though. Race or sexuality doesn't equate to an inherent advantage in weight lifting but a woman who has transitioned after puberty DOES.
That's not transphobic, it's a fact.0 -
Here comes one of those "I'm woke but..." posts
Irrespective of whatever people might say about the transitioning process robbing those born biologically male of the physical advantages gained over biologically female competitors by suppressing testosterone etc, it would take a special kind of cretin to believe that those advantages disappear overnight. Even ignoring the more egregious examples (Hannah Mouncey in Australian Rules, Rachel McKinnon in track cycling) it takes years to lose the extra muscle mass, fast twitch fibres and hormonal advantage that makes men faster and stronger than women. Eventually, gender reassignment surgery and hormone therapy will level the playing field, but it takes decades before that's the case - and even then, provided the would-be athlete continues their training regime through the surgery, they'll still retain many of the physical advantages they had through being born male.
There is no easy answer to this. Assigning a 'category' for trans athletes at the Paralympics is insulting, and insinuates they have a 'disability'. However, allowing them to compete against women is also unfair (ask any of the women who has tried to beat McKinnon on the track, or been on the end of a tackle from Mouncey on the field). What shouldn't be permitted, is the lunacy of someone using it as some kind of crusade for trans rights - and people ignoring the dilemma and just caving into it because they don't want to offend someone.
The biggest losers here are women who have spent their entire lives training for something, competing against their peers, only to lose to someone who is biologically inherently different from them (rather than just 'better').
33 -
There has to be a proper discussion in the interests of fairness but whether that happens is another matter.Leroy Ambrose said:Here comes one of those "I'm woke but..." posts
Irrespective of whatever people might say about the transitioning process robbing those born biologically male of the physical advantages gained over biologically female competitors by suppressing testosterone etc, it would take a special kind of cretin to believe that those advantages disappear overnight. Even ignoring the more egregious examples (Hannah Mouncey in Australian Rules, Rachel McKinnon in track cycling) it takes years to lose the extra muscle mass, fast twitch fibres and hormonal advantage that makes men faster and stronger than women. Eventually, gender reassignment surgery and hormone therapy will level the playing field, but it takes decades before that's the case - and even then, provided the would-be athlete continues their training regime through the surgery, they'll still retain many of the physical advantages they had through being born male.
There is no easy answer to this. Assigning a 'category' for trans athletes at the Paralympics is insulting, and insinuates they have a 'disability'. However, allowing them to compete against women is also unfair (ask any of the women who has tried to beat McKinnon on the track, or been on the end of a tackle from Mouncey on the field). What shouldn't be permitted, is the lunacy of someone using it as some kind of crusade for trans rights - and people ignoring the dilemma and just caving into it because they don't want to offend someone.
The biggest losers here are women who have spent their entire lives training for something, competing against their peers, only to lose to someone who is biologically inherently different from them (rather than just 'better').0 -
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?0 -
You can take it as an insult, I posted it as a fact.kentaddick said:
If your only contribution to a discussion is to post an insult - it’s probably best not to post at all.southamptonaddick said:
You do come out with some shit.kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
I will continue to post what I like until one of the mods think I have broken a rule then I am sure they will tell me.
1 -
kentaddick said:
Then surely that’s discriminating against trans people unfairly. Can’t see that staying up in the courts.Covered End said:
No.kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
What characteristics are those? If it’s genitalia, then trans women can have a vagina - if it’s another characteristic then a woman who was born female could well come under the same umbrella.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Sports are segregated by sex on the basis of Male and female physical characteristics? Would you be happy for this to be scrapped?kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
What about trans women who took puberty blockers and transitioned at 18? Would they be allowed to compete?thenewbie said:kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
That's a false comparison though. Race or sexuality doesn't equate to an inherent advantage in weight lifting but a woman who has transitioned after puberty DOES.
That's not transphobic, it's a fact.
Not sure. Which is why I was very specifically talking about post puberty transition - still the most common kind as well as that which is actually the issue here.0 -
That's ludicrous. I'm 47 and not particularly fit compared to most of the young lads I race my bike against week in week out. Yet - with about six months of proper training, there isn't a single woman I couldn't annihilate in a road race or a crit - should I then be able to qualify for the GB female Olympic team in the road race?. Just because YOU'RE shit, doesn't mean other people in elite sport are pal 😂kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?5 -
You could beat an Olympic woman with six months of training? Bold claim.Leroy Ambrose said:
That's ludicrous. I'm 47 and not particularly fit compared to most of the young lads I race my bike against week in week out. Yet - with about six months of proper training, there isn't a single woman I couldn't annihilate in a road race or a crit - should I then be able to qualify for the GB female Olympic team in the road race?. Just because YOU'RE shit, doesn't mean other people in elite sport are pal 😂kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?0 - Sponsored links:
-
I'm a shit 3rd cat rider and I regularly beat first cat and elite female riders in races (cycling at amateur levels is often co-ed). In fact I've never finished behind a woman in any of the races I've done that women have also entered. And - did I mention - I'm shit? There isn't a single 1st cat male rider who couldn't beat every single woman put in front of him in a bike race every single time. And those lads aren't even pro (they're unpaid).kentaddick said:
You could beat an Olympic woman with six months of training? Bold claim.Leroy Ambrose said:
That's ludicrous. I'm 47 and not particularly fit compared to most of the young lads I race my bike against week in week out. Yet - with about six months of proper training, there isn't a single woman I couldn't annihilate in a road race or a crit - should I then be able to qualify for the GB female Olympic team in the road race?. Just because YOU'RE shit, doesn't mean other people in elite sport are pal 😂kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
I don't think you've thought this through...
Edit - in fact, I 'beat' Sarah Storey in a race a few years ago - when I was a 4th cat (even shitter than I am now). No amateur cyclist ever thinks about that though, because it's completely unimportant. It BECOMES important when a young lad decides he quite fancies going to the Olympics, because then it absolutely is not a level playing field8 -
Is there any other biological difference that makes half the population 10% faster than the other 50%?kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
0 -
Sex - the basis on which every species reproduces (with a few exceptions), is a genetic oddity?kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
Well, one learns something new every day!0 -
Just because you say “I was saying it is a fact” doesn’t make it a fact or less of an insult. It clearly was an insult and you should apologise.southamptonaddick said:
You can take it as an insult, I posted it as a fact.kentaddick said:
If your only contribution to a discussion is to post an insult - it’s probably best not to post at all.southamptonaddick said:
You do come out with some shit.kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
I will continue to post what I like until one of the mods think I have broken a rule then I am sure they will tell me.3 -
If you don't think biological differences matter I'm unclear why you would want gender categories to remain? Your position is not consistent.kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short
Trans women retain an advantage physically which is simply down to having grown up as Male. If you think that's okay then a lot of female athletes won't.
1 -
Sport has different categories that are deemed appropriate and fair such as male and female (in most sports) and weight divisions in some. There are also various other divisions such as experience (like novices for development and veterans (or should that be 'masters'? )and age categories to give the non elite sub-categories to be able to have some competition. You could argue a league structure allows the better teams to play one another.bobmunro said:
The last time I looked the general division in sport was between men and women - based on genetic strength as a result of presence of testosterone throughout puberty, not long arms or short arms, height or otherwise.kentaddick said:
I honestly missed the para part of the post - apologies, especially about the legs comment, I hope you realise I was using it as an example.KBslittlesis said:
Seeing as she has absolutely no feeling in her legs, hence being a para athlete, that wouldn’t matter would it.kentaddick said:
If she was transphobic she would have a problem with it, if she wasn’t, she won’t. Pretty simple really.KBslittlesis said:
I have recently become interested because our niece competes in para weightlifting tournaments for Wales.Chizz said:Good luck to her.
And I am surprised and delighted to see so many people interested in women's weightlifting. It's not a subject many on CL have shown much interest in, in the past.I was wondering how she would feel if she had been training all this time, finally got to an Olympics only to find one of the competitors was a trans woman 🤷♀️What if she went to the olympics only to find a competitor had longer legs, so had more muscles on her legs? It’s the same thing, different genetics give you an advantage and a disadvantage.
All the competitors in her weight category have differing para issues they all know about before they compete & are access properly because of it.
Being a trans athlete gives you an advantage, simple as.
That doesn’t make you transphobic if you’re not happy with that.
But it doesn’t surprise me that you think it is.
Does it give you an advantage? Surely there are other genetic factors that also give them an advantage? Why should trans people suddenly banned because of their biology?
Sorry (or maybe I'm not) but in my opinion biological sex and gender are two different things.
Quite rightly, in my opinion, there is drug testing, rather than a free for all of enhancing substances. And there has isn't a need to create (or should there be in my opinion) further categories for physical characterises such as leg length or feet size. Generally, athletes develop in sports and positions within to those sports that suit their physical characteristics, skills and abilities etc - you won't see an international lock or high jumper who is 5ft 6 nor a gymnast who is 25 stone.1 -
As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have.
My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.
The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.3 -
Of course it matters, or all women would be able to compete to an Olympic level, but they can’t. My point is, what makes a trans woman’s difference any different from the other competitors?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
If you don't think biological differences matter I'm unclear why you would want gender categories to remain? Your position is not consistent.kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short
Trans women retain an advantage physically which is simply down to having grown up as Male. If you think that's okay then a lot of female athletes won't.0 -
Just give up mate you are making yourself look foolish.kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?2 -
I think that's a reasonably sensible approach to take. Most people with a brain can see there isn't a simple, straightforward answer - there are a lot of nuances to consider.Leuth said:As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have.
My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.
The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.
However, I take issue with the final paragraph. Chuck 'most' in there and I'd agree with it. But look up Rachel McKinnon and tell me she's not doing it to make a point? THAT'S what people take issue with - not someone who followed gender reassignment early in adulthood following an expressed desire to transition in or around puberty1 - Sponsored links:
-
I'll apologise when you stop posting shit.kentaddick said:
Just because you say “I was saying it is a fact” doesn’t make it a fact or less of an insult. It clearly was an insult and you should apologise.southamptonaddick said:
You can take it as an insult, I posted it as a fact.kentaddick said:
If your only contribution to a discussion is to post an insult - it’s probably best not to post at all.southamptonaddick said:
You do come out with some shit.kentaddick said:
Right, but there’s women born as a female that would have unfair physical advantage over other women, should they be segregated too?Covered End said:
Because she was born as a man and has an unfair physical advantage over the females that were born female.kentaddick said:
Its an interesting idea, but why should trans women be segregated like that? Should we segregate other athletes based on other factors? I mean, we have weight classes in boxing - is this the same thing?Covered End said:
The line is drawn at trans women who should be able to compete equally and fairly with other trans women.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?
I will continue to post what I like until one of the mods think I have broken a rule then I am sure they will tell me.
AND THAT'S A FACT.5 -
As long as there are gender categories in sport this will remain an issue and coming up with a 'fair' solution will be difficult. It will be an ongoing and complicated process.Leuth said:As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have.
My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.
The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.1 -
Appreciate the views expressed here as I’m learning a lot and challenging my own views - I don’t feel like I need to have an entrenched opinion on every subject.12
-
Because she went through pubity as a man, what part of that don't you understand?kentaddick said:
Of course it matters, or all women would be able to compete to an Olympic level, but they can’t. My point is, what makes a trans woman’s difference any different from the other competitors?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
If you don't think biological differences matter I'm unclear why you would want gender categories to remain? Your position is not consistent.kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short
Trans women retain an advantage physically which is simply down to having grown up as Male. If you think that's okay then a lot of female athletes won't.
That's the issue. It's a fact that if you go through pubity as a man you have a biological, sporting, advantage. You can not want it to be true, but it is.
I don't think anyone wants you to say trans women shouldn't be able to compete, just to understand, and accept, why some people don't think they should be able to.
It is not transphobic to acknowledge that its true.4 -
I don’t think @kentaddick should ‘give up’ for that reason, but anyone who has posted on a thread 23 times in just a couple of hours, has obviously made their stance and contribution clear and should know when to not dominate the floor, so to speak.blackpool72 said:
Just give up mate you are making yourself look foolish.kentaddick said:
No I don’t - but I also can’t see why a trans woman shouldn’t be able to compete in women’s competitions, as there are genetic oddities that allow certain athletes to outcompete others anyway. Why should we discriminate against trans people?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:@kentaddick
I've asked you a simple question several times which is do you think gender categories should be scrapped? A simple yes or no would suffice rather than a lot of waffle.I, a 30 year old man, if I wouldn’t be able to compete with an Olympic woman in any sport, because I don’t have the conditioning, training or talent. A trans woman competing to an Olympic level would have all three of those - just like other women. She might not have webbed feet say, that other women might have to be able to swim faster. That’s a biological advantage, and they’re not banned from competing. So why should another biological difference matter?
that goes for everyone not just KA, forum etiquette innit2 -
There's no good way of dealing or even talking about this.
Separating out biological females and transgender females is essentially segregation and discrimination. Not exactly a very inclusive attitude and would outcast them and make them feel like a freak show.
On the other hand I do understand the sporting advantages they may benefit from with the increased testosterone from a young age aiding physical development.
Glad it's not up to me.1 -
If you have a Y chromosome, you should not be able to compete in a race for female athletes as it simply is not fair, regardless of transition age. The inherent biological advantages begin in utero via differences in transcription factors controlling androgen production which leads to increased muscle mass and the other sporting advantages that have already been mentioned. It is not a level playing field.
Most recognise this fact and it is only a minority who deny biological reality, preferring ideological dogma. This is one of the reasons why Stonewall (who appear to have abandoned and alienated many former feminist and gay allies in this matter having been a fantastic success story previously) and its fundamentalists are destroying themselves, because they have taken an extreme position and assumed that the usual tactics of unleashing the SJWs on social media to scream 'transphobe' at anyone who does not adopt their position 100% will see all opposition crumble (although their adherents appear to be loathe to try any other tactic). Now, the IOC and other spineless organisations have done so, but others are starting to grow increasingly uneasy at the fact that the policies of international organisations, corporations and public institutions are being decided by what is a minority of extremists without room for logic or rationality. Most people believe in tolerance, but they also believe in fairness. Also, most people don't live in a Twitter echo chamber.
I have no doubt that pushing an extreme position on this matter will harm the trans lobby more in the long run; when the public get to see the reality of it on their screens it will shock many and get them to wonder how we have allowed ourselves to be dictated to by lunatics (see also transitioned folk in womens' prisons, toilets, refuges etc.). I know that it isn't their style, but maybe actually listening to counter arguments and seeking a solution via compromise would ultimately help the trans cause much more.
I won't hold my breath, though.13 -
I'm slightly taller than AFKA.
That gives me an advantage if we are playing basketball or if we're deciding who replaces Ben Amos
AFKA is actually quite good at playing football which I never was (although my knee injury when I was 20 ruined my career, honest) and that gives him an advantage.
Neither of those however are "unfair" advantages.
The question of transwomen competing in female sport isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether they are women or if they have a right to identify as women but whether they gain an "unfair" advantage by doing so.
9 -
I know fuck all about this sort of stuff but can hormone therapy be reversed? i.e child wants to be opposite gender, then a few years down the line wants to revert back to original gender. Is there a reverse hormone therapy treatment?Leuth said:As I said earlier, this is all further evidence that gender dysphoria is dealt with and hormone therapy made available as widely as possible to children who exhibit prolonged dysphoria and a demonstrable preference for changing their gender. People don't just get to 30 and decide they're a woman. It's something that's always there. The younger it can be dealt with, the less trans women will go through male puberty and the less of a sex-based strength/power/speed advantage they'll have.
My current suggestion is to keep it difficult for those who've participated in adult competition as a man to then do so as a woman. But for those who enter professional sport as a woman, it shouldn't matter what they were born as.
The ultimate truth though is that trans people do not, in fact, wish to be political footballs, and the vast majority of them avoid professional sport as they just don't want the negative exposure and the trouble. If they want to brave it, though, all they can do is follow the rules and regulations. They shouldn't be vilified for who they are.0 -
The difference here is that the examples you have cited above, reference people who have a natural inborn advantage. In the Laurel Hubbard case she is only competing with women after very significant medical and surgical intervention.kentaddick said:
Has allowing black competitors bred more racism? Has allowing gay competitors bred more homophobia? I don’t think it has.KBslittlesis said:I started this thread because I really wanted to see if there was someone out there who could genuinely help me get my head around this issue.
But it just seems it has attracted those who would rather stick an oar in & be judgmental then actually come up with sensible adult conversation about a very difficult topic.
It doesn’t suddenly make you a transphobic is you feel this doesn’t sit right in the competitive world of sport. It makes you want to have a playing field as fairly as possible and to continue having a conversation about it until the issue is resolved for all those who want to compete.If we ignore it and say, ‘yeah crack on, welcome aboard’ when other competitors feel aggrieved then surely you are opening the door to breeding more transphobia?
It has to be spoken of, it has to be.The fact is - trans women are women. If you’re saying they shouldn’t compete because of a biological advantage, then where is the line drawn? If some one who was born a woman with higher muscle density not be allowed to compete either? If a swimmer is born with webbed feet, we know that to be a biological advantage, so should they be allowed to compete?There is the freedom to and the freedom from. Laurel’s wants to have the freedom to compete against other women and other women want to have the freedom from competing against someone whose advantages, in this particular arena, have come about by surgical intervention. The reason that sport is usually split between men and women is not because of genitalia, menstruation or different pitched voices but because being born of one gender usually confers a definite advantage of speed and strength over the other. Given that, it would actually make more sense for Laurel to compete against those born with similar advantages.7
