# Transgender, a Challenge for the Conservative Mindset



## Huntn

Was listening to a story this morning on NPR from the mother of a transgender child who took their biological daughter to be evaluated. They were told by the psychiatrist this might be a phase or their child might be transgender, to humor her with how she wanted to dress or cut their hair and to come back in a year. She said they took their son to the store and bought him boy clothes and had never seen him so happy. A year later they went back to see the doctor who told them, their son was transgender and to support him because unsupported, suppressed transgender children have high suicide rates.

So on one hand, we have the informed view, and on the other we have the Christian knuckle draggers* who have so much trouble with this issue because it does not conform to their simplistic view of their existence, they want to charge responsible parents with child abuse?

This is where ignorance sets us way back, why the conservative mindset appears to be a inference to our species advancement. The real issue is politicians who actually believe their rubbish or cater to STUPID to keep themselves in office. 

* not implying all Christians are idiots.


----------



## Joe

Transgendered are the new boogie man for conservatives. It used to be the gays, but now that gays can marry and they see that the sky hasn't fallen they have moved on to trans folks. 

They make a point when it comes to trans in sports. I get that. They just go about it the wrong way. Don't be a hateful douchebag about it and maybe people will listen to you. 

If I took Greg Abbott seriously I would think there is a whole team of trans athletes at my local HS just looking to take over and win all the State titles and leave the poor little girls in the dust.  But that is not the case. I don't think I have ever come across a trans athlete in my 30+ years of watching HS athletics in Texas. I am sure they are out there somewhere, but I just haven't come across them because its not a huge issue like conservatives make it out to be. 

What I have noticed over the last 30+ years is an increase in boys joining the dance teams that were traditionally all female. Most people don't care for the most part.


----------



## Renzatic

Joe said:


> It used to be the gays, but now that gays can marry and they see that the sky hasn't fallen they have moved on to trans folks.




Depending on how Roe v. Wade fares in front of this new SCOTUS, even that could be considered temporary. All laws are currently open to Christian conservative reinterpretation.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> Was listening to a story this morning on NPR from the mother of a transgender child who took their biological daughter to be evaluated. They were told by the psychiatrist this might be a phase or their child might be transgender, to humor her with how she wanted to dress or cut their hair and to come back in a year. She said they took their son to the store and bought him boy clothes and had never seen him so happy. A year later they went back to see the doctor who told them, their son was transgender and to support him because unsupported, suppressed transgender children have high suicide rates.




I think the parents did the responsible thing.  They waited to see.  They didn't have an agenda and seemed to have the child's best interests in mind.

My concern is parents who jump the gun because a boy likes to play with dolls or a girl who likes to play with building blocks and all of a sudden the kid is on puberty blockers.  




Joe said:


> I don't think I have ever come across a trans athlete in my 30+ years of watching HS athletics in Texas. I am sure they are out there somewhere, but I just haven't come across them because its not a huge issue like conservatives make it out to be.




Not yet.  Give it some time as it is happening.  Here is an example from Connecticut:









						I Was the Fastest Girl in Connecticut. But Transgender Athletes Made it an Unfair Fight.
					

It’s discouraging that the federal district court has decided that these experiences—these lost opportunities—simply don’t matter.




					adflegal.org


----------



## ronntaylor

Herdfan said:


> Not yet. Give it some time as it is happening. Here is an example from Connecticut:




with the expected link to a right-wing attack group, in this instance, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). Yeah, they don't seemed biased:



> Founded by some 30 leaders of the Christian Right, the Alliance Defending Freedom is a *legal advocacy and training group *that *has supported the recriminalization of sexual acts between consenting LGBTQ adults* in the U.S. and criminalization abroad; *has defended state-sanctioned sterilization of trans people abroad*; has contended that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia; and claims that a “homosexual agenda” will destroy Christianity and society. *ADF also works to develop “religious liberty” legislation and case law that will allow the denial of goods and services to LGBTQ people* on the basis of religion. Since the election of President Trump, ADF has become one of the most influential groups informing the administration’s attack on LGBTQ rights.


----------



## fooferdoggie

why is it we always see family and freedom in the titles and they ave nothing to do with either of those?


----------



## SuperMatt

Some people cannot restrain themselves from fear mongering when it comes to gay or transgender people. Their own misunderstanding and/or fear is translated into banning transgender people from using the bathroom or participating in sports, or even being taken away from their parents in Texas.

Ever hear of live and let live? Conservative politicians have NOTHING to offer America except hate and scapegoating, and transgender CHILDREN are their latest targets. It is truly disgusting, although quite unsurprising to see their faithful minions following suit in online posts.


----------



## Herdfan

ronntaylor said:


> with the expected link to a right-wing attack group, in this instance, the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). Yeah, they don't seemed biased:




Doesn't matter since she is the author.  



SuperMatt said:


> Some people cannot restrain themselves from fear mongering when it comes to gay or transgender people. Their own misunderstanding and/or fear is translated into banning transgender people from using the bathroom or participating in sports, or even being taken away from their parents in Texas.




Do you think it is fair to a girl who has trained her whole life for a chance to win a state or NCAA title, only to not win because they have to compete against someone who is for all intents a biological male?


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Doesn't matter since she is the author.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think it is fair to a girl who has trained her whole life for a chance to win a state or NCAA title, only to not win because they have to compete against someone who is for all intents a biological male?



This is a red herring. There are policies in place that dictate under what circumstances transgender athletes can compete. I’m talking about outright bans that some states have put into place.

Banning all transgender people from competing because of a 1-in-a-million problem is really stupid. But we know that’s not what it’s really about. It’s “othering” transgender, gay, black, or any other minority group. It’s page one in the GOP playbook, and we can see that it works incredibly well to get their voters riled up.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> This is a red herring. There are policies in place that dictate under what circumstances transgender athletes can compete. I’m talking about outright bans that some states have put into place.
> 
> Banning all transgender people from competing because of a 1-in-a-million problem is really stupid. But we know that’s not what it’s really about. It’s “othering” transgender, gay, black, or any other minority group. It’s page one in the GOP playbook, and we can see that it works incredibly well to get their voters riled up.




There are policies.  That the NCAA ignored a month after they put them in place.  The initial policy was to allow the governing body in that sport decide the guidelines.  In the case of Thomas, that would be USA Swimming.  

Previously the NCAA guidelines were 10 nmol/L for 12 months.  The USA Swimming Guidelines are 5 nmol/L for 36 months.  The NCAA then set aside its own policy a month after enacting it.  Thomas won an NCAA title, so this isn't some made-up issue that won't happen.

As for othering other minority athletes, that is BS.  Minorities participate in sports every day without issue.  Any nobody cares.


----------



## Renzatic

Herdfan said:


> Not yet.  Give it some time as it is happening.  Here is an example from Connecticut...




Whether you think trans people competing against people who are biologically of the opposite sex is right, wrong, or somewhere in between, the one thing I can't manage to wrap my head around is why this issue needs to be a concern for the state.

Transsexuals are fairly rare. We're hearing a lot about them at the moment, because they're the current hot topic wedge issue in our ongoing, incredibly stupid culture war. In reality, you'll probably see 1 trans person for every 10,000 female athletes.

...so given their relative rarity, and the low impact their involvement entails overall, why do we need all these laws and regulations?

It seems to me that this is less about addressing an issue, and more about pandering to panic for votes.


----------



## Herdfan

Renzatic said:


> Whether you think trans people competing against people who are biologically of the opposite sex is right, wrong, or somewhere in between, the one thing I can't manage to wrap my head around is why this issue needs to be a concern for the state.
> 
> Transsexuals are fairly rare. We're hearing a lot about them at the moment, because they're the current hot topic wedge issue in our ongoing, incredibly stupid culture war. In reality, you'll probably see 1 trans person for every 10,000 female athletes.
> 
> ...so given their relative rarity, and the low impact their involvement entails overall, why do we need all these laws and regulations?
> 
> It seems to me that this is less about addressing an issue, and more about pandering to panic for votes.




You may be correct in that it is being covered more in-depth for political purposes.  But that 1/10,000 or whatever the real number is affects more than just that 1 athlete.  In the case of Thomas, at the NCAA's alone, in the 3 events that Thomas swam and placed 1st, 5th and 8th, that is 38 girls who placed one place lower than they should have including 3 who didn't make finals and another 3 who were relegated to the Consolation Final instead of the real final.  And they way swimming is scored, those 3 didn't have a chance to win the event. (In swimming you can't place outside your final).

And that is just at the NCAA's and doesn't count conference championships.  So probably 100 girls didn't get what they earned because of 1 person.  Are the rights of 1 superior to the rights of the other 100?


----------



## Renzatic

Herdfan said:


> But that 1/10,000 or whatever the real number is affects more than just that 1 athlete. In the case of Thomas, at the NCAA's alone, in the 3 events that Thomas swam and placed 1st, 5th and 8th, that is 38 girls who placed one place lower than they should have including 3 who didn't make finals and another 3 who were relegated to the Consolation Final instead of the real final.




There's a lot of conjecture there with no basis to stand it on. If Thomas got 1st place in all three events, soundly beating everyone she was competing against, you'd have a more solid argument. As is, she won one event, and placed fairly low in the others, which could be said of any naturally born females competing in the same event.

A transgender woman winning one event isn't indicative of an unfair advantage. You'll have to illustrate a clear bias in their favor over multiple events.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> I think the parents did the responsible thing.  They waited to see.  They didn't have an agenda and seemed to have the child's best interests in mind.
> 
> My concern is parents who jump the gun because a boy likes to play with dolls or a girl who likes to play with building blocks and all of a sudden the kid is on puberty blockers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not yet.  Give it some time as it is happening.  Here is an example from Connecticut:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Was the Fastest Girl in Connecticut. But Transgender Athletes Made it an Unfair Fight.
> 
> 
> It’s discouraging that the federal district court has decided that these experiences—these lost opportunities—simply don’t matter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> adflegal.org



I’m trying not to offend anyone, please be kind. 

I don’t see average parents jumping any guns, so there really is no need to worry. Think of it this way. Most parents want their biological child to act according to their biological sex. So if your little  girl acts tom-boyish no one is going to rush them into a sex change, period. The wise parents will wait and see, allowing  their child to dress as they prefer and see if it is a phase, (which is exactly what the doctors said to do in the report) or if not, see to their child’s needs and support them. Emotionally beating them up is asking for heart break or tragedy.

I personally can‘t relate to this, born a boy, always felt like a boy, I can’t imagine how it would feel to feel like I am more like the opposite sex and had to emotionally deal with that. I imagine it feels like you have been cheated. However there is enough variation in average sexuality that there are no walls in place that define behavior although I acknowledge that girls today might have it easier wearing boy clothes than vice a versa especially  in grade school.

Back to jumping  the gun, we have a nephew who we knew was gay a young age, now a happy adult (lawyer) and a niece who was very boyish all her life and at 18 is finally transitioning and is now our nephew.

And if it can be shown that trans women statistically and reasonably have a physical advantage in sports events than I believe adjustments would have to be made for such competitions to remain fair. What we see now are ignorant conservatives legislating banns across the board based on their prejudices.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> Back to jumping  the gun, we have a nephew who we knew was gay a young age,




How young?  This young?


----------



## Renzatic

Herdfan said:


> How young?  This young?




That's not a good argument, Herd. You're comparing someone's personally made identification against some crazy women using her baby to rack up hits on Tik-Tok.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> How young?  This young?



Apologies, to be fair, we suspected, not knew when he was about 10.

Of interest concerning children clothing styles in the 19th Century: 


​


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> As for othering other minority athletes, that is BS. Minorities participate in sports every day without issue. Any nobody cares.



Brian Flores might have something to say about this.

A bit more info on racism in sports.









						Lapchick: Racism reported in sports decreasing but still prevalent
					

Columnist Richard Lapchick examines how documented acts of racism in sports decreased in both the United States and internationally over the past year, but why it's important that athletes and leagues continue to push for no-tolerance policies.




					www.espn.com
				




Or a bit more:



			https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1156&context=sportslaw
		


It’s also absurd to excuse anti-trans or anti-gay bigotry by saying “well at least I ain’t racist!"


----------



## Herdfan

Renzatic said:


> That's not a good argument, Herd. You're comparing someone's personally made identification against some crazy women using her baby to rack up hits on Tik-Tok.




I actually agree.  But that doesn't stop posters here from finding conservatives doing stupid things and posting them as examples of what all conservatives are doing.


----------



## Renzatic

Herdfan said:


> I actually agree.  But that doesn't stop posters here from finding conservatives doing stupid things and posting them as examples of what all conservatives are doing.




It's like all the conservatives on Facebook that scream about their recent hash of book bannings not being as bad as those hypocritical liberals wanting to ban Cat in the Hat.

...was that a big push among liberals? No, it wasn't. I think it was just some local thing brought up by some high strung people. I wouldn't have even remembered it being a thing if it weren't brought up recently. 

The thing is, broad brush accusations are part and parcel with arguing politics on the internet. It's annoying, and you should call it out when it happens, but really, the best thing to do is offer up a more compelling, preferably less cheap, counterpoint.


----------



## SuperMatt

Renzatic said:


> It's like all the conservatives on Facebook that scream about their recent hash of book bannings not being as bad as those hypocritical liberals wanting to ban Cat in the Hat.
> 
> ...was that a big push among liberals? No, it wasn't. I think it was just some local thing brought up by some high strung people. I wouldn't have even remembered it being a thing if it weren't brought up recently.
> 
> The thing is, broad brush accusations are part and parcel with arguing politics on the internet. It's annoying, and you should call it out when it happens, but really, the best thing to do is offer up a more compelling, preferably less cheap, counterpoint.



The biggest problem I have with the right-wing side of this argument is as follows:

They are using *laws* to force their way on others. Banning books, censoring teachers, prosecuting parents who have transgender kids for child abuse, etc.

They claim liberals are doing the same thing through cancel culture or decisions made by “woke” corporations. I’m sorry, but that isn’t the same as using the state to make your opponents’ views or ideas LITERALLY illegal.

Passing laws in an attempt to stop natural changes to society is just pissing into the wind. It won‘t stop the changes from happening, and it just blows back on the person doing it. They tried it when Galileo told them the world was round, and guess what? The world didn’t magically flatten out because they wanted it to.


----------



## Renzatic

SuperMatt said:


> They are using *laws* to force their way on others.




That is one thing I've noticed when I decide to waste my time making fun of people on Facebook. For a bunch who constantly preach about keeping government small, and taking care of your own problems, they tend to support the government legislating itself into other people's lives surprisingly quickly.

It's not the government's job to prove us with cheap healthcare, but micromanaging sports organizations, defining for them who can or cannot compete in certain events? Well, that's perfectly kosher.

I wholly support big government, so long as it's being used to fuck over someone I don't like. I can't abide them helping anyone, because god forbid my tax dollars go towards enabling some deviant's lifestyle. WANGS IS WANGS AND VAJANEUHS IS VAJANEUHS!


----------



## ronntaylor

Herdfan said:


> Doesn't matter since she is the author.



Of course it matters. They are a hate group with their sole purpose being to take away rights. Simple as that. They will cherry pick cases to forward their agenda. Once again: the expected link to a right-wing attack group, the Alliance Defending Freedom (sic)


----------



## DT

There are certain groups  (ex: certain organized religions),  whose charters/doctrines/bylaws at a minimum encourage, and sometimes demand, that their belief systems be imposed on people outside of their group.  Their preference is  to make you "one of us ...",  call it, passive indoctrination (with maybe a little scare tactics, i.e., "Have you been saved?"), but if you won't/can't be part of the group, doesn't matter, you're still going to follow their rules.

I've noticed that all the groups I dislike, follow this same behavior.


----------



## Deleted member 215

The reason there's so much focus on trans women as opposed to trans men is that conservatives have always strongly played up things that could be seen as a threat to white women and children. Trans men are not an obvious threat to white women and children, so they more or less ignore them and the focus is on trans women, predatory men hiding in bathrooms or threatening women's sports. It's ironically sexist against men because it implies that men are inherently predatory (a similar current I think underlies those who have a problem with the idea of a male babysitter).


----------



## Joe

TBL said:


> The reason there's so much focus on trans women as opposed to trans men is that conservatives have always strongly played up things that could be seen as a threat to white women and children. Trans men are not an obvious threat to white women and children, so they more or less ignore them and the focus is on trans women, predatory men hiding in bathrooms or threatening women's sports. It's ironically sexist against men because it implies that men are inherently predatory (a similar current I think underlies those who have a problem with the idea of a male babysitter).




The 'ole "What can we do to scare white people today?" It works, and that's why they continue to do it.


----------



## AG_PhamD

I think this is a very complex issue that both sides tend to oversimplify. It amazes me how big of an issue this has become considering how few people are transgender. It also amazes me how litigious this has become- whether it be having to protect people’s ability to transition or preventing it and inhabiting the ability to even talk about it. 

If parents want to debate at what age issues of sexuality are discussed in school and in what manner, I think there is merit to that. A lot of the incidents in the media that some parents are outraged about I think can be seen as age-inappropriate education. But that does not mean such realities should should be censored from a child’s entire life experience- it’s not productive or realistic. 

From a medical perspective, considering the statistics, I think we need to be careful to properly determine who should be a good candidate for puberty blockers and surgery. Both are significant steps with risks and irreversible consequences. These are monumental decisions that a young teenager may not be fully equipped to comprehend or may change as they develop further. 

I think this is an important perspective on the matter: 








						Forget What Gender Activists Tell You. Here’s What Medical Transition Looks Like
					

Free Thought Lives




					quillette.com
				




To be clear, my opinion is not to ban gender affirming treatments or make it practically impossible. My point is we should be careful as to how we judge when a patient is fit for such treatments and that they fully understand the potential risks. It concerns greatly me when you have large movements pushing against things like pre-surgery psych assessments (which exist with a number of other types of treatments unrelated to gender). 

If children want to experiment and explore gender, that’s harmless in my opinion. But when it comes to hormones and surgery, I am just advocating that exercise be cautioned. In the noble effort to improve transpeople’s access to gender confirming treatment and social acceptance, we need to be careful not to let vulnerable kids (or even adults) get swept into making decisions the might later regret. I think it’s important for this to be further researched to better predict how we can help these people.


----------



## Deleted member 215

^Important valid points. I've said this before, but though it is possible for someone to know they are trans from a young age, it's also possible that certain behaviors and "signs" are not indicative of gender dysphoria but of something else and if anyone is going to transition, you must be absolutely certain that is what is happening. And they must be old enough to make their own, informed decision about it with a doctor's input. It's not helpful to put up a wall and label anyone who has questions or concerns about any of this "transphobic". Let's talk about it.


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> ^Important valid points. I've said this before, but though it is possible for someone to know they are trans from a young age, it's also possible that certain behaviors and "signs" are not indicative of gender dysphoria but of something else and if anyone is going to transition, you must be absolutely certain that is what is happening. And they must be old enough to make their own, informed decision about it with a doctor's input. It's not helpful to put up a wall and label anyone who questions any of this "transphobic". Let's talk about it.



Let’s allow young people, their parents, and doctors to work through these issues. Politicians threatening to lock parents up or take away their kids if they support gender transition is NOT the right way to do things.


----------



## Herdfan

TBL said:


> It's not helpful to put up a wall and label anyone who has questions or concerns about any of this "transphobic". Let's talk about it.




So is it transphobic to question the fairness of a biological male competing against biological female?  

I think it is a legitimate question.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> So is it transphobic to question the fairness of a biological male competing against biological female?
> 
> I think it is a legitimate question.



It isn’t transphobic for sport governing bodies to ask the question... because they are seeking solutions to allow transgender athletes to compete in a way that is fair for all.

It could be transphobic when people constantly harp on it. It could be transphobic when politicians ban all transgender people from participating in sports entirely.

My question would be: do most people believe in “live and let live”? If so, why constantly complain about transgender people competing in sports since it hasn’t affected over 99% of them directly and most likely never will? Instead, laws are passed attacking transgender athletes and transgender children. They aren’t hurting anybody, but for some reason they are the current punching bags for the right-wing.


----------



## SuperMatt

And now Florida is trying to legislate what kind of clothing your kids are allowed to wear and what you can name them?

Here’s an example of another unnecessary attack on transgender kids.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1517141090133893120/


----------



## DT

SuperMatt said:


> My question would be: do most people believe in “live and let live”? If so, why constantly complain about transgender people competing in sports since it hasn’t affected over 99% of them directly and most likely never will? Instead, laws are passed attacking transgender athletes and transgender children. They aren’t hurting anybody, but for some reason they are the current punching bags for the right-wing.




Just going to repost something I wrote in another thread:



DT said:


> There are certain groups  (ex: certain organized religions),  whose charters/doctrines/bylaws at a minimum encourage, and sometimes demand, that their belief systems be imposed on people outside of their group.  Their preference is  to make you "one of us ...",  call it, passive indoctrination (with maybe a little scare tactics, i.e., "Have you been saved?"), but if you won't/can't be part of the group, doesn't matter, you're still going to follow their rules.
> 
> I've noticed that all the groups I dislike, follow this same behavior.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> And now Florida is trying to legislate what kind of clothing your kids are allowed to wear and what you can name them?
> 
> Here’s an example of another unnecessary attack on transgender kids.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1517141090133893120/



Can't say gay
Can't wear certain clothes
Can't have certain names
Can't have an abortion
Can't fart in public after 6:00 PM (yes, really)

Look at all that Republican freedom.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Herdfan said:


> So is it transphobic to question the fairness of a biological male competing against biological female?
> 
> I think it is a legitimate question.




For once, as it happens, I am in agreement with you.

Questions do need to be asked.

Now, I don't care if this "applies to the elite 1%" - and I am writing as someone who loathes the very concept of working out, or gym culture, and used to detest sports (when I was expected to try to play them).  So, personally, this doesn't apply to me.

However, it does apply to girls and women who are talented at sports, and it is a legitimate question to ask.

And, to my mind, it goes (or has the potential to go) far further.

What of female only spaces?

Changing rooms, rest rooms (and no, I am not comfortable with the ardent stance of the more motivated and - yes rabid - members of the trans community on such issues).

Okay: What of other female only spaces, places and spaces that are female safe spaces only for reasons of safety?  Domestic violence shelters, female prisons?

Seriously, there are very good reasons why some spaces (historically, carved out and protected with considerable difficulty and often in the teeth of fierce and vehement conservative (often male) opposition) are designated female safe spaces only.


----------



## Herdfan

Scepticalscribe said:


> For once, as it happens, I am in agreement with you.+




I think it is the THIRD time.  Better watch out. 




Scepticalscribe said:


> Questions do need to be asked.
> 
> Now, I don't care if this "applies to the elite 1%" - and I am writing as someone who loathes the very concept of working out, or gym culture, and used to detest sports (when I was expected to try to play them).  So, personally, this doesn't apply to me.
> 
> However, it does apply to girls and womne who are talented at sports, and it is a legitimate question to ask.
> 
> And, to my mind, it goes (or has the potential to go) far further.
> 
> What of female only spaces?
> 
> Changing rooms, rest rooms (and no, I am not comfortable with the stance of the more rabid members of the trans community oon such issues).
> 
> Okay: What of other female only spaces, places and spaces that are female safe spaces only for reasons of safety?  Domestic violence shelters, female prisons?
> 
> Seriously, there are very good reasons why some spaces (historically, carved out and protected with considerable difficulty and often in the teeth of fierce and vehement conservative (often male) opposition) are designated female safe spaces only.




Lots of questions need to be asked and the answers need to be more than calling someone who disagrees transphobic (certainly not meaning you).


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Herdfan said:


> *I think it is the THIRD time*.  Better watch out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of questions need to be asked and the answers need to be more than calling someone who disagrees transphobic (certainly not meaning you).



Oh, dear.

That many?

What can I say?

Anyway, yes, yet again, I agree with you.

To refer to people who raise legitimate questions - and belittle, denigrate, and dismiss their concerns - by the cheap shot of hoping to silence them by calling them "transphobic" - is not good enough.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> Oh, dear.
> 
> That many?
> 
> What can I say?
> 
> Anyway, yes, yet again, I agree with you.
> 
> To refer to people who raise legitimate questions - and belittle, denigrate, and dismiss their concerns - by the cheap shot of hoping to silence them by calling them "transphobic" - is not good enough.



To those that raise legitimate questions, surely they don’t mind answering a legitimate question.

Should transgender people be banned from all sports?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> To those that raise legitimate questions, surely they don’t mind answering a legitimate question.
> 
> Should transgender people be banned from all sports?




Perhaps a separate category.

However, I would argue (strongly) that women's sport (and - as things are - it is already hard enough to persuade teenage girls to participate in sport, why place further obstacles in their way) - and not just elite sport - what defines women's sports, and who gets to participate in them, - and the (damned hard won) rights of women - should not be sacrificed on the altar of trans rights.

In other words, trans rights do not - and ought not - trump women's rights.

And @Herdfan has a point.

Why should kids anywhere (female kids) participate in something that they will never - and that is, never - have a hope of succeeding in, or winning, in such circumstances?

Moreover, something that could actually prove to be physically dangerous if they do participate when competing against those who are trans?

And worse: What about physical safety (in sports) for women: I have read stories - yes, a small number, thus far, but, but, but, - where girls/women who competed against trans women (in rugby, judo, for example - contact sports) suffered injuries far in excess of what they might have suffered when competing against girls or women who hadn't already had - or enjoyed - the considerable advantages and/or benefits (strength, reach, weight, reaction speed, power, size, oxygen capacity in heart and lungs) of having gone through puberty in a male body.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> Perhaps a separate category.
> 
> However, I would argue ((strongly) that women's sport (and - as things are - it is already hard enough to persuade teenage girls to participate in sport, why place further obstacles in their way) - and not just elite sport - what defines women's sports, and who gets to participate in them, - and the (damned hard won) rights of women - should not be sacrificed on the altar of trans rights.
> 
> In other words, trans rights do not - and ought not - trump women's rights.
> 
> And @Herdfan has a point.
> 
> Why should kids anywhere (female kids) participate in something that they will never - and that is, never - have a hope of succeeding in, or winning, in such circumstances?
> 
> Moreover, something that could actually prove to be physically dangerous if they do participate when competing against those who are trans?
> 
> And worse: What about physical safety (in sports) for women: I have read stories - yes, a small number, thus far, but, but, but, - where girls/women who competed against trans women (in rugby, judo, for example - contact sports) suffered injuries far in excess of what they might have suffered when competing against girls or women who hadn't already had - or enjoyed - the considerable advantages and/or benefits (strength, reach, weight, reaction speed, power, size, oxygen capacity in heart and lungs) of having gone through puberty in a male body.



Transgender rights vs women’s rights is not a zero-sum game. Shouldn’t we find a way to respect all humans? Allow everybody to participate?

How many examples of injuries are there involving transgender women in sports?

What is wrong with the existing rules that regulate transgender women in sports?

Surely there is a way for things to be fair without excluding all transgender people from all sports. Even the conservative governor of Utah felt that way, opposing an outright ban of transgender people from sports.









						Are trans women really a 'threat' to female sport?
					

Transgender women's participation in female sport has prompted criticism, but two trans athletes says there is a lot of misunderstanding.




					www.bbc.com


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> To those that raise legitimate questions, surely they don’t mind answering a legitimate question.
> 
> Should transgender people be banned from all sports?




Who is banned?  A biological male can still play on the men's team even if they identify as a woman.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Transgender rights vs women’s rights is not a zero-sum game. Shouldn’t we find a way to respect all humans? Allow everybody to participate?




Respect all humans yes, but not at the expense of humans who are female, who are women.

Besides, women in sport is a relatively recent thing, with many who still oppose it - or seek to belittle it, or dismiss it - (including male sportsmen, male churchmen, some male sports commentators, among many others).

The fact that what will deny women success in sports (when competing against trans competitors) is precisely that which makes them women, while the success of their trans competitors will have arisen from the fact that the advantages and benefits they enjoyed as male, will still stand to them when competing against people who were born, and went through puberty, as female.

Thus, the defining feature of success, defeat, and - what will be perceived as failure - is born biological sex, the old, tired trope, of equating being female to failure, being second rate, and incapable of success.

I'm not sure that this is a lesson that we would like teenage sports to further consolidate.  Or, perhaps it is.

Perhaps a separate category of sports.

However, trans rights shouldn't occur at the expense of women's rights.



SuperMatt said:


> How many examples of injuries are there involving transgender women in sports?



I don't know (this is not a subject that I am remotely expert in; normally, I do not post on stuff I know little about).

However, I have read accounts (in the Guardian - about rugby, and an online account about a mother writing about why her daughter - a medal winner at an advanced level - quit judo), of injuries, which concern me.

One such serious injury - delivered by someone with the strength and reach and power - and with the fists - of an adult male in such a setting - is one too many.

While the governor of Utah is not an authority I look to, writers such as J K Rowling, (yes, she is more than capable of looking after herself, but she was treated outrageously having penned a piece on the trans issue)- and Suzanne Moore, who quit the Guardian - do express legitimate concerns, which need to be addressed.



SuperMatt said:


> Surely there is a way for things to be fair without excluding all transgender people from all sports. Even the conservative governor of Utah felt that way, opposing an outright ban of transgender people from sports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are trans women really a 'threat' to female sport?
> 
> 
> Transgender women's participation in female sport has prompted criticism, but two trans athletes says there is a lot of misunderstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



I have never said "exclude trans athletes".

However, I do think that there is a case to be made for excluding them - post puberty - from women's sports.

Perhaps a separate category.

Otherwise, in time, we run the risk (to the joy of religious conservatives everywhere, who hate womne more than they hate anything else) of a world of men's, or male sport, and trans sport (which will, misleadingly, be passed off as "women's sports").

Yes, I exaggerate. 

But - candidly- denying women's experiences (and suppressing women's rights) under the umbrella of supporting others, does not seem to me to be the way to go.


----------



## Herdfan

Scepticalscribe said:


> And worse: What about physical safety (in sports) for women: I have read stories - yes, a small number, thus far, but, but, but, - where girls/women who competed against trans women (in rugby, judo, for example - contact sports) suffered injuries far in excess of what they might have suffered when competing against girls or women who hadn't already had - or enjoyed - the considerable advantages and/or benefits (strength, reach, weight, reaction speed, power, size, oxygen capacity in heart and lungs) of having gone through puberty in a male body.




For years I "managed" a Co-Ed softball team.  We played in an A/B League meaning we were pretty good.  But I would never let one of the girls play 3rd base.  Not even someone who played 3rd for their college team.  Guys simply hit the ball too hard down the line.

I know I have posted this before, but when my daughter was swimming growing up, there was a club that hosted a meet where everyone swam together by seed.  There were no genders or age brackets.  You swam where your seed put you.  The results were then scored by age and gender.  But the swims in the pool were all mixed.

Up until about age 10, the girls did pretty good job of beating the boys.  Girls at that age had more control of their bodies, they listened to instruction better and were just better swimmers.  Once the boys hit puberty everything changed.  The boys took off and left the girls in their wake.  It simply isn't a level playing field.


----------



## SuperMatt

Excluding transgender women from activities, such as sports aligned with their gender identity, can be very detrimental to their mental health and well-being.

I am unaware of a similarly negative effect on others caused by including transgender women in women’s sports.





__





						Protecting Transgender Youths' Right to Participate in Sports | Columbia Public Health
					

While most young athletes across the U.S. nervously await announcements from sports conferences about the fate of their 2021 seasons amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, athletes like Lindsay Hecox also await another type of announcement about their future participation in sports: a court ruling...




					www.publichealth.columbia.edu
				






> Additionally, a 2016 study showed that transgender students denied access to gender-appropriate bathrooms on their college campuses were 45 percent more likely to attempt suicide. This has direct implications for sports participation, demonstrating how policies of exclusion can exacerbate the mental health crisis already surrounding transgender youth.





> Furthermore, the commonly cited belief that transgender girls and women will dominate sports is unfounded, as there is currently no scientific evidence that transgender people have an athletic advantage. Transgender athletes have been eligible for Olympic, professional, and NCAA competition for years, without any instance of trans dominance in sports.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Excluding transgender women from activities, such as sports aligned with their gender identity, can be very detrimental to their mental health and well-being.



And including transgender women in women's sport may be detrimental (physically, psychologically, emotionally, mental health and mental and physical and emotional well-being) to girls and women.  

Women's rights, and women's lived experience - and the needs of women, in sport and elsewhere,  - should not be sacrificed (yet again) to the well being of others, transwomen or anyone else.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> And including transgender women in women's sport may be detrimental (physically, psychologically, emotionally, mental health and mental and physical and emotional well-being) to girls and women.
> 
> Women's rights, and women's lived experience - and the needs of women, in sport and elsewhere,  - should not be sacrificed (yet again) to the well being of others, transwomen or anyone else.



I would be interested in seeing some evidence of the detriments listed above affecting women who include transgender women in their gender-specific activities.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> I would be interested in seeing some evidence of the detriments listed above affecting women who include transgender women in their gender-specific activities.



Well, sport isn't my area of expertise.

However, I do have (increasingly serious) concerns.   

Nevertheless, I have read (subjective, yes) accounts where people (usually, but not exclusively, women, also some men) have written about experiences they - or, their children - experienced when competing against trans women in sports such as cycling, rugby (some severe injuries), and one recent horrific case re judo. 

Moreover, when I see women whose writing I respect (Suzanne Moore, Hadley Freeman - both from the Guardian, who have written about this - and J K Rowling, who was torn apart when she published a thoughtful piece on the subject), I pay attention. 

I am also concerned on the state of the current debate re access to what are specifically women's spaces, women only spaces, changing rooms, rest rooms, - and, also, prisons, and domestic violence refuges, and to the silencing and sacking of some female academics in the UK when they raised some concerns about this. 

Again, some material - a few pieces - I read re gay women (who experienced extraordinary unpleasantness, the sort more usually associated with entitled men who become vicious and violent when rejected) when rejecting "romantic" overtures from trans women (who then attempted to argue that this was "transphobic"), I found unsettling.

None of this is conclusive: However, it is unsettling, and the tone of some trans activists - echoes of monstrous male entitlement, and classic mansplaining, but, in a female setting - does little to persuade me of the merit of their case. 

In any case, I see no reason why women's rights should be sacrificed on the altar of trans women's rights.  We fought too long and too hard for them.

(Interesting that none of this seems to occur with trans men). 

And, it is also interesting that more men seem to be passionately concerned and exercised with the rights of trans women than they ever were with the rights of women who had the misfortune (biological, legal, cultural, sporting, for that matter, socio-economic, political) to be born women.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I would be interested in seeing some evidence of the detriments listed above affecting women who include transgender women in their gender-specific activities.




There are plenty of interviews out there with the female swimmers who got beat by Lia Thomas.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> There are plenty of interviews out there with the female swimmers who got beat by Lia Thomas.



What did they say?


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> What did they say?




I think you have a WaPo subscription.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/02/03/lia-thomas-penn-swimming-teammates/
		










						Kentucky swimmer who tied with Lia Thomas says majority of women not okay with 'trajectory' of female sports
					

Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines, who tied with transgender swimmer Lia Thomas for fifth place in the 200-yard freestyle NCAA swimming championships, says the “majority” of females are “not okay with the trajectory” that female sports are taking.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> I think you have a WaPo subscription.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/02/03/lia-thomas-penn-swimming-teammates/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kentucky swimmer who tied with Lia Thomas says majority of women not okay with 'trajectory' of female sports
> 
> 
> Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines, who tied with transgender swimmer Lia Thomas for fifth place in the 200-yard freestyle NCAA swimming championships, says the “majority” of females are “not okay with the trajectory” that female sports are taking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



16 swimmers opposed it. But other swimmers supported her.

I notice that even those opposed to her competing were not calling for a ban on transgender women in women’s sports. They just wanted some changes to the rules.

So back to this question:



Scepticalscribe said:


> And including transgender women in women's sport may be detrimental (physically, psychologically, emotionally, mental health and mental and physical and emotional well-being) to girls and women.
> 
> Women's rights, and women's lived experience - and the needs of women, in sport and elsewhere, - should not be sacrificed (yet again) to the well being of others, transwomen or anyone else.




I do not see any of the above-listed detriments mentioned in the statement from those opposed to Ms. Thomas competing. I didn’t see anybody’s rights being sacrificed by including her.

Nothing is 100% fair, right? So, how about who is harmed more? The harm to transgender women by excluding them from all women’s sports is greater than the harm to women by having a small number of transgender women (about 1/2 of 1% of the population is transgender) compete with them.

If one wants to discuss how the NCAA or other sports governing bodies can change the rules to make sure things are as fair as possible, I think that’s reasonable.

But banning transgender women from all women’s sports is unreasonable, and unfairly discriminatory. Saying “they can play with the boys” or “use the boys bathroom” or “use the unisex bathroom” marginalizes and ostracizes them more. It really doesn’t hurt the 99%+ of people to accommodate the occasional transgender person that they encounter. To even think that such a small group of people pose a threat to the 99%+ is really silly.

Transgender people are not willingly enduring discrimination and hate in order to sneak a peek at somebody’s genitals in a bathroom or to be “first” in some sport.


----------



## Herdfan

When I was growing up, our town didn't have any girls sports other than cheerleaders for the midget league football teams.  There was usually a girl or two on the boys little league team, but that was it.

Then when I was 14 they built 2 new ball fields at the park.  The reason is remember this is after I aged out of LL, I had no place to play baseball.  We didn't have Babe Ruth or Senior League.  So my 13yo year, I had no place to play.  Then at 14 they created a Senior League and a Girls Softball League.  And the girls came out of the woodwork.  It went from a couple on each boys team to several girls teams.

So the women who fought for the right to play benefited my daughter.  She had soccer (although it was coed bunchball when she played), softball and volleyball all to choose from as she grew up.  She finally decided swimming was what she wanted to do even though she did play volley ball in MS because she was taller than just about everyone else.  

But those women who fought for girls to have their own sports, where they could compete against each other, is being dismantled.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> But those women who fought for girls to have their own sports, where they could compete against each other, is being dismantled.



Allowing a marginalized tiny sliver of the population to participate is not “dismantling” anything.

Instead of finding better ways to include transgender people, I see multiple people here falsely accusing them of harming women.

Data has been provided of the harms suffered by transgender people when they’re excluded. As I asked before, I’d like to see some data on non-transgender people being harmed by including transgender people in their activities. Perhaps it hasn’t been studied? I don’t know, but as it stands, the claims of supposed harm coming from transgender people are not backed up by anything.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> I didn’t see anybody’s rights being sacrificed by including her.



Only women's rights.



SuperMatt said:


> Nothing is 100% fair, right?



I've yet to see this argument put forward by a male when they (that is, men) may well be affected negatively by the proposed policy.

In fact, I marvel at how easily this argument is advanced by men when the rights to be encroached upon are those of women.



SuperMatt said:


> Nothing is 100% fair, right? So, how about who is harmed more? The harm to transgender women by excluding them from all women’s sports is greater than the harm to women by having a small number of transgender women (about 1/2 of 1% of the population is transgender) compete with them.




That is not the argument that you think it is.

Anyway, my answer (that is, for now, at present, as matters are,) is that women stand to be harmed more.

Women's sports - which, remember, were originally devised as a separate category precisely because in most sports, adult males enjoy (and, as an ardent feminist, you can have no idea how much it galls me to have to even bash this out on the keyboard, to grit my teeth to write this), an advantage, a physical advantage, (in reach, size, height, speed, strength, lung and heart oxygen capacity), granted them by biology once they passed puberty, which means that, in most sporting events, men and women compete in separate categories.

This is precisely because men and women cannot compete in most sports on any sort of an equal footing, for men will always have an advantage.

In fact, in most sporting events (equestrian events are different, because the size, speed and strength in competition are those of the horses, whereas victory comes to riders, or jockeys, who bring skill, intelligence, experience, judgment, a good working relationship with the horse - on those criteria, women are easily equal; while extreme endurance events and long distance swimming are about the only sports where women - at an elite level - appear to enjoy some advantage) the physical advantage lies with men.

Thus, to allow women (who used to be men, with all of the advantages puberty grants to men in most forms of physical competition with women) to compete against women is not only grossly unfair to the girls and women who have practised, trained, dreamed, sacrificed weeks, if not months or years of their lives, - because they will never achieve success - they cannot, (and all of @Herdfan's points about destroying the dreams of girls matter here) hope to achieve success.

Furthermore, it is not just grossly unfair but, it is also grotesquely unfair to girls and women, because it tells them that - even in a category supposedly confined to women, to female competitors - that they cannot win.  Cannot ever win, in these circumstances.

It further tells them - reinforces the message - that, even as women, (let alone competing against men in life, love, careers, education, professions) they are still lesser, still inadequate, still second-rate.

That, even as women, they are failures.  Because, the only women that will win in such stacked competitions, competitions supposedly confined to women, are women who used to be men, women who enjoy the advantages of men.

It is hard enough to persuade women (and girls) to want to exercise, to want to play sports, especially competitive sports; I have no doubt whatsoever that this will make matters far harder still.

And that does not take into account the very real (if yet insufficiently explored) question of injuries to womne and girls at the hands of transwomen on the field of competition (I mentioned cases of rugby and judo, both of which have been written about: @Herdfan mentioned ball games).


SuperMatt said:


> But banning transgender women from all women’s sports is unreasonable, and unfairly discriminatory.




Not banning them is unfair to women and girls.



SuperMatt said:


> Transgender people are not willingly enduring discrimination and hate in order to sneak a peek at somebody’s genitals in a bathroom or to be “first” in some sport.




I'm afraid that this comes across as a classic case of the cheerful oblivion granted by what is sometimes referred to as "male privilege".

Try to see this from a woman's point of view, from the bitterly lived experience of many women.

While "sneaking a peek" is a shared giggle to many men, (yes, yawn, not all men), it is something that is experienced as - and viewed as - a threat, and an invasion, and a violation of privacy, consent, personal space, and autonomy, to many women.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Instead of finding better ways to include transgender people, I see multiple people here falsely accusing them of harming women.



Include them, yes.

And regulate (and enforce) how - and under what conditions - they may participate.

But - and this is key - not at the cost of harming women, or, and this is fundamental, undermining women's rights, or what constitutes women's sports.

And - even more key - preserving safe spaces (genuinely safe spaces) for women, womne only safe spaces (and here, I am referring to domestic violence refuges, women's prisons).

On the issue of access to women only safe spaces, this is one area where I would be implacably opposed to access for trans women, or anyone who is male in any size, or shape; to my mind, the rights, the safety, and the need for safety, of the 99% outweighs the sensitivities of the 1%.

Re data, I think that the area is too new to have gathered much data, although I think that this will change as more women become emboldened to voice their reservations.

Personally, I only became aware of some of these issues over the past two years, - and then, only because writers I respect (Suzanne Moore, Hadley Freeman, and J K Rowling) had written about it.

Sports, in general, are not my area of expertise, - thus, I rarely comment on them - although I read about them, and am interested in how they affect and influence culture and society, and, yes, I do follow soccer.


----------



## mollyc

I am the mother of a son and daughter, both whom competitively swim. They are neither at the elite level, although my son probably could get there if he liked swimming more. My daughter is 16, 5'4" and 120 pounds. She is not built for elite level swimming, even if she trained hard enough. Not all humans are genetically designed to be elite athletes. My son is 14, 6' tall and wears a size 11 mens shoe. He is not done growing (not sure how much he weighs currently, I'd say probably 160). He is not fully through puberty. That said, theoretically, if he were to come out as transgender and decided to transition today.....his major growth has already happened. He will never be a small person. He should not compete against my daughter; he is already faster than she is at two years younger with less training. Are there 16 yo female swimmers who are 6' tall? I'm sure they are. But they are genetically slighter and finer boned than my son.

Although my daughter is not as fast as many of her friends, she was fast enough to qualify for high school states in her school's league this year, so she isn't pokey. I hestitate to think how many of the female swimmers she competes with, who _are_ elite level for their age, will find themselves up against swimmers like Lia Thomas, who is built like my son, and competed for years as a male. There will be girls who will drop out of competitions before they should because they know they will never win against people like Lia.

The comments section in the linked Washington Post article were surprising; as a known liberal biased newspaper, most of the comments were against trans male athletes in women's competitions. This comment caught my eye:


> Lia obviously has not been taught one of life's most important principles: that we none of us get everything we want in life, and that sometimes we have to make a choice.
> 
> Male athletes who fervently desire to live their lives as women, but also fervently love their sport, must make a choice between the two. EITHER they pursue transition OR they pursue their sport, competing with and against males. They cannot have both.
> 
> The patent unfairness of Lia's male body competing against female swimmers is glaringly obvious to everyone—even to those who will feebly insist the Emperor is fully clothed.




I don't have an answer. I don't think there is harm in letting trans people compete at the everyday, club type of level. But elite?? We aren't there yet, and there are too many unknowns to throw everyone together just yet.


----------



## Herdfan

Scepticalscribe said:


> Try to see this from a woman's point of view, from the bitterly lived experience of many women.




I will never be able to do that.  But what I do know is the hours that my daughter put in to excel at her sport.  She was in the pool 10-12 hours a week plus running on non-pool days, all while keeping a 4+GPA.  Once she got her license, she would go swim an hour BEFORE school (she was one of those weird morning people).  I could not have been more proud of her simply based on her dedication, regardless of how she did in a race.


----------



## Herdfan

mollyc said:


> Although my daughter is not as fast as many of her friends, she was fast enough to qualify for high school states in her school's league this year, so she isn't pokey.




Sounds very similar to my daughter.  She was more of a distance swimmer, for which HS doesn't really have any events (even the 500 is considered a sprint for elite athletes). 

A good friend who is also a swim parent has two kids just like yours, the younger one is a great swimmer, but doesn't love it, the older one one loves, but will never be as good as her younger sister no matter what.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

This debate (discussion) appears to be heating up: 

Having prowled online, I came across a thoughtful, balanced, statement (published yesterday, - initially, I had spotted it on Twitter, - and I read the subsequent discussion; anyway, I also tracked it down (from the BBC) so that I can quote it, or cite it, here, from Katie Archibald, who, as an Olympic champion, is more than qualified to offer an opinion on the subject.

The statement is from the two time Olympic Champion, Katie Archibald, on the vexed issue of transgender athletes in cycling:

"20.04.2022.

Cycling has given me things that I value deeply. It's given me friendships, mentors, and rivals. It's given me an outlet for my desire to compete, an escape from the world when I need it, and a community I can always rely on.

Riding a bike keeps me healthy, riding a bike keeps me happy, and I believe everyone should have a chance to feel this way about cycling, and to feel welcomed by the cycling community that I hold dear.

With this in mind, it is my opinion that the international governing bodies of several sports have let down transgender athletes, in particular transgender women, with their inclusion policies.

These policies have put the athletes, their involvement in sport, and their personal lives under intense scrutiny when all the athletes have done is follow the rules and enter a category they were encouraged to enter.

I, too, feel let down by these policies.

I feel let down by the International Olympic Committee who tell me there should be no assumed advantage for an athlete with a gender identity different to their sex.

I read this and hear that my world titles, my Olympic medals, and the champions jerseys I have at home, were all won in a category of people who simply don't try as hard as the men.

That losing to male androgenisation is not about biology, but mindset. They are wrong.

The retained advantage of people who have gone through male puberty in strength, stamina, and physique, with or without testosterone suppression, has been well documented.

Cycling's global governing body, by its president's own admission, knows this. But they chose to delay action until it became sadly personal for one rider. That wasn't fair.

I have the utmost respect for transgender people and equally respect their right to fair and safe inclusion in sport.

Global sports bodies, instead of doing the work to create a welcoming and inclusive environment in a category where fairness could be ensured, have put the personal lives of these athletes on to the pages of tabloid newspapers. It's not right and we can't continue this way.

I'd like the work to start now. I'd like national and global sports bodies to work with the wider scientific community when developing their policies.

I'd like the governing bodies of cycling and related endurance sports like triathlon and rowing to work together and pool their resources for this work.

I'd like us all to continue welcoming trans athletes into our clubs, our training sessions, and our races. But I'd like us to do all this without sacrificing one of the foundational pillars of sport: fairness."


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Re possible suggested solutions:

That the idea of three categories (as recommended by some on Twitter) be given consideration:

Males (post puberty):

Females:

And other (open to all).

One writer who also put forward the argument of devising further additional categories for competition, offered as an example how fairness decreed not only competitions segregated by gender (for post pubertal individuals), but also how fairness required that people who are disabled not be obliged to compete aginst the able bodied (hence the development of the concept and competition of the Paralympics).


----------



## SuperMatt

mollyc said:


> I hestitate to think how many of the female swimmers she competes with, who _are_ elite level for their age, will find themselves up against swimmers like Lia Thomas, who is built like my son, and competed for years as a male. There will be girls who will drop out of competitions before they should because they know they will never win against people like Lia.



Transgender people make up about 1/2 of 1% of the population. So if you hesitate and think, you might consider that it’s quite unlikely that the proposed situation would actually affect most people. If all women dropped out of sports because of fear they’d face a transgender competitor, then over 99% of athletes would quit and we wouldn’t have women’s athletics at all. 

Also, most transgender athletes are NOT elite.

Sports organizations have rules in place to try and create a level playing field. The NCAA recently changed rules to allow different sports to handle things differently. Why is that important? In some sports, some of the factors accounted for by gender-change surgery have different impacts on athletic ability than in other sports.

We don’t have a full understanding of the athletic capabilities of these unique individuals yet. But I believe we should continue to work and find ways to include them in a way that is as fair as possible.

I do not believe banning all transgender women from women’s sports is an acceptable solution.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> This debate (discussion) appears to be heating up:
> 
> Having prowled online, I came across a thoughtful, balanced, statement (published yesterday, - initially, I had spotted it on Twitter, - and I read the subsequent discussion; anyway, I also tracked it down (from the BBC) so that I can quote it, or cite it, here, from Katie Archibald, who, as an Olympic champion, is more than qualified to offer an opinion on the subject.
> 
> The statement is from the two time Olympic Champion, Katie Archibald, on the vexed issue of transgender athletes in cycling:
> 
> "20.04.2022.
> 
> Cycling has given me things that I value deeply. It's given me friendships, mentors, and rivals. It's given me an outlet for my desire to compete, an escape from the world when I need it, and a community I can always rely on.
> 
> Riding a bike keeps me healthy, riding a bike keeps me happy, and I believe everyone should have a chance to feel this way about cycling, and to feel welcomed by the cycling community that I hold dear.
> 
> With this in mind, it is my opinion that the international governing bodies of several sports have let down transgender athletes, in particular transgender women, with their inclusion policies.
> 
> These policies have put the athletes, their involvement in sport, and their personal lives under intense scrutiny when all the athletes have done is follow the rules and enter a category they were encouraged to enter.
> 
> I, too, feel let down by these policies.
> 
> I feel let down by the International Olympic Committee who tell me there should be no assumed advantage for an athlete with a gender identity different to their sex.
> 
> I read this and hear that my world titles, my Olympic medals, and the champions jerseys I have at home, were all won in a category of people who simply don't try as hard as the men.
> 
> That losing to male androgenisation is not about biology, but mindset. They are wrong.
> 
> The retained advantage of people who have gone through male puberty in strength, stamina, and physique, with or without testosterone suppression, has been well documented.
> 
> Cycling's global governing body, by its president's own admission, knows this. But they chose to delay action until it became sadly personal for one rider. That wasn't fair.
> 
> I have the utmost respect for transgender people and equally respect their right to fair and safe inclusion in sport.
> 
> Global sports bodies, instead of doing the work to create a welcoming and inclusive environment in a category where fairness could be ensured, have put the personal lives of these athletes on to the pages of tabloid newspapers. It's not right and we can't continue this way.
> 
> I'd like the work to start now. I'd like national and global sports bodies to work with the wider scientific community when developing their policies.
> 
> I'd like the governing bodies of cycling and related endurance sports like triathlon and rowing to work together and pool their resources for this work.
> 
> I'd like us all to continue welcoming trans athletes into our clubs, our training sessions, and our races. But I'd like us to do all this without sacrificing one of the foundational pillars of sport: fairness."



I agree with the conclusion. Let’s work hard to find a fair way to include transgender people in sports if they want to participate. I also appreciate that this author takes the sport’s governing body to task for failing to properly handle the situation. They do NOT attack transgender people, since they were simply following the rules set forth by the sport’s governors.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Transgender people make up about 1/2 of 1% of the population. So if you hesitate and think, you might consider that it’s quite unlikely that the proposed situation would actually affect most people. If all women dropped out of sports because of fear they’d face a transgender competitor, then over 99% of athletes would quit and we wouldn’t have women’s athletics at all.



But that one athlete, Thomas, affected the places of hundreds of girls.  Some didn't qualify for the NCAA's because the slot was already taken.  Some didn't make finals because the slot was taken.  That one person affects a lot of other people.





SuperMatt said:


> Sports organizations have rules in place to try and create a level playing field. *The NCAA recently changed rules to allow different sports to handle things differently. *Why is that important? In some sports, some of the factors accounted for by gender-change surgery have different impacts on athletic ability than in other sports.




Which they promptly decided to ignore when they didn't like what USA Swimming came up with.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Transgender people make up about 1/2 of 1% of the population. So if you hesitate and think, you might consider that it’s quite unlikely that the proposed situation would actually affect most people. If all women dropped out of sports because of fear they’d face a transgender competitor, then over 99% of athletes would quit and we wouldn’t have women’s athletics at all.
> 
> Also, most transgender athletes are NOT elite.
> 
> Sports organizations have rules in place to try and create a level playing field. The NCAA recently changed rules to allow different sports to handle things differently. Why is that important? In some sports, some of the factors accounted for by gender-change surgery have different impacts on athletic ability than in other sports.
> 
> We don’t have a full understanding of the athletic capabilities of these unique individuals yet. But I believe we should continue to work and find ways to include them in a way that is as fair as possible.
> 
> I do not believe banning all transgender women from women’s sports is an acceptable solution.



Transgender athletes may well comprise (for now) a half of one percent of all of the female population.

However, I am willing to wager that they will comprise a far greater percentage of those who compete successfully (i.e. secure victory) when competing in female segregated sports than their overall proportion of the (female) population.

And no: This does not just apply to elite sports,, although that is where this issue has become most visible.

Candidly, I will confess that I am far more concerned about ordinary sports, and the impact this might have on girls wishing to participate (and compete) given that they already face considerable obstacles to engage with and play and participate in, sports.

Moreover, I suspect that male concern about right of access to, and participation in, (by trans athletes) to sporting competition would be far greater, (not to mention a lot louder), if the trans people who became male were to secure regular victories (and simply turn up to competitions bearing such clear basic biological advantages in terms of reach, strength, size, power, speed, lung and heart oxygen capacity) against mere boys whose own biology meant that they lacked such preternatural (but advantageous) qualities.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> I agree with the conclusion. Let’s work hard to find a fair way to include transgender people in sports if they want to participate. I also appreciate that this author takes the sport’s governing body to task for failing to properly handle the situation. They do NOT attack transgender people, since they were simply following the rules set forth by the sport’s governors.



But Katie Archibald also raises the fundamental issue of fairness.

Fairness to girls and women.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> But Katie Archibald also raises the fundamental issue of fairness.
> 
> Fairness to girls and women.



Transgender women are women too, right?


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Transgender women are women too, right?



All women are equal, but some women (not least, those born male with the advantages conferred by having gone through puberty in a male body) are more equal - a lot more equal - than others.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> However, I am willing to wager that they will comprise a far greater percentage of those who compete successfully (i.e. secure victory) when competing in female segregated sports than their overall proportion of the (female) population.



I’d suggest not wagering much. After all, transgender people have been allowed in the olympics since 2004. 

Guess how many actually got into the olympics since then.

Then guess how many won a medal.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

My concerns - in sport - lie with ensuring fairness for female athletes, (and that fairness not be sacrificed on the altar of trans rights) and elsewhere, ensuring that the rights of women are not undermined, or eroded, and the safety of women in single sex spaces remains guaranteed.


----------



## Cmaier

Scepticalscribe said:


> My concerns - in sport - lie with ensuring fairness for female athletes, (and that fairness not be sacrificed on the altar of trans rights) and elsewhere, ensuring that the rights of women are not undermined, or eroded, and the safety of women in single sex spaces remains guaranteed.




”the altar of trans rights” is a very clever turn of phrase designed to minimize the pursuit of those rights. Well done.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Cmaier said:


> ”the altar of trans rights” is a very clever turn of phrase designed to minimize the pursuit of those rights. Well done.



Not sure what you mean by "well done" unless you have intended to use it as one of those faux clever dismissive expressions.

For all of the vocally expressed concern about trans rights for (female) trans athletes, I have yet to observe much by way of concern, or worry, about ensuring fairness for women from some who have posted here.


----------



## SuperMatt

Threatening to kill workers at Merriam-Webster because you don’t like their definition of “female” is apparently the logical conclusion of anti-trans sentiment constantly broadcast by right-wing media.









						Merriam-Webster Targeted Online With Threats of Anti-LGBTQ Violence, U.S. Attorney Says
					

Prosecutors say a California man suggested company headquarters be "shot up and bombed"




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

Scepticalscribe said:


> Re possible suggested solutions:
> 
> That the idea of three categories (as recommended by some on Twitter) be given consideration:
> 
> Males (post puberty):
> 
> Females:
> 
> And other (open to all).
> 
> One writer who also put forward the argument of devising further additional categories for competition, offered as an example how fairness decreed not only competitions segregated by gender (for post pubertal individuals), but also how fairness required that people who are disabled not be obliged to compete aginst the able bodied (hence the development of the concept and competition of the Paralympics).




I would definitely support a neutral category in sports for people identifying as a different gender to their biological gender. I think that would be a lot fairer, especially in the women’s categories where women who were previously male, gain a distinct physical advantage despite their appearance. 

I think the problem that would exist is the lack of individuals in some of the categories or the additional cost at events like the Olympic Games.


----------



## SuperMatt

The-Real-Deal82 said:


> I think that would be a lot fairer, especially in the women’s categories where women who were previously male, gain a distinct physical advantage despite their appearance.



The evidence has shown that it is quite rare for transgender athletes to gain a distinct physical advantage. It’s not the problem that many claim it is.

I posed 2 questions earlier that, if answered, might illustrate that point quite clearly.



SuperMatt said:


> Transgender people have been allowed in the olympics since 2004.
> 
> Guess how many actually got into the olympics since then.
> 
> Then guess how many won a medal.




Banning transgender athletes or creating a special category is a solution in search of a problem.


----------



## mollyc

My son, the 14yo 6' swimmer, brough Lia Thomas up today (out of the blue, but I think it was relevant to something he'd seen online) said that he does not think she should compete against girls.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> Banning transgender athletes or creating a special category is a solution in search of a problem.



No, it is a solution to a problem (for women) that - belatedly - is becoming both more pronounced and more recognised.

From Twitter today (under the handle @ForWomenScot): 

"Today, the ebike category at the TweedLove Enjoyro mountain bike race in Peebles was won by Maxine Yates, a trans athlete, who was allowed to enter the women's category under British cycling rules. This isn't just affecting elite women."


----------



## mollyc

SuperMatt said:


> The evidence has shown that it is quite rare for transgender athletes to gain a distinct physical advantage. It’s not the problem that many claim it is.
> 
> I posed 2 questions earlier that, if answered, might illustrate that point quite clearly.
> 
> 
> 
> Banning transgender athletes or creating a special category is a solution in search of a problem.



If biological women are being displaced from sports and awards by trans women, there is a problem.

Being open minded is a two way street. No one here has said trans athletes should not compete AT ALL. But there is an issue that needs to be addressed, and just saying "it's unfair to trans athletes" is sticking your head in the sand just as much as saying "trans athletes should be banned completely." Let's find a safe space where people on equal footing can compete.


----------



## SuperMatt

I’ve yet to see answers to the questions I posed about how many transgender people have gone to the Olympics or medaled in them since they were first allowed in 2004.

I also feel there is a lack of understanding how strongly hormones affect athletic ability.

Transgender women will supplant all other women from athletics? That idea is truly absurd and ignores reality.



mollyc said:


> If biological women are being displaced from sports and awards by trans women, there is a problem



That “if” isn’t happening. Participation in athletics by women is growing, not shrinking. The 2020 Olympics were the most gender balanced in history; 49% of participants were female.

The reality vs the fear is not even in the same ballpark.


----------



## mollyc

SuperMatt said:


> I’ve yet to see answers to the questions I posed about how many transgender people have gone to the Olympics or medaled in them since they were first allowed in 2004.
> 
> I also feel there is a lack of understanding how strongly hormones affect athletic ability.
> 
> Transgender women will supplant all other women from athletics? That idea is truly absurd and ignores reality.
> 
> 
> That “if” isn’t happening. Participation in athletics by women is growing, not shrinking. The 2020 Olympics were the most gender balanced in history; 49% of participants were female.
> 
> The reality vs the fear is not even in the same ballpark.




i feel you lack understanding the effect of aging to 18-24 then transitioning on body frame and mass. 

no one is saying transgender athletes will replace all females athletes. but if one trans athlete wins, there is a trickle down throughout the sport. 

so because overall sports participation is dwindling by biological females we should allow trans females?

it’s okay to you for lia thomas to win over a biological female? or the biker in @Scepticalscribe’s post?

we are trying to consider this concept objectively and with reason. you are not. your mind is closed. without reason.


----------



## SuperMatt

mollyc said:


> i feel you lack understanding the effect of aging to 18-24 then transitioning on body frame and mass.
> 
> no one is saying transgender athletes will replace all females athletes. but if one trans athlete wins, there is a trickle down throughout the sport.
> 
> so because overall sports participation is dwindling by biological females we should allow trans females?
> 
> it’s okay to you for lia thomas to win over a biological female? or the biker in @Scepticalscribe’s post?
> 
> we are trying to consider this concept objectively and with reason. you are not. your mind is closed. without reason.



If one thinks I am truly closed-minded and without reason, then it is probably best to simply ignore me, not to accuse me of it publicly. Such a statement could be considered an insult, and I don’t see the benefit of insulting each other in this case.

I have highlighted the facts to put things into perspective. There are only 2 instances of transgender women coming in first in major competitions that I am aware of. The response to these 2 instances is quite disproportional, in my opinion.

And yes. I do believe it is ok for transgender women to compete… and if they compete, it is therefore ok for them to win. Not only are they very rare, their overall record so far is well below the record of other women, so it is nothing to worry about. Allow the sports governing boards to make sure things are as fair as possible.

I’ve yet to see any evidence that there is a negative effect on participation of women in athletics due to the inclusion of transgender women. I can see that some people are worried about that for the future. However, I believe such worries are unfounded.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

SuperMatt said:


> The evidence has shown that it is quite rare for transgender athletes to gain a distinct physical advantage. It’s not the problem that many claim it is.



I think it would depend on the sport of course. If it’s boxing or weightlifting then the physical advances men have are more defined, along with most contact sports. It’s a difficult topic as society is under pressure to rectify past stigma’s and prejudices and now sport is under the spot light to be more inclusive. I’d much rather a separate category in the spirit of fair competition.


----------



## SuperMatt

The-Real-Deal82 said:


> I think it would depend on the sport of course. If it’s boxing or weightlifting then the physical advances men have are more defined, along with most contact sports. It’s a difficult topic as society is under pressure to rectify past stigma’s and prejudices and now sport is under the spot light to be more inclusive. I’d much rather a separate category in the spirit of fair competition.



Such a “separate category” would not work. It would further ostracize a marginalized group of people.

I keep requesting evidence that transgender athletic dominance is a widespread problem, and I’m hearing crickets. Where are all the transgender women that are dominating boxing or weightlifting?

And why do you assume transgender women would/could dominate such sports? Do you think sex change surgery has no effect on physical strength and endurance? Reducing testosterone has no effect on such things?


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

SuperMatt said:


> Such a “separate category” would not work. It would further ostracize a marginalized group of people.
> 
> I keep requesting evidence that transgender athletic dominance is a widespread problem, and I’m hearing crickets. Where are all the transgender women that are dominating boxing or weightlifting?
> 
> And why do you assume transgender women would/could dominate such sports? Do you think sex change surgery has no effect on physical strength and endurance? Reducing testosterone has no effect on such things?




It might not work from the other stance either if biological women feel ostracised within their sports. It’s a difficult topic because sport in general needs to be careful not to force itself to suit a very small number competitors at the expense of alienating a significantly larger segment of participants. There are sports women who have been publicly unhappy about certain events and sadly are condemned by the press under the narrative of being transphobic. 

I can’t really answer your questions about dominance as I haven’t claimed anything about that. You don’t have to have a complete sex change to be transgender. A work colleague and friend of mine has been transgender since February 2018 and has not yet decided whether she wants the operation. This is why it’s not a clear cut set of variables to consider.


----------



## SuperMatt

The-Real-Deal82 said:


> It might not work from the other stance either if biological women feel ostracised within their sports. It’s a difficult topic because sport in general needs to be careful not to force itself to suit a very small number competitors at the expense of alienating a significantly larger segment of participants. There are sports women who have been publicly unhappy about certain events and sadly are condemned by the press under the narrative of being transphobic.
> 
> I can’t really answer your questions about dominance as I haven’t claimed anything about that. You don’t have to have a complete sex change to be transgender. A work colleague and friend of mine has been transgender since February 2018 and has not yet decided whether she wants the operation. This is why it’s not a clear cut set of variables to consider.



To offer a slight bit more clarity on the sport aspect: the Olympics used to require one to have undergone gender change surgery and demonstrate specific low levels of testosterone. So, somebody currently transitioning to female wasn’t eligible for their new gender until the process is complete.

They have updated the rules recently. Here is a more detailed look at the latest rules.









						The Olympics Just Announced New Rules for Trans Inclusion
					

They're being called “a victory for all athletes and fans.”




					www.them.us
				






> Other principles announced by the IOC today establish that *trans and intersex athletes should not be assumed to have an unfair advantage over their competitors without scientific evidence*; that restrictions on their participation must be based on “robust and peer reviewed research;” and that athletes be able to contest restrictions through “internal mediation mechanisms” or through a quasi-judicial process.




The part in bold highlights my largest source of frustration during this discussion. People automatically *assume* trans and intersex athletes have an unfair advantage. Full details in the link below.



			https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/News/2021/11/IOC-Framework-Fairness-Inclusion-Non-discrimination-2021.pdf?_ga=2.148710847.922111840.1650818188-1716186674.1650818188


----------



## thekev

SuperMatt said:


> The part in bold highlights my largest source of frustration during this discussion. People automatically *assume* trans and intersex athletes have an unfair advantage. Full details in the link below.
> 
> 
> 
> https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/News/2021/11/IOC-Framework-Fairness-Inclusion-Non-discrimination-2021.pdf?_ga=2.148710847.922111840.1650818188-1716186674.1650818188




To be clear here, this doesn't say there isn't an advantage. This says they're going to assume no advantage unless future evidence suggests otherwise. If they have a small sample here, it's hard to draw conclusions. They are likely to have trouble with pushback if future evidence suggests that an advantage does exist. Keep in mind, if they don't want to pressure anyone into unwanted medical procedures, I'm wondering in which division people who are not undergoing any kind of hormone therapy but who now identify as the opposite sex will compete. 




SuperMatt said:


> The part in bold highlights my largest source of frustration during this discussion. People automatically *assume* trans and intersex athletes have an unfair advantage. Full details in the link below.




Intersex refers to people who are born with both male and female genitalia. It's absurd to group the two.


----------



## SuperMatt

thekev said:


> To be clear here, this doesn't say there isn't an advantage. This says they're going to assume no advantage unless future evidence suggests otherwise. If they have a small sample here, it's hard to draw conclusions. They are likely to have trouble with pushback if future evidence suggests that an advantage does exist. Keep in mind, if they don't want to pressure anyone into unwanted medical procedures, I'm wondering in which division people who are not undergoing any kind of hormone therapy but who now identify as the opposite sex will compete.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intersex refers to people who are born with both male and female genitalia. It's absurd to group the two.



First part - the point is to examine the evidence, and not to assume any advantage. Many others have assumed there IS an inherent advantage as a starting point. Following the evidence is the best path forward, so I think the IOC approach is correct.

Second part: The article I quoted grouped the two together; I was simply repeating their language which I quoted above.


----------



## thekev

SuperMatt said:


> First part - the point is to examine the evidence, and not to assume any advantage. Many others have assumed there IS an inherent advantage as a starting point. Following the evidence is the best path forward, so I think the IOC approach is correct.




In cases where the individual was already an athlete pre-transition and isn't undergoing hormonal therapy, I'm suspicious they'll find evidence of an advantage. Right now they may be unsure what to do about it though. As I said before, forcing people to undergo additional medical procedures is a terrible solution, so it makes sense that they would want to get away from this. 

In cases where a male to female trans person starts identifying and presenting as a woman, yet isn't doing anything else (likely to come up at some point), I'm wondering whether the Olympic committee would allow them to register as a woman. That's likely to convey an advantage, even if it won't ensure they place near the top.



SuperMatt said:


> Second part: The article I quoted grouped the two together; I was simply repeating their language which I quoted above.




Fair enough. It's definitely absurd on their part though.


----------



## SuperMatt

NCAA Woman of the Year nominee:









						Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas nominated for NCAA 2022 Woman of the Year Award | CNN
					

The University of Pennsylvania nominated swimmer Lia Thomas -- who has become the face of the debate on transgender women in sports -- for the 2022 NCAA Woman of the Year award.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## mollyc

SuperMatt said:


> NCAA Woman of the Year nominee:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas nominated for NCAA 2022 Woman of the Year Award | CNN
> 
> 
> The University of Pennsylvania nominated swimmer Lia Thomas -- who has become the face of the debate on transgender women in sports -- for the 2022 NCAA Woman of the Year award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com




FINA, the international swim federation, has ruled that transgender women who have gone through male puberty should not swim with women.

As the mother of a 14 year old male swimmer who is 6' and faster now than his 16  year old sister, I agree with FINA and not the NCAA.

I feel for people who want to compete at elite levels, but those levels have to be as "level" as possible. Lia is not on an even level with her now peers.


----------



## Herdfan

mollyc said:


> FINA, the international swim federation has ruled that transgender women who have gone through male puberty should not swim with women.
> 
> As the mother of a 14 year old male swimmer who is 6' and faster now than his 16  year old sister, I agree with FINA and not the NCAA.
> 
> I feel for people who want to compete at elite levels, but those levels have to be as "level" as possible. Lia is not on an even level with her now peers.




Add to that the NCAA failed to follow their own rules regarding this issue.  Thomas would haven't been allowed to swim under USA Swimming's policy (they will be required to adopt FINA's new policy or risk losing the ability to send athletes to FINA competitions) and the NCAA was supposed to follow the sport's governing bodies regarding this issue.  

But they caved.

And I expect your son to be faster.  Based on what I remember, 11-12 is when the boys start really getting faster compared to the girls.


----------



## mollyc

I also think that nomination just is so defeating to women who have trained their entire lives with only female peers...then to have someone who competed for 20+ years as a male to be nominated....no. just no.


----------



## Cmaier

mollyc said:


> I also think that nomination just is so defeating to women who have trained their entire lives with only female peers...then to have someone who competed for 20+ years as a male to be nominated....no. just no.




My teenage daughter who is a competitive swimmer (albeit not one who will end up in the Olympics) loves the nomination.


----------



## Renzatic

Cmaier said:


> My teenage daughter who is a competitive swimmer (albeit not one who will end up in the Olympics) loves the nomination.




This is one of those rare situations where both sides of the equation have entirely valid, equally incongruent points.

Do trans people deserve to live their lives as they see fit, as the gender they identify with? Yes, they do.

Does having trans women compete against cis women in sports present an inherent unfair advantage to the former? Yes, it does. Or at least can.

So in a situation where both sides have a point, and taking any stance on the issue inevitably means you're screwing someone else out of their right to X in some shape, form, or fashion, what can you do?


----------



## Herdfan

Renzatic said:


> So in a situation where both sides have a point, and taking any stance on the issue inevitably means you're screwing someone else out of their right to X in some shape, form, or fashion, what can you do?




Yes and no.  No one is saying they can't compete.  They are just being told they can't compete in the division they want.  Not really any different than a boxer, wrestler or MMA fighter being classified by weight.  In HS, as a 210lb full back who would try and cut to 198lb to wrestle, it would have been much easier to just be allowed to compete at 198 anyway.  But physically, that would not have been fair.

What I don't understand is why "Gender" matters.  Why can't the divisions simply be born male and born female?  Identify however you please, but you have to compete as the sex you were born with.


----------



## Huntn

mollyc said:


> FINA, the international swim federation, has ruled that transgender women who have gone through male puberty should not swim with women.
> 
> As the mother of a 14 year old male swimmer who is 6' and faster now than his 16  year old sister, I agree with FINA and not the NCAA.
> 
> I feel for people who want to compete at elite levels, but those levels have to be as "level" as possible. Lia is not on an even level with her now peers.



I believe in transgender rights, however my view regarding athletic events is that transgender individuals should not be allowed to bring advantages into the competition based on their previous gender status. Typically males have more muscle mass than females, and unless that can somehow be mitigated, then they should not compete, or maybe create  a new transgender category of competition.


----------



## Nycturne

Huntn said:


> Typically males have more muscle mass than females, and unless that can somehow be mitigated, then they should not compete, or maybe create  a new transgender category of competition.




Many of those differences are due to hormones. The SRY is a trigger for sexual differentiation, but it’s the hormones and the other genes activated by those that make the difference during development, and hormones are required to maintain many of them.









						MTF hormone therapy and body changes: Expectations and more
					

Estrogen hormone therapy can cause physical, sexual, reproductive, and emotional changes. Learn more about how it affects the body here.




					www.medicalnewstoday.com
				




But it does make things complicated as some things are reversible under HRT given enough time, and others aren’t. Muscle mass (and the ease that someone can build it) and fat distribution are (although we don’t have good research other than general steroid research). Testosterone is a steroid after all. Skeletal growth doesn’t change as much after puberty though. But if someone does get access to blockers, and doesn’t have to go through two puberties, then these non-reversible effects don’t happen, and HRT is more effective on the whole.

Some of these effects are even specific to one hormone or another, lowering of the voice for example. A trans man will have their voice deepen on testosterone, but a trans woman will not have their voice affected on estrogen if they went through a masculine puberty first. Breasts grow because of estrogen and progesterone, but cannot be “undone” by testosterone. 

There really isn’t a black and white simple answer here. Starting HRT after puberty or getting access to blockers, trans masc vs trans femme, it all plays out differently.



Herdfan said:


> Why can't the divisions simply be born male and born female?  Identify however you please, but you have to compete as the sex you were born with.




If your concern is testosterone giving folks an advantage, I don’t think making trans men compete with cis women will have the effect you think it will.


----------



## Huntn

Nycturne said:


> Many of those differences are due to hormones. The SRY is a trigger for sexual differentiation, but it’s the hormones and the other genes activated by those that make the difference during development, and hormones are required to maintain many of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MTF hormone therapy and body changes: Expectations and more
> 
> 
> Estrogen hormone therapy can cause physical, sexual, reproductive, and emotional changes. Learn more about how it affects the body here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.medicalnewstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it does make things complicated as some things are reversible under HRT given enough time, and others aren’t. Muscle mass (and the ease that someone can build it) and fat distribution are (although we don’t have good research other than general steroid research). Testosterone is a steroid after all. Skeletal growth doesn’t change as much after puberty though. But if someone does get access to blockers, and doesn’t have to go through two puberties, then these non-reversible effects don’t happen, and HRT is more effective on the whole.
> 
> Some of these effects are even specific to one hormone or another, lowering of the voice for example. A trans man will have their voice deepen on testosterone, but a trans woman will not have their voice affected on estrogen if they went through a masculine puberty first. Breasts grow because of estrogen and progesterone, but cannot be “undone” by testosterone.
> 
> There really isn’t a black and white simple answer here. Starting HRT after puberty or getting access to blockers, trans masc vs trans femme, it all plays out differently.
> 
> 
> 
> If your concern is testosterone giving folks an advantage, I don’t think making trans men compete with cis women will have the effect you think it will.



I think one suggestion was that anyone who switches genders before puberty is good to go, those who transition after puberty are not. Is that a fair approach?


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> I think one suggestion was that anyone who switches genders before puberty is good to go, those who transition after puberty are not. Is that a fair approach?



In many states, it is illegal to transition before puberty. It’s also an ethical question: are children ready to make such a momentous decision that early in their life?

Therefore, these transgender bans for college athletics that require a fairly long time between transitioning and competing are _de facto_ bans on transgender athletes competing.


----------



## Joe

Huntn said:


> I believe in transgender rights, however my view regarding athletic events is that transgender individuals should not be allowed to bring advantages into the competition based on their previous gender status. Typically males have more muscle mass than females, and unless that can somehow be mitigated, then they should not compete, or maybe create  a new transgender category of competition.




Most people feel this way, but the Republicans go about it the wrong way. They make the most vile attacks towards transgender people. You can make your point without being a fucking vile human being.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> I think one suggestion was that anyone who switches genders before puberty is good to go, those who transition after puberty are not. Is that a fair approach?




From the standpoint of fair competition, yes it is.  That is FINA's position.

But at the same time, allowing a per-pubescent person to transition is not something I am comfortable with.  We as a society think that adolescents at this age aren't mature enough to drive, vote, buy alcohol, buy weed, enter into contracts, etc.  Yet we think they are mature enough to make a decision that will affect them the rest of their lives.  I don't think so.


----------



## mollyc

Yes, I agree that transitioning before puberty is the best for "fairness" in athletics, but I don't think it's best from a decision perspective for an 8-9 year old to make that kind of choice. 

And the problem with transitioning later isn't even just about testosterone levels, but height and wingspan and hip development; men's narrower hips typically allow better ergonomics for motion and are therefore more efficient at a lot of sports, even if muscle quality and hormone levels are similar with women. 

As I said previously, I don't inherently have a problem with inclusion in club sports, but when you get to things like titles and scholarships, there are too many unknowns to just throw all the trans women with biological women and then just hope for the best... that best isn't easily defined yet and biological women have worked too hard for too many years just to be now potentially ousted by physical males with a lot of hormone therapy.


----------



## Nycturne

Huntn said:


> I think one suggestion was that anyone who switches genders before puberty is good to go, those who transition after puberty are not. Is that a fair approach?




As a society, we don’t have good enough information on HRT to properly administer it to trans women, let alone make an clear determination as to what is “fair” here. What I want are better studies. And I would love it if we weren’t so bloody focused on just how trans women play into this, and ignoring the other half of the trans community.



SuperMatt said:


> In many states, it is illegal to transition before puberty. It’s also an ethical question: *are children ready to make such a momentous decision that early in their life?*
> 
> Therefore, these transgender bans for college athletics that require a fairly long time between transitioning and competing are _de facto_ bans on transgender athletes competing.




This does create a double-bind of sorts. Which is the point of bathroom bans and the like as well (in order to create a urinary leash). Make it such that no matter what the trans person does or attempt to do, it will be the wrong answer in the eyes of society and/or the law. And it goes for transition in general, too.

But I’ll point out of the obvious to the part of your comment in bold: The whole point of puberty blockers in the first place is to give more time for a decision on hormones. And at young ages before puberty would rear it’s head at all, social transition is easy and inherently makes no physical changes. Transition isn’t a single event, but a process, so to describe it as a momentous decision I think underscores the ignorance involved here. There are many off-ramps along the way (and stopping HRT is always an option), and so many delays in getting access to treatment, that this smacks me as a form of straw-man, as it’s not representing reality, but some perceived thing that seems to only exist in the minds of people debating the topic.

But at the end of the day, I do ask: at what point do we cross the line between concern and meddling with someone’s right to self-determination and bodily autonomy?

Honestly, there’s a reason I have avoided this thread for the most part, it’s too depressing to think that this is what non-trans people get hung up on when discussing the trans community.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> From the standpoint of fair competition, yes it is.  That is FINA's position.
> 
> But at the same time, allowing a per-pubescent person to transition is not something I am comfortable with.  We as a society think that adolescents at this age aren't mature enough to drive, vote, buy alcohol, buy weed, enter into contracts, etc.  Yet we think they are mature enough to make a decision that will affect them the rest of their lives.  I don't think so.



I‘m undecided on this point. There are  reports of young children who seem certain they are in the wrong gender body at a young age.

What makes it the wrong body? Their brain has decided.
Might they change their mind later? Have their been any cases were a pre-puberty child has gone though a gender  transition and then changed their minds? can’t say. Ideally if puberty creates the significant change in development, the sooner it is known, the better at least if they want to participate in gender based teams.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> I‘m undecided on this point. There are  reports of young children who seem certain they are in the wrong gender body at a young age.
> 
> What makes it the wrong body? Their brain has decided.
> Might they change their mind later? Have their been any cases were a pre-puberty child has gone though a gender  transition and then changed their minds? can’t say. Ideally if puberty creates the significant change in development, the sooner it is known, the better at least if they want to participate in gender based teams.




Two things.  Did their brain decide, or are they simply trying to please a parent or other adult.  That is a valid question.

And yes, some have gone back to their biological sex.  It is called de-transitioning.  Google some stories and make your own determination.

Back to the competition side.  Rebecca Soni is a Gold medalist breaststroker.  She is a really great swimmer.  But if you look at her feet, she has almost paddles below her ankles.  It is no wonder she is fast, especially in breaststroke.  She was born with a gift just like a basketball player who is 6'10".  

But then you look at Thomas, who has feet that were developed for a male body.  In swimming, the "catch" or amount of water you can grab or push during your stroke is very important.  We are taught to swim thinking out hands are doing the pulling, when in reality, it is our hands, forearms, upper arms etc.  Same with legs, but due to the way the stroke works, large feet are more important than large hands.  This gives Thomas an unfair physical advantage over the girls no matter how much testosterone blockers are taken. Compared to the girls, Thomas has mini fins.


----------



## SuperMatt

Nycturne said:


> As a society, we don’t have good enough information on HRT to properly administer it to trans women, let alone make an clear determination as to what is “fair” here. What I want are better studies. And I would love it if we weren’t so bloody focused on just how trans women play into this, and ignoring the other half of the trans community.
> 
> 
> 
> This does create a double-bind of sorts. Which is the point of bathroom bans and the like as well (in order to create a urinary leash). Make it such that no matter what the trans person does or attempt to do, it will be the wrong answer in the eyes of society and/or the law. And it goes for transition in general, too.
> 
> But I’ll point out of the obvious to the part of your comment in bold: The whole point of puberty blockers in the first place is to give more time for a decision on hormones. And at young ages before puberty would rear it’s head at all, social transition is easy and inherently makes no physical changes. Transition isn’t a single event, but a process, so to describe it as a momentous decision I think underscores the ignorance involved here. There are many off-ramps along the way (and stopping HRT is always an option), and so many delays in getting access to treatment, that this smacks me as a form of straw-man, as it’s not representing reality, but some perceived thing that seems to only exist in the minds of people debating the topic.
> 
> But at the end of the day, I do ask: at what point do we cross the line between concern and meddling with someone’s right to self-determination and bodily autonomy?
> 
> Honestly, there’s a reason I have avoided this thread for the most part, it’s too depressing to think that this is what non-trans people get hung up on when discussing the trans community.



In a nation of 330 million people, one transgender athlete won a national collegiate competition one time. And the reaction is to ban them all. Seeing this reaction, one would think that, instead, male athletes were lining up by the thousands at Antifa-funded sex-change hospitals so they could dominate women’s athletics.

In the end, the biggest proponents (not saying ALL proponents) of “protecting women” by banning transgender athletes were the same ones passing “bathroom bills,” fighting against gay marriage, and firing people for being gay or transgender. Oh, and they are all for banning abortion too. Yep, they surely care a LOT about women’s rights.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> In a nation of 330 million people, one transgender athlete won a national collegiate competition one time.




Do you honestly think it would have been the last?

Yes, it was the first at the collegiate level, but there are plenty of stories about trans women winning HS state championships.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Do you honestly think it would have been the last?



When did I say that?


----------



## mollyc

yes one transgender wins a title. but if it isn’t addressed fairly, and early on, biological women will lose to more and more trans women over time. 

it is better to be too cautious early on and open more later. because once the horse is out of the barn it’s hard to put back. unless it’s abortion.


----------



## thekev

Huntn said:


> I think one suggestion was that anyone who switches genders before puberty is good to go, those who transition after puberty are not. Is that a fair approach?




I would be concerned with that putting pressure on something that should only be a medical decision.


----------



## SuperMatt

mollyc said:


> yes one transgender wins a title. but if it isn’t addressed fairly, and early on, biological women will lose to more and more trans women over time.
> 
> it is better to be too cautious early on and open more later. because once the horse is out of the barn it’s hard to put back. unless it’s abortion.



When they closed schools down to protect against COVID, many people said the mental problems due to the lack of socializing may have been almost as bad as getting an actual disease.

But when it comes to allowing transgender women and girls to be part of a sports team that reflects their own gender, winning a sporting competition is suddenly more important than allowing these kids to socialize in a way that supports who they are. Playing youth (and college) sports is a healthy social activity that can be good for the kids involved.

We had a fair system with some controls in place. But because a single transgender women actually won something, suddenly the system is unfair and we need to block them all?

So let’s further ostracize an already marginalized group of people because winning a swimming race is much more important. Maybe I’m not competitive enough or something, but I just don’t get the outrage.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> ..........
> 
> So let’s further ostracize an already marginalized group of people because winning a swimming race is much more important. Maybe I’m not competitive enough or something, but I just don’t get the outrage.



If you were (born) a woman, you might see matters a little differently.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> If you were (born) a woman, you might see matters a little differently.



I imagine I’d see many things differently, indeed.


----------



## Herdfan

Scepticalscribe said:


> If you were (born) a woman, you might see matters a little differently.




Or had a daughter who was a competitive athlete.



SuperMatt said:


> When did I say that?




This sentence says it happened once, but implies it won't happen again.



SuperMatt said:


> In a nation of 330 million people, one transgender athlete won a national collegiate competition one time.




I also framed my post as a question so you could clarify further.  But you didn't, you went straight to challenging me.


----------



## mollyc

SuperMatt said:


> When they closed schools down to protect against COVID, many people said the mental problems due to the lack of socializing may have been almost as bad as getting an actual disease.
> 
> But when it comes to allowing transgender women and girls to be part of a sports team that reflects their own gender, winning a sporting competition is suddenly more important than allowing these kids to socialize in a way that supports who they are. Playing youth (and college) sports is a healthy social activity that can be good for the kids involved.
> 
> We had a fair system with some controls in place. But because a single transgender women actually won something, suddenly the system is unfair and we need to block them all?
> 
> So let’s further ostracize an already marginalized group of people because winning a swimming race is much more important. Maybe I’m not competitive enough or something, but I just don’t get the outrage.




I really feel like you are not actually listening to some of us. You are so busy being outraged that you aren't considering our position. Not even...."I don't agree with you, but I see why you'd think that."

No one here, in this thread (I'm ignoring the "real world" where I know it happens)...the people of this board (women, parents of daughters), has said trans women should never again participate in sports. Not one person on this thread.

The "fair system" that has been in place has separated people by their biological sex. Including trans people in sports is a relatively new phenomenon, really within the past ten years, and even with that, it hasn't been enough people to make a difference in sports. I have specifically said that trans athletes should be allowed to compete right now, as long as there is no potential of taking a monetary or a "titled" position from girls who have never had to compete with a biological male. There are girls in Connecticut right now who are losing scholarship money to trans athletes. These girls feel defeated; they feel marginalized.

It is not fair to say it is all just hormone based and that as long as testosterone levels are low everyone should just play together happily. There are physical differences--bone, vascular, muscle-- that are not changed by hormone therapy.

Look, I'm not a sportsy person at all....but my husband and I have spent thousands and thousands of dollars year over year paying for sportsing for our daughter (and son). We know elite level high school female swimmers who may be eligible for scholarships based on their swimming. Those scholarships would represent real money to their families for tuition. But as it stands now, our friends may lose out on that money due to biological males who would outperform them.

Every human has their own challenges in life, and we all make choices given our strengths and weaknesses. In the future, there may be a more settled science for athletic performance, but right now, allowing trans women compete for money and titles that rightly belong to biological women is not fair. You want to go out and play pickup basketball or club soccer?? Have at it, and have fun. But the entire point of elite athletics is to prove you are the best... as we are heading, women will never again be allowed to be the best.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Very well said, @mollyc.


----------



## Alli

Herdfan said:


> From the standpoint of fair competition, yes it is.  That is FINA's position.
> 
> But at the same time, allowing a per-pubescent person to transition is not something I am comfortable with.  We as a society think that adolescents at this age aren't mature enough to drive, vote, buy alcohol, buy weed, enter into contracts, etc.  Yet we think they are mature enough to make a decision that will affect them the rest of their lives.  I don't think so.



This post belongs in the Roe thread. You just made a perfect argument for allowing children to have abortions.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> This sentence says it happened once, but implies it won't happen again.



It implies nothing of the sort.


----------



## SuperMatt

mollyc said:


> I really feel like you are not actually listening to some of us. You are so busy being outraged that you aren't considering our position. Not even...."I don't agree with you, but I see why you'd think that."
> 
> No one here, in this thread (I'm ignoring the "real world" where I know it happens)...the people of this board (women, parents of daughters), has said trans women should never again participate in sports. Not one person on this thread.
> 
> The "fair system" that has been in place has separated people by their biological sex. Including trans people in sports is a relatively new phenomenon, really within the past ten years, and even with that, it hasn't been enough people to make a difference in sports. I have specifically said that trans athletes should be allowed to compete right now, as long as there is no potential of taking a monetary or a "titled" position from girls who have never had to compete with a biological male. There are girls in Connecticut right now who are losing scholarship money to trans athletes. These girls feel defeated; they feel marginalized.
> 
> It is not fair to say it is all just hormone based and that as long as testosterone levels are low everyone should just play together happily. There are physical differences--bone, vascular, muscle-- that are not changed by hormone therapy.
> 
> Look, I'm not a sportsy person at all....but my husband and I have spent thousands and thousands of dollars year over year paying for sportsing for our daughter (and son). We know elite level high school female swimmers who may be eligible for scholarships based on their swimming. Those scholarships would represent real money to their families for tuition. But as it stands now, our friends may lose out on that money due to biological males who would outperform them.
> 
> Every human has their own challenges in life, and we all make choices given our strengths and weaknesses. In the future, there may be a more settled science for athletic performance, but right now, allowing trans women compete for money and titles that rightly belong to biological women is not fair. You want to go out and play pickup basketball or club soccer?? Have at it, and have fun. But the entire point of elite athletics is to prove you are the best... as we are heading, women will never again be allowed to be the best.



I understand your opinion on the issue. But this is an extremely rare occurrence. Your are more likely to be struck by lightning than to be a transgender woman who wins a national competition.  I believe the “threat” of transgender women taking over women’s sports is greatly exaggerated.

Here is another perspective on the issue:









						Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas speaks out about backlash, future plans
					

Penn swimmer Lia Thomas spoke one-on-one with ABC News' Juju Chang.




					goodmorningamerica.com
				






> In response to critics who say Thomas transitioned in order to win more swimming medals, she reiterated that is not the case.
> 
> "Trans people don't transition for athletics," she said. "We transition to be happy and authentic and our true selves. Transitioning to get an advantage is not something that ever factors into our decisions."






> Thomas said she does not see it as an acceptable option to prevent transgender people from competing in sports, or to limit them to competing only against each other or themselves, like in a separate swimming lane, for example.
> 
> "In addition to not allowing the full athletic experience, that's incredibly othering to trans people who already face immense discrimination in other parts of our lives," she said. "To then again have this discrimination in sports and be, like, 'Oh, OK, you can swim, but only over there, like in that lane.' It's very othering."


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> Two things.  Did their brain decide, or are they simply trying to please a parent or other adult.  That is a valid question.
> 
> And yes, some have gone back to their biological sex.  It is called de-transitioning.  Google some stories and make your own determination.
> 
> Back to the competition side.  Rebecca Soni is a Gold medalist breaststroker.  She is a really great swimmer.  But if you look at her feet, she has almost paddles below her ankles.  It is no wonder she is fast, especially in breaststroke.  She was born with a gift just like a basketball player who is 6'10".
> 
> But then you look at Thomas, who has feet that were developed for a male body.  In swimming, the "catch" or amount of water you can grab or push during your stroke is very important.  We are taught to swim thinking out hands are doing the pulling, when in reality, it is our hands, forearms, upper arms etc.  Same with legs, but due to the way the stroke works, large feet are more important than large hands.  This gives Thomas an unfair physical advantage over the girls no matter how much testosterone blockers are taken. Compared to the girls, Thomas has mini fins.



Could there be women with duck feet?  

I reject the idea that a parent as any kind of routine occurance, would pressure their child to switch sex just because of the parents preference. There is too much negativity in society about such things. I imagine in just about all cases, it would be the child pushing.


----------



## mollyc

I honestly appreciate the fact that Lia Thomas transitioned to be authentic to herself. I would hope it wouldn't be for any other reason. But having lived her life as a male, and having reached adulthood, I would think she would also appreciate that she does have an unfair advantage over her new competitors.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

SuperMatt said:


> I understand your opinion on the issue. But this is an extremely rare occurrence. Your are more likely to be struck by lightning than to be a transgender woman who wins a national competition.  I believe the “threat” of transgender women taking over women’s sports is greatly exaggerated.



I beg to differ.

And, if it is relatively rare now - and not as rare as you seem to suggest - unless challenged, it will become much less rare.

And, if it is not addressed - and challenged  - now, it may well become the norm.

I think it interesting that those who have written (on this thread, and elsewhere) with concerns tend to fall into one of two categories: One are women, and the other are parents (of either gender) of daughters.

For the most part men, even liberal men, just don't really see this, and are not listening; it doesn't have a direct bearing on them, or their lives, and is thus partly reduced to a vague, pseudo scientific, detached discussion of balancing supposedly equivalent rights of different groups.   One can only assume such a posture of lofty impartialty when the topic in question has no direct bearing on how one gets to live one's own life.

Think of the advantages a team comprised of trans athletes would have over a team comprised of (mere) female athletes, and of the temptations (to coaches, schools, etc) to seek and select for the athletes - or sportspeople - who will bring victory and glory to the team (and whatever that team represents).

This could give rise to a world - a mindset - where anyone who has been born as a woman isn't deemed a good enough "woman", to seriously compete (or be able to win) in women's events.

The message that this gives to young girls is appalling - that, leaving aside that the world is not designed for you and cultural, socio-economic, legal structural inequalities still exist, persist, (and some women's rights are being challenged and rolled back, reversed as I write and not only in Afghanistan) - but that, even in the part of the world that is reserved for you, (such as women's sports) you can be out-competed and defeated by those who were born male, with all of the social, cultural, economic - and, in the case of sport, - physical advatages that being born male affords you.  That, even in women's events, being female is not good enough, not least because you are the wrong kind of female.  That is an appalling message to want to send to young girls.

Moreover, this is a subject with ramifications that extend far beyond sport.

There are a few other - general - points I wish to make.

We hear much of the concerns of transwomen, but - and, to my mind, this is instructive - very little about the concerns, or facilitating the needs of transmen (although their numbers are not insignificant).

Obviously, this will hardly apply to sport (transmen will bring little by way of competitive advantage to any male sport) but it sees to me that there are wider, cultural, issues also at play here. Nevertheless, transmen do not present a direct challenge to existing situations or structures; if anything, they are almost invisible.

Put bluntly, I suspect that some of the transwomen - men who have transitioned to some degree (or wholly) to being female - having been born male, and socialised as male from a young age, - may well be bringing some of the attitudes of male entitlement and male privilege (not to mention elements of classic toxic masculinity) that they absorbed culturally and socially as young males, or as boys, or male teenagers, into the new female world that they have chosen to inhabit.

For, this desire of some of the more perfervid of the TRA  movement, to demand the right to define what it is to be a woman, (reduced to weird definations where one is viewed as womb bearers, cervix bearers, with the word woman excised completely) what it is to be female, strikes me as an especially egregious example of male entitlement, - one that I find outrageous - and - as a woman - is something that I find it extraordinarily offensive.

It is quite one thing to defend trans rights, and to support the right of trans people to express themselves (and live in, and as) their preferred gender and try to help bring about a shared world where this is possible.

However, it is quite another where some in the trans movement arrogate to themselves the right to define what it is to be female, and where some groups with a pronounced preference for female only spaces - or, in the case of lesbians - female only sexual preferences - come under surprisingly sustained, and sometimes, quite vehement, attack.

Moreover, I will note that (in my experience) those who write - invariably glibly - that "life is unfair" (more usually a lazy right wing argument to defend an unjust status quo in socio-economic matters) have rarely experienced structural or systemic unfairness in their own lives.

However, as a woman, I'm tired of hearing "life is unfair" when it is used (as it almost invariably is used) to defend a policy or view or stance that simply perpetuates unfairness, refusing to acknowledge, let alone address it.

Moreover, those who write that there are "two injustices", or "unfairnesses" here, fail to distinguish (not least because they do not see the issues as applying to themsleves) that the burden of "unfairness" will not fall equally; asking women to "put up with" potential (or real) unfairness in order to facilitate the need for inclusion of transpeople is, to my mind, an ask too far, and is a facile argument (and one, note, not made by any of the women who have written on this topic).

The degrees of unfairness are not equivalent, and it is disingenuous to attempt to argue that it is.  An entire gender - half of the human race - should not be asked to accept "unfairness" - or sacrifice their safety - in the interests of seeking to accommodate others.


----------



## mollyc

On a much more biological level, trans female athletes will never know what it's like to wake up the morning of a sportsing event with horrible cramps, or a flow that is hard to contain. Or try to fit on a tech suit for swim and also learn how to use tampons for the first time (both on the same day) when you are 12. Many won't know how much breasts can get in the way of sportsing (although in fairness, many biological women are small chested and have this as advantage over other biological women). Trans female athletes won't know what it's like to suffer from such lack of body fat that they don't even menstruate properly (thinking of gymnasts in particular)....

Biological women have a lot of "disadvantages" already in physical prowess, and now we are supposed to be matched against people who can never have these issues at all?


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> And, if it is relatively rare now - and not as rare as you seem to suggest - unless challenged, it will become much less rare.
> 
> And, if it is not addressed - and challenged - now, it may well become the norm.



What evidence do you have to support this prediction of future events?


----------



## mollyc

SuperMatt said:


> What evidence do you have to support this prediction of future events?



As transitioning becomes more accepted and normalized, why wouldn't more trans female athletes want to be in sports? The numbers are small now because there is still a huge stigma to being trans.


----------



## SuperMatt

Scepticalscribe said:


> I think it interesting that those who have written (on this thread, and elsewhere) with concerns tend to fall into one of two categories: One are women, and the other are parents (of either gender) of daughters.



I take the people on this forum at their word when they say it is about the competition to them. I certainly wish there were a way to include transgender women in sports that would be fair to everybody. It seems that it has been figured out in some sports, while the jury is still out in others (such as swimming).

As for the public’s opinion on transgender people, polling indicates it is a generational gap more than a gender gap.

47% of people ages 18-24 oppose transgender women in sports
76% of people aged 45-54 oppose the same

As for women vs men on the topic? This forum is perhaps the inverse of overall opinion. Men are *less* accepting of transgender women in sports.

72% of men think athletes should compete based on their birth gender
53% of women think the same

Interestingly, while about 2/3rds of people oppose transgender women competing in women’s sports (with the justification that they’d have an advantage, correct?), 52% of people also oppose transgender men competing in men’s sports. So that indicates that at least some of the opposition out there is not just based on competitive advantages, but on general attitudes towards transgender people. I don’t believe that to be the case among the esteemed members of this forum though. I understand there are honest concerns, although I disagree on the solutions.









						Mixed Views Among Americans on Transgender Issues
					

While Americans support transgender military service, a majority believe birth gender, rather than gender identity, should govern participation in sports.




					news.gallup.com


----------



## mollyc

Oh, and let's not forget the fact that biological women can often be discriminated against, and have lost sponsorships, just because they get pregnant. And of course now those athletes have even more difficulty if they didn't plan the pregnancy and need to terminate it for some reason.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I take the people on this forum at their word when they say it is about the competition to them.




And now we add injury to the list of reasons this is a bad idea:









						School District Forfeits All Volleyball Matches Against Team with Trans Player
					

A North Carolina school district will forfeit all games against a school with a transgender volleyball player over safety concerns.




					www.metroweekly.com
				




I co-managed a Co-Ed softball team in a local league for years.  The other manager and I had one rule: No girls playing 3rd base.  We were playing in the A-B class and the guys just hit the ball down the line too hard.  We did let a girl play first, but she was also a damn good college player and tough as hell.  But even she played back against a left-handed guy.  I witnessed a girl playing first get her front teeth knocked out on a hard throw by a guy from 3rd.  He didn't do anything wrong, he was just trying to get the runner.  His balled tailed up and over the top of her glove right into her mouth.


----------



## rdrr

Herdfan said:


> I co-managed a Co-Ed softball team in a local league for years.  The other manager and I had one rule: No girls playing 3rd base.  We were playing in the A-B class and the guys just hit the ball down the line too hard.  We did let a girl play first, but she was also a damn good college player and tough as hell.  But even she played back against a left-handed guy.  I witnessed a girl playing first get her front teeth knocked out on a hard throw by a guy from 3rd.  He didn't do anything wrong, he was just trying to get the runner.  His balled tailed up and over the top of her glove right into her mouth.




I am not sure what your story has anything to do with the point of the thread.  It just comes off as sexist implying the girl got hurt playing with boys.   It seems that this injury could have happened to any gender, or are you implying that because she was a girl her hand-eye coordination was below average?


----------



## Herdfan

rdrr said:


> I am not sure what your story has anything to do with the point of the thread.  It just comes off as sexist implying the girl got hurt playing with boys.   It seems that this injury could have happened to any gender, or are you implying that because she was a girl her hand-eye coordination was below average?




No, she was actually a pretty good player.  She just was not used to how hard a guy can throw a ball and she didn't make the adjustment.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

rdrr said:


> I am not sure what your story has anything to do with the point of the thread.  It just comes off as sexist implying the girl got hurt playing with boys.   It seems that this injury could have happened to any gender, or are you implying that because she was a girl her hand-eye coordination was below average?



Come on.

Read @Herdfan's post.  

He wrote nothing about her hand-eye coordination (which I don't doubt was probably excellent if she was "a damned good college player"), but drew attention to how hard an adult - or adolescent - male can throw (which derives from upper body strength).


----------



## Renzatic

Scepticalscribe said:


> Come on.
> 
> Read @Herdfan's post.
> 
> He wrote nothing about her hand-eye coordination (which I don't doubt was probably excellent if she was "a damned good college player"), but drew attention to how hard an adult - or adolescent - male can throw (which derives from upper body strength).




If this is the same story I’m thinking of, it happened in my neck of the woods. When it first broke, no one was reporting the transgender angle, but plenty of people were spreading the word through the rumor mill. It became something of a big deal thereafter, primarily due to the culture war aspect of it.


----------



## thekev

Scepticalscribe said:


> He wrote nothing about her hand-eye coordination (which I don't doubt was probably excellent if she was "a damned good college player"), but drew attention to how hard an adult - or adolescent - male can throw (which derives from upper body strength).




Guys are probably more used to how hard other guys can throw, but if it was a hard enough throw to knock out someone's teeth, a teenage guy still could have been badly injured by it. I kind of wish more emphasis was put on safety with some of these sports, as that's a horrible injury to sustain, particularly at a young age.


----------



## AG_PhamD

This topic is such a minefield. And too often these transgender-male-female interface issues are not rational and dictated by extreme opinions. 

Speaking about MTF in sports, I think the fundamental problem is that depending on when the person transitions makes a significant difference. The development of someone who never undergoes male puberty is quite different than a male who transitions at age 17.

Frankly, my biggest concern is the astronomical rise in children identifying as trans and how easily hormone blockers/replacement can be initiated. When you factor in proposed or actual legislation allowing  parents to not even be informed of treatment (let alone authorize it), not requiring psych evaluations before treatment, etc - this all just sounds like insanity. 

The notion puberty blocking drugs “just hit the pause button” ignores a whole host of risks and consequences- the full extent of which we’re still not entirely aware of. Relatively recently a number of western countries have decided to rethink the extent to which these drugs are used.

Considering the proportion of people who appear to revert their gender identity back to their biological sex, you would hope we could better assess patients to help them. And when you consider other data around transpeople and the astronomical rise in cases, particularly FTM, there are numerous indications many of these cases may be a social phenomenon rather than a biological/psychological one. Additionally, some cases of GID may be caused by other underlying factors or psychological conditions that may be temporary or treatable without having to resort to hormones and surgery. 

Unfortunately, doing research on trans-identifying subjects is extremely difficult. If there is any chance the research could suggest doing anything but fulfilling the wishes of the trans activists, no one want to be involved and no one wants to fund it for fear of backlash. And I know a great number of extremely influential medical professionals who have serious concerns with how we currently handle transgender healthcare but it’s just too dangerous professionally to discuss. 

This is not to say trans people do not exist. It’s not to say trans people shouldn’t receive gender affirming case. It’s not to say trans people should be treated poorly in society. 

My concern is that we have a large number of people seeking potentially risky treatments with longterm permanent consequences, the majority of whom may come to regret their decision down the road. Children and adolescents are particularly volatile in their beliefs. Being able to best delineate where and when treatment is foundational to modern healthcare. Yet it seems trans healthcare has been entirely hijacked by activists and fear. 

It concerns me when you see medical organizations using terms like “sex assigned at birth” in their official guidelines (rather than biological sex). This is a sociology term not a medical one - your sex is your sex, no one “assigns” it. 

To be clear, I believe trans activists are entirely well intentioned. Trans people have clearly suffered enormously in our society. But ensuring the rights and safety of the population should not mean providing serious medical interventions without some deeper analysis. 

I have no problem with people choosing to live out their gender identity in the way they feel is most congruent. And I’m happy to support these people. I have no problem with adults making informed decisions about medical interventions. When it comes to children, because of what the data shows and the nature of children, I think it’s important to exercise an extra degree of caution before making major, life changing decisions- including puberty blockers.


----------



## rdrr

Herdfan said:


> No, she was actually a pretty good player.  She just was not used to how hard a guy can throw a ball and she didn't make the adjustment.






Scepticalscribe said:


> Come on.
> 
> Read @Herdfan's post.
> 
> He wrote nothing about her hand-eye coordination (which I don't doubt was probably excellent if she was "a damned good college player"), but drew attention to how hard an adult - or adolescent - male can throw (which derives from upper body strength).



I think I know what your are trying to say, but for me and I don't think my response is "Come on" comment.  It still comes across with a bit of sexism twist, by saying men throw harder that is why there was an injury to this girl.  I have personally played against female softball pitchers that throw hard enough to knock out a tooth or a few.   Injuries happen in sports all the time, and sometimes it is tragic, and by no means does it have to do with gender. 

I don't know why it's such a hot button topic transgenders in sports, and the funny thing is you only hear about protecting girls sports. I cannot recall the debate or outrage when a transgender male plays with boys, and how the field of play is unfair.  Again a bit of sexist view.   Parents cry foul all the time when it comes to sports and "fairness".   I think most of the outrage comes from the delusional idea that their child will make it in professional sports.   Occasionally you hear about an outcry when the rare kid who potentially will make it professionally gets questioned or tossed out of a Rec-League when they are perceived to be too good.   I have had it in my area not too long ago, they basically made the parents prove his age, still questioned it and then eventually banned him from playing in the Rec-League all because he was too good.


----------



## Herdfan

rdrr said:


> I think I know what your are trying to say, but for me and I don't think my response is "Come on" comment.  It still comes across with a bit of sexism twist, by saying men throw harder that is why there was an injury to this girl.  I have personally played against female softball pitchers that throw hard enough to knock out a tooth or a few.   Injuries happen in sports all the time, and sometimes it is tragic, and by no means does it have to do with gender.




Absolutely girls can throw hard.  Ever seen male players try to hit a Fastpitch pitch?  They struggle for sure.

But in FP, the rubber is 43' and the top players are throwing in the lower 70's (MPH).  In baseball, the rubber is 60.5' and the top players throw 90+.  To the batter, the reaction times are similar.  But which pitch do you want to be hit by?

Also, guys who come to softball from baseball are used to throwing a ball across a diamond based on 90' bases, not 60/65.  So guys are used to slinging across as hard as they can because the runner gets to 1st so much faster.  A put out at 1st on a ball hit to 3rd is a much harder play in softball than baseball.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

rdrr said:


> I think I know what your are trying to say, but for me and I don't think my response is "Come on" comment.



You're a guy, a dude, right?

I am a woman.

No, you don't know what I am trying to say.



rdrr said:


> I think I know what your are trying to say, but for me and I don't think my response is "Come on" comment.  It still comes across with a bit of sexism twist, by saying men throw harder that is why there was an injury to this girl.  I have personally played against female softball pitchers that throw hard enough to knock out a tooth or a few.   Injuries happen in sports all the time, and sometimes it is tragic, and by no means does it have to do with gender.




Look: Men do throw harder, they hit and punch harder, far harder, their reach is greater, their lung capacity is more capacious, they can lift weights, and suitcases effortlessly (and I write this with gritted teeth, still spitting with fury, for it killed me, as an ardent feminist, in my teens and twenties, to have to admit that men were physically stronger).

Yes, injuries happen.  C'est la vie, etc,

But - quelle surprise - you are missing the point. 

This is not sexism, but a concern for safety (for women).  

When guys (dudes) play against women, their strength will tell; and yes, the number of injuries (the women will suffer) will increase, and - more to the point - the severity of these injuries will be more pronounced.  And that is done to physical differences that arise as a result of puberty.  

Now, of course, there are women who excel in sports (privately, in that quiet corner of my mind, I cheer them on, madly and passionately), and who can destroy (many, most) men in a sporting contest; but, they are very much a tiny minority. 

However, my point is that those who are born into - and go through puberty in - male bodies have an extraordinary physical advantage in the vast majority of sports, an advantage that is particularly telling when they compete against women, that is, people who have experienced puberty as someone who was born female, someone who becomes a woman.




rdrr said:


> I don't know why it's such a hot button topic transgenders in sports, and the funny thing is you only hear about protecting girls sports. I cannot recall the debate or outrage when a transgender male plays with boys, and how the field of play is unfair.  Again a bit of sexist view.  ......



Seriously?

Okay: Two reasons why there is no such debate re transgender males in sports: 

1: Transgender males have gone through puberty as females, as women.  From a physical perspective they will bring no advantage whatsoever to a (mixed) sporting team, let alone a team comprised of males; indeed, unless (as an individual) they were personally exceptionally talented as an individual sportsperson, they would bring little (if anything) to a male team in terms of strength, power, reach.

Skill and experience and endurance are something else, and there, they may well excel, but most transgender men fly well under the radar.

2: Precisely because they went through - experienced - puberty as women, they do not have the physical advantage (strength, reach, oxygen capacity, power) puberty grants to males, and thus, will not be a threat to anyone - male or female - in any team when they throw, tackle, hit, etc.  They simply will not have the brute force to be able to bash someone's (a woman, because men's skulls are thicker) skull or brains in when they throw something.  Physically, a trans man will not be able to harm a women with a throw - or a blow, or a hit, or a strike - the way a man, or a trans woman will be able to do.


----------



## Deleted member 215

AG_PhamD said:


> This topic is such a minefield. And too often these transgender-male-female interface issues are not rational and dictated by extreme opinions.
> 
> Speaking about MTF in sports, I think the fundamental problem is that depending on when the person transitions makes a significant difference. The development of someone who never undergoes male puberty is quite different than a male who transitions at age 17.
> 
> Frankly, my biggest concern is the astronomical rise in children identifying as trans and how easily hormone blockers/replacement can be initiated. When you factor in proposed or actual legislation allowing  parents to not even be informed of treatment (let alone authorize it), not requiring psych evaluations before treatment, etc - this all just sounds like insanity.
> 
> The notion puberty blocking drugs “just hit the pause button” ignores a whole host of risks and consequences- the full extent of which we’re still not entirely aware of. Relatively recently a number of western countries have decided to rethink the extent to which these drugs are used.
> 
> Considering the proportion of people who appear to revert their gender identity back to their biological sex, you would hope we could better assess patients to help them. And when you consider other data around transpeople and the astronomical rise in cases, particularly FTM, there are numerous indications many of these cases may be a social phenomenon rather than a biological/psychological one. Additionally, some cases of GID may be caused by other underlying factors or psychological conditions that may be temporary or treatable without having to resort to hormones and surgery.
> 
> Unfortunately, doing research on trans-identifying subjects is extremely difficult. If there is any chance the research could suggest doing anything but fulfilling the wishes of the trans activists, no one want to be involved and no one wants to fund it for fear of backlash. And I know a great number of extremely influential medical professionals who have serious concerns with how we currently handle transgender healthcare but it’s just too dangerous professionally to discuss.
> 
> This is not to say trans people do not exist. It’s not to say trans people shouldn’t receive gender affirming case. It’s not to say trans people should be treated poorly in society.
> 
> My concern is that we have a large number of people seeking potentially risky treatments with longterm permanent consequences, the majority of whom may come to regret their decision down the road. Children and adolescents are particularly volatile in their beliefs. Being able to best delineate where and when treatment is foundational to modern healthcare. Yet it seems trans healthcare has been entirely hijacked by activists and fear.
> 
> It concerns me when you see medical organizations using terms like “sex assigned at birth” in their official guidelines (rather than biological sex). This is a sociology term not a medical one - your sex is your sex, no one “assigns” it.
> 
> To be clear, I believe trans activists are entirely well intentioned. Trans people have clearly suffered enormously in our society. But ensuring the rights and safety of the population should not mean providing serious medical interventions without some deeper analysis.
> 
> I have no problem with people choosing to live out their gender identity in the way they feel is most congruent. And I’m happy to support these people. I have no problem with adults making informed decisions about medical interventions. When it comes to children, because of what the data shows and the nature of children, I think it’s important to exercise an extra degree of caution before making major, life changing decisions- including puberty blockers.




Agreed on all points. What adolescent doesn't say "this is me now" when joining a new scene/clique/fandom? People don't seem to realize that children and adolescents go through phases. No, that is not me saying "trans is just a phase", it is me saying that some children who are not trans might be mistaken for trans because they are going through a phase and are being encouraged to pursue this path by well-meaning people who are not appreciating the consequences of what they are doing. Gender non-conformity is not uncommon in children. Some studies indicate that gender non-conformity is more likely to correspond with homosexuality or bisexuality later in life. As a young boy, I went through a phase of wanting to be a girl (giving myself a girl's name, wearing my sister's clothes, playing with girl's toys)...but it turned out to be a phase. It may or may not have presaged my bisexuality, I don't know, but it was not a permanent thing and I did not end up being trans. Nowadays I feel like it would've been taken as a sign that I was trans and I should begin "socially transitioning" (which is often the first step towards hormones and puberty blockers). Trans activists are far too gung ho about supposed trans children. A child becoming disillusioned with gender norms and roles does not mean they are trans. I am firmly pro-LGBT but I never approach anything without questioning it and I think we need to be a lot more careful about what we're doing to children.


----------



## AG_PhamD

TBL said:


> Agreed on all points. What adolescent doesn't say "this is me now" when joining a new scene/clique/fandom? People don't seem to realize that children and adolescents go through phases. No, that is not me saying "trans is just a phase", it is me saying that some children who are not trans might be mistaken for trans because they are going through a phase and are being encouraged to pursue this path by well-meaning people who are not appreciating the consequences of what they are doing. Gender non-conformity is not uncommon in children. Some studies indicate that gender non-conformity is more likely to correspond with homosexuality or bisexuality later in life. As a young boy, I went through a phase of wanting to be a girl (giving myself a girl's name, wearing my sister's clothes, playing with girl's toys)...but it turned out to be a phase. It may or may not have presaged my bisexuality, I don't know, but it was not a permanent thing and I did not end up being trans. Nowadays I feel like it would've been taken as a sign that I was trans and I should begin "socially transitioning" (which is often the first step towards hormones and puberty blockers). Trans activists are far too gung ho about supposed trans children. A child becoming disillusioned with gender norms and roles does not mean they are trans. I am firmly pro-LGBT but I never approach anything without questioning it and I think we need to be a lot more careful about what we're doing to children.




I have worked in mental health for about a decade at a leading psych hospital. The number in youth trans patients from a decade ago compared to today is astounding. 
Recently, the NHS in the UK has states it plans on altering its guidelines for treatment of trans youth due to an internal review. 


> The proposals say that the new clinical approach will for younger children “reflect evidence that in most cases gender incongruence does not persist into adolescence” and doctors should be mindful this might be a “transient phase”.
> 
> Instead of encouraging transition, medics should take “a watchful approach” to see how a young person’s conditions develop, the plans state.
> 
> When a prepubescent child has already socially transitioned, “the clinical approach has to be mindful of the risks of an inappropriate gender transition and the difficulties that the child may experience in returning to the original gender role upon entering puberty if the gender incongruence does not persist”.




They also found:


> (1) a significant and sharp rise in referrals; (2) poorly-understood marked changes in the types of patients referred; (3) scarce and inconclusive evidence to support clinical decision-making, and (4) operational failures of the single gender clinic model, as evidenced by long wait times for initial assessment, and overall concern with the clinical approach.




Some of the proposed changes: 


> 1. Eliminates the “gender clinic” model of care and does away with “affirmation”





> 2. Classifies social gender transition as an active intervention eligible for informed consent





> 3. Establishes psychotherapy and psychoeducation as the first and primary line of treatment





> 4. Sharply curbs medical interventions and confines puberty blockers to research-only setting





> 7. Reaffirms the preeminence of the DSM-5 diagnosis of “gender dysphoria” for treatment decisions




More details here:








						The NHS Ends the "Gender-Affirmative Care Model" for Youth in England
					

Following extensive stakeholder engagement and a systematic review of evidence, England’s National Health Service (NHS) has issued new draft guidance for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors, which sharply deviates from the “gender-affirming” approach. The previous presumption that gender...




					segm.org
				




This is a radical departure from the current mainstream American treatment philosophy.  Whether or not all these changes are adopted we shall see. 

I believe there are a number of plausible expositions as to why we’re seeing such an increase in cases that are worth exploring. The argument that it’s because of greater social acceptance is probably true to a small degree but I don’t think has merit as the primary factor. And to my knowledge there is no evidence to make that claim despite its public popularity.


----------



## mollyc

AG_PhamD said:


> I have worked in mental health for about a decade at a leading psych hospital. The number in youth trans patients from a decade ago compared to today is astounding.
> Recently, the NHS in the UK has states it plans on altering its guidelines for treatment of trans youth due to an internal review.
> 
> 
> They also found:
> 
> 
> Some of the proposed changes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More details here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The NHS Ends the "Gender-Affirmative Care Model" for Youth in England
> 
> 
> Following extensive stakeholder engagement and a systematic review of evidence, England’s National Health Service (NHS) has issued new draft guidance for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors, which sharply deviates from the “gender-affirming” approach. The previous presumption that gender...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> segm.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a radical departure from the current mainstream American treatment philosophy.  Whether or not all these changes are adopted we shall see.
> 
> I believe there are a number of plausible expositions as to why we’re seeing such an increase in cases that are worth exploring. The argument that it’s because of greater social acceptance is probably true to a small degree but I don’t think has merit as the primary factor. And to my knowledge there is no evidence to make that claim despite its public popularity.



your comments are always so thoughtful


----------



## AG_PhamD

mollyc said:


> your comments are always so thoughtful



That’s very nice of you to say. 

I meant to post this along with my previous post.  




Sweden was considering a number of laws to reduce the age of gender affirming surgery from 18 to 15 and allow children as young as 12 to legally change their gender The government’s health dept was asked to review the evidence. They concluded basically the same thing as the UK. Hormone blockers are not to be used in children under 18 except in  the rare “classic cases” when very young children display gender incongruence and distress. 

Summary is available here:








						Summary of Key Recommendations from the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen/NBHW)
					

Background In February 2022, the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) issued an update to its health care service guidelines for children and youth




					segm.org
				




I would like to highlight this bit: 


> Currently, the NBHW assert that the risks of hormonal treatments outweigh the benefits for most gender-dysphoric youth:
> Poor quality/insufficient evidence: The evidence for safety and efficacy of treatments remains insufficient to draw any definitive conclusions;
> Poorly understood marked change in demographics: The sharp rise in the numbers of youth seeking to transition and the change in sex ratio toward a preponderance of females is not well-understood;
> Growing visibility of detransition/regret: New knowledge about detransition in young adults challenges prior assumption of low regret, and the fact that most do not tell practitioners about their detransition could indicate that detransition rates have been underestimated.




Meanwhile we have states where children as young as 13 can receive gender affirming interventions without parental consent or evidently even notification. We have groups advocating that requiring psych evaluations is “gatekeeping” and “dehumanizing”.  

I suppose these people don’t realize that psych exams are not uncommon before major surgical interventions- such as spinal reconstruction and bariatric surgery. It’s required for pain management programs. In the case of gender surgeries, it’s not just about does the individual’s gender identity, a lot of it is assessing if they’re prepared  to cope with the recovery process. And honestly, what is healthcare these day but an endless series of gatekeepers? You practically can’t even take someone’s blood pressure without getting a prior authorization from insurance these days…


----------



## Andropov

AG_PhamD said:


> Considering the proportion of people who appear to revert their gender identity back to their biological sex, you would hope we could better assess patients to help them. And when you consider other data around transpeople and the astronomical rise in cases, particularly FTM, there are numerous indications many of these cases may be a social phenomenon rather than a biological/psychological one. Additionally, some cases of GID may be caused by other underlying factors or psychological conditions that may be temporary or treatable without having to resort to hormones and surgery.





AG_PhamD said:


> My concern is that we have a large number of people seeking potentially risky treatments with longterm permanent consequences, the majority of whom may come to regret their decision down the road. Children and adolescents are particularly volatile in their beliefs. Being able to best delineate where and when treatment is foundational to modern healthcare. Yet it seems trans healthcare has been entirely hijacked by activists and fear.



How many people do revert their gender identity when transitioning after puberty, though? It is my understanding that detransitioning has been fairly rare in the past. The most significant study I've read on the matter is _The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972-2015)_, with 6,793 people treated over 43 years. Of the ~5074 people who underwent a gonadectomy, only 14 (0.6% of the transgender women and 0.3% of the transgender men) reported that they were going to detransition, of which 2 reported due being to feeling non-binary, 5 due to social acceptance issues, and 7 due to what the authors call 'true regret' (0.07% of the sample!).
Admittedly, even this study has significant limitations: there's no record of the percentage of regrets in people who were on HRT but didn't underwent gonadectomy, which is a significant portion of the sample (~25%), and 36% of the people were lost to follow up. A study in Spain found 8 detransitions among 696 people (1.1%) in HRT, regardless of whether they had received a gonadectomy or not. It's a greater percentage than the one reported by the other study, but not dramatically so, and it takes another variable out of the equation by not sampling only people who underwent gonadectomy. Accounting for people lost to follow-up is obviously more difficult, and this is also a limitation of the spanish study. However, even accounting for a huge margin of error, I think it's safe to say that most people have not regretted their transition.

That's not to say that we should behave as if no people ever detransitioned, but I feel like the public debate on medical transition is often unfairly skewed in favor to those who will eventually realise that they're not transgender. It's not like delaying HRT is without risks for those who choose to transition either: some of the masculinizing/feminizing effects of sexual hormones will be greatly reduced if treatment is started later in life, and —while this is obviously anecdotal evidence and hardly proof of anything— I know some people say that having to undergo the changes of puberty for the gender they didn't identify with was the most traumatic part. 

What I want to convey is that waiting around is often portrayed as an innocuous and cautious approach, and this is ultimately not true.



TBL said:


> Agreed on all points. What adolescent doesn't say "this is me now" when joining a new scene/clique/fandom? People don't seem to realize that children and adolescents go through phases. No, that is not me saying "trans is just a phase", it is me saying that some children who are not trans might be mistaken for trans because they are going through a phase and are being encouraged to pursue this path by well-meaning people who are not appreciating the consequences of what they are doing. Gender non-conformity is not uncommon in children. Some studies indicate that gender non-conformity is more likely to correspond with homosexuality or bisexuality later in life. As a young boy, I went through a phase of wanting to be a girl (giving myself a girl's name, wearing my sister's clothes, playing with girl's toys)...but it turned out to be a phase. It may or may not have presaged my bisexuality, I don't know, but it was not a permanent thing and I did not end up being trans. Nowadays I feel like it would've been taken as a sign that I was trans and I should begin "socially transitioning" (which is often the first step towards hormones and puberty blockers). Trans activists are far too gung ho about supposed trans children. A child becoming disillusioned with gender norms and roles does not mean they are trans. I am firmly pro-LGBT but I never approach anything without questioning it and I think we need to be a lot more careful about what we're doing to children.



As far as I know, it has been established that the majority of gender dysphoric prepubertal children will not meet the criteria for gender dysphoria as adults and will not be transgender as adults. Working on identifying those who will become transgender adults is still a work in progress, but your specific choice of words reminded me of a (not very sciency, admittedly) quote from the section of _Greenspan's Basic & Clinical Endocrinology_ on transgender endocrinology: _[...] persisters believed they "were" the other sex, while desisters "wished they were" the other sex [...]_. That same paragraph also mentions how most of those children will, as you say, correspond with homosexuality/bisexuality later in life. Anyway, I think anyone trying to indisputably identify a child as transgender (before puberty) is threading on very thin ice.

Once puberty starts though, if the child still identifies as transgender, I think it's unlikely to be a phase. And even for the few that is, this 'phase' burns out before any kind of irreversible medical intervention is carried out. It carries an amount of pressure and social stigma too great for anyone not absolutely sure to go through, unlike scenes/cliques/fandoms, which are essentially 'free to enter' and have a similar feeling of belonging to a group. A more apt comparison, IMHO, would be with sexual orientation. How many people express a non-heterosexual sexual orientation after puberty and then go back?


----------



## AG_PhamD

Andropov said:


> How many people do revert their gender identity when transitioning after puberty, though? It is my understanding that detransitioning has been fairly rare in the past. The most significant study I've read on the matter is _The Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972-2015)_, with 6,793 people treated over 43 years. Of the ~5074 people who underwent a gonadectomy, only 14 (0.6% of the transgender women and 0.3% of the transgender men) reported that they were going to detransition, of which 2 reported due being to feeling non-binary, 5 due to social acceptance issues, and 7 due to what the authors call 'true regret' (0.07% of the sample!).
> Admittedly, even this study has significant limitations: there's no record of the percentage of regrets in people who were on HRT but didn't underwent gonadectomy, which is a significant portion of the sample (~25%), and 36% of the people were lost to follow up. A study in Spain found 8 detransitions among 696 people (1.1%) in HRT, regardless of whether they had received a gonadectomy or not. It's a greater percentage than the one reported by the other study, but not dramatically so, and it takes another variable out of the equation by not sampling only people who underwent gonadectomy. Accounting for people lost to follow-up is obviously more difficult, and this is also a limitation of the spanish study. However, even accounting for a huge margin of error, I think it's safe to say that most people have not regretted their transition.
> 
> That's not to say that we should behave as if no people ever detransitioned, but I feel like the public debate on medical transition is often unfairly skewed in favor to those who will eventually realise that they're not transgender. It's not like delaying HRT is without risks for those who choose to transition either: some of the masculinizing/feminizing effects of sexual hormones will be greatly reduced if treatment is started later in life, and —while this is obviously anecdotal evidence and hardly proof of anything— I know some people say that having to undergo the changes of puberty for the gender they didn't identify with was the most traumatic part.
> 
> What I want to convey is that waiting around is often portrayed as an innocuous and cautious approach, and this is ultimately not true




The numbers are really all over the place. Some report it being extremely rare. There was a recent study that put the rate at 54% in FTM and 20 or 30% in MTF, this was in people affiliated with the military thought which has age bias and I would speculate transitioning is less socially acceptable in the military community. 

The Swedish claim 
“Growing visibility of detransition/regret: New knowledge about detransition in young adults challenges prior assumption of low regret, and the fact that most do not tell practitioners about their detransition could indicate that detransition rates have been underestimated.”

It’s also worth noting in the UK something like 1000/19000 patients are suing their largest youth gender clinic (Tavistock Clinic) for malpractice. We’ll have to see what claims are made and if others are suing privately. 

If we go with the theory there is a large social influence component in young people, it would make sense rates now are higher than they used to be. 

Another intriguing statistic is the the factor of race and gender. MTF between races is pretty similar between racial groups. But the rate of white FTM is 3x+ higher than Black and Hispanic FTM.

Waiting can certainly be damaging in legitimate cases. But hormone blockers have a multitude of risk from mental illness to affecting growth, to the underdevelopment of sex organs (which can affect the success of vaginoplasty), to permanent infertility, amongst others. The risks aren’t often talked about in public. In fact, I’ve seen child-targeted medical literature that fails to adequately inform risk. Hormone replacement therapy brings about a whole slew of additional risks. Surgery, especially bottom surgery, carries substantial risk of complications and often require multiple surgeries to correct. 
The problem is currently we have little way of predicting what is transient and what is not. There definitely needs to be more research into this. For the past numbers of years however the very suggestion that transgenderism could be transient, despite evidence, was taken as being transphobic. To be clear, I’m not remotely supporting “conversion therapy, which is pseudoscientific, often religious abuse. Exploring why people feel the way they do and what might factors might be impacting them is not.

I will stress that the UK and Swedish guidelines make a point to say Trans-identifying people deserve to be treated with compassion, respect, and dignity. And I agree with that entirely. 

It’s also worth noting Sweden does have some exceptions to their 18+ policy. But more time and research is necessary to see if their policy is appropriate. 

My perception is the medical community got ahead of itself with gender affirming care. They had the best intentions of providing care to the trans community, there’s no nefarious conspiracy. But in my opinion there are too many red flags that warrant reassessing how this is approached.


----------



## Clix Pix

I know two women, (both MTF) who at a very young age -- barely out of toddlerhood -- identified as female although they had "boy parts".  They didn't understand why they felt different but they knew that they WERE different.  In each case they were made to dress and act as boys although it just did not feel right to them. Both of them early on tried to express how they felt and how they really wanted to play with dolls, not with toy trucks, but this was brushed aside and ignored, especially in the case of one of them.   The other girl's family did allow the child to dress and play with whatever toys that she wanted at home but she still for various reasons was required to appear, dress and try to act as a boy when out in public. 

One of them is an early pioneer in this whole thing, who after leaving her family as soon as she was able to do so,  to her joy and relief found a new and much more welcoming family in the LGBTQ community long before it was even called that.   After some time she understood and  realized what she needed to do to truly be herself.  She began the transitioning process, eventually undergoing surgical procedures at John Hopkins in Baltimore back in the days when that medical center had the very first clinic of its kind, one which provided gender affirming support, treatment and surgeries to those who were at that time often referred to as "transsexual."   Once she had undergone the full medical and surgical transition this woman was able to move on through her life and career through the years as the woman she knew she truly was.    Unfortunately that clinic at Johns Hopkins  closed its doors in 1979 due to controversy and misunderstandings.   Thankfully, in more enlightened times,  Johns Hopkins has now once again established a program, the Center for Transgender Health, which offers current, comprehensive, evidence-based and affirming care for transgender youth and adults. 

The other woman, born many years later than the first person, was fortunate in that her family was supportive right from the beginning, when she was very small and toddling around,  even though they didn't quite understand what was going on with her and her insistence upon playing with "girl toys" and wanting to play dressup in angel and fairy costumes rather than going outside to play baseball with the neighborhood boys.  Eventually just as she was on the brink of adolescence  she and her family became aware of the term "transgender" and what it entailed, and as time went on it was clear that this clearly seemed to fit her like a glove.  She began therapy and then at the age of seventeen moved into the more visible phase of transitioning by at home and in public dressing and living as the girl she had always known she was.  When she was eighteen years old she underwent the physical transition with surgery.  Today, she is a lovely and happy young woman enjoying her life.  

While I am sure that there are people who regret having made a transition and who no longer regard themselves as transgender,  there are also many, like the two women I mention here, who are very, very happy in being able to live their lives as the female individuals they have always felt they truly are.

That said, it does seem as though these days we are hearing more and more about young people transitioning or wanting to transition and young people who are declaring themselves as transgender or non-binary or some such to the point where this seems almost trendy or contagious, which definitely is rather unusual.  This is where the medical professionals really have to be careful right from the get-go in their working with the families and clients who come to them for support and guidance.  Definitely tricky territory!


----------



## Clix Pix

Clix Pix said:


> I know two women, (both MTF) who at a very young age -- barely out of toddlerhood -- identified as female although they had "boy parts".  They didn't understand why they felt different but they knew that they WERE different.  In each case they were made to dress and act as boys although it just did not feel right to them. Both of them early on tried to express how they felt and how they really wanted to play with dolls, not with toy trucks, but this was brushed aside and ignored, especially in the case of one of them.   The other girl's family did allow the child to dress and play with whatever toys that she wanted at home but she still for various reasons was required to appear, dress and try to act as a boy when out in public.
> 
> One of them is an early pioneer in this whole thing, who after leaving her family as soon as she was able to do so,  to her joy and relief found a new and much more welcoming family in the LGBTQ community long before it was even called that.   After some time she understood and  realized what she needed to do to truly be herself.  She began the transitioning process, eventually undergoing surgical procedures at John Hopkins in Baltimore back in the days when that medical center had the very first clinic of its kind, one which provided gender affirming support, treatment and surgeries to those who were at that time often referred to as "transsexual."   Once she had undergone the full medical and surgical transition this woman was able to move on through her life and career through the years as the woman she knew she truly was.    Unfortunately that clinic at Johns Hopkins  closed its doors in 1979 due to controversy and misunderstandings.   Thankfully, in more enlightened times,  Johns Hopkins has now once again established a program, the Center for Transgender Health, which offers current, comprehensive, evidence-based and affirming care for transgender youth and adults.
> 
> The other woman, born many years later than the first person, was fortunate in that her family was supportive right from the beginning, when she was very small and toddling around,  even though they didn't quite understand what was going on with her and her insistence upon playing with "girl toys" and wanting to play dressup in angel and fairy costumes rather than going outside to play baseball with the neighborhood boys.  Eventually just as she was on the brink of adolescence  she and her family became aware of the term "transgender" and what it entailed, and as time went on it was clear that this clearly seemed to fit her like a glove.  She began therapy and then at the age of seventeen moved into the more visible phase of transitioning by at home and in public dressing and living as the girl she had always known she was.  When she was eighteen years old she underwent the physical transition with surgery.  Today, she is a lovely and happy young woman enjoying her life.
> 
> While I am sure that there are people who regret having made a transition and who no longer regard themselves as transgender,  there are also many, like the two women I mention here, who are very, very happy in being able to live their lives as the women they have always felt they truly are.




That said, it does seem as though these days we are hearing more and more about young people transitioning or wanting to transition and young people who are declaring themselves as transgender or non-binary or some such to the point where this seems almost trendy or contagious, which definitely is rather unusual.  This is where the medical professionals really have to be careful right from the get-go in their working with the families and clients who come to them for support and guidance.  Definitely tricky territory!


----------



## lizkat

The Rs' approach to transgender issues seems a lot like what the Rs are trying to do with abortion rights:  overlay their own nonmedical opinions on decisions and choices that should remain a matter between people and their physicians.


----------



## Clix Pix

Sorry about the repetition above.....I tried to delete the second post since I'd included all I wanted to say in the first one but that didn't work out too well.


----------



## AG_PhamD

lizkat said:


> The Rs' approach to transgender issues seems a lot like what the Rs are trying to do with abortion rights:  overlay their own nonmedical opinions on decisions and choices that should remain a matter between people and their physicians.




I have to agree for the most part. The fervent opposition from the R’s treats every case the same, particularly when it comes to children. I think they routinely over exaggerate how easy it is to get gender affirming care. While I think it’s true there are *some* more liberal places with incredibly lax standards and policies pertaining to children and some rather outrageous proposed laws, this is generally not the case in most places.

I think there needs to be a reasonable balance between allowing accessibility to treatment while also ensuring that these treatments decisions are made wisely.

What’s truly disgusting are those who feel it is their mission to attack trans people or their providers. Boston Children’s Hospital had a deluge of targeted attack and threats due to complete misinformation. The fact is the youngest bottom surgery they will consider is age 17… and it’s never happened. And fun fact, like most pediatric hospitals they also treat young adults (generally up to age 21 but apparently up to 35 with gender surgery- granted it’s part of a giant convoluted healthcare network with doctors often working between hospitals). 

And what these idiots don’t realize when you call in threats, including bomb threats, hospitals implement a ton of extra security. It puts everyone on edge, especially the patients. And then every other hospital has to take precautions too.


----------



## thekev

Clix Pix said:


> While I am sure that there are people who regret having made a transition and who no longer regard themselves as transgender,  there are also many, like the two women I mention here, who are very, very happy in being able to live their lives as the female individuals they have always felt they truly are.
> 
> That said, it does seem as though these days we are hearing more and more about young people transitioning or wanting to transition and young people who are declaring themselves as transgender or non-binary or some such to the point where this seems almost trendy or contagious, which definitely is rather unusual.  This is where the medical professionals really have to be careful right from the get-go in their working with the families and clients who come to them for support and guidance.  Definitely tricky territory!




The downside to this is that no surgical treatment is 100% reversible if it turns out to have been the wrong treatment in retrospect. I'm not sure that point really gets completely absorbed by kids in or just out of their teenage years. Non-binary seems more predictable. The term isn't highly associated with any kind of medical procedure, although I'm wondering whether it'll just become a thing of the 2020s.


----------



## AG_PhamD

thekev said:


> The downside to this is that no surgical treatment is 100% reversible if it turns out to have been the wrong treatment in retrospect. I'm not sure that point really gets completely absorbed by kids in or just out of their teenage years. Non-binary seems more predictable. The term isn't highly associated with any kind of medical procedure, although I'm wondering whether it'll just become a thing of the 2020s.




I would argue no surgical treatment is reversible, period. Some are more “correctable” than others but in most typical cases of gender surgery it will never be the same. 
It is possible to get a phalloplasty while retaining a functional vagina. But as I understand this is an exceedingly rare procedure. That’s probably the most reversible surgery. 

I think part of the problem is (which seems to be recognized by countries like the UK and Sweden) is that there is a conflation of gender dysphoria and transgenderism resulting from curiosity, experimentation, making a social statement, status/attention seeking, perceived benefit of being the opposite gender, etc. Legitimate gender dysphoria means your gender incongruence is overwhelmingly distressing to the point it’s significantly affecting your ability to function- often resulting in suicidality. 

If people want to explore the realms of gender I have no issue with that. But let’s not pretend it should be medically treated as cases of true gender dysphoria may warrant. 

I believe the meteoric rise in gender affirming care is overwhelmingly related to it being “trendy” and in some cases a manifestation of other mental illness (that’s a whole discussion in itself). I think many data points very strongly suggests that. When I was growing up in the 90’s and early 2000’s there were various subculture trends like punk, goth, emo, and scene that all had their time with a small cohort of kids. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to question if a lot what we’re seeing with gender is just a modern example of these relatively short lived fads. 

I’ve worked with a lot of transgender patients. Some of them, an increasing number, I really do worry about their long term satisfaction and motivations for transitioning. 

I’ve literally had a 18yr FTM patient on 2yrs of HRT explain to me he “never really thought about [gender] until his friend transitioned FTM”. That suggests to me more social influence than organic origin. 

And I’ve seen the flip side, what can happen to people when they come to realize they made a mistake transitioning. It’s truly heartbreaking. 

I don’t care how people live their lives, I just want the best for everyone and for them to make good, informed decisions for themselves, to live contently.


----------



## Herdfan

Clix Pix said:


> That said, it does seem as though these days we are hearing more and more about young people transitioning or wanting to transition and young people who are declaring themselves as transgender or non-binary or some such *to the point where this seems almost trendy or contagious, *which definitely is rather unusual.  This is where the medical professionals really have to be careful right from the get-go in their working with the families and clients who come to them for support and guidance.  Definitely tricky territory!




Now add in parents who help feed this.  Chardonnay mom wants to be able to brag to all her elitist friends how she has a transgender or non-binary child.  So instead of slowing down and making sure the child really is transgendered, they are scheduling puberty blockers and surgery.

My biggest issue is keeping this from the parents.  What is it they don't want them to know?  Also, why is it that a 12 year old can't vote, buy alcohol, cigarettes, drive, get a tattoo or any number of things because they aren't mature enough, but can make life altering decisions behind their parent's backs.


----------



## rdrr

Herdfan said:


> Now add in parents who help feed this.  Chardonnay mom wants to be able to brag to all her elitist friends how she has a transgender or non-binary child.  So instead of slowing down and making sure the child really is transgendered, they are scheduling puberty blockers and surgery.
> 
> My biggest issue is keeping this from the parents.  What is it they don't want them to know?  Also, why is it that a 12 year old can't vote, buy alcohol, cigarettes, drive, get a tattoo or any number of things because they aren't mature enough, but can make life altering decisions behind their parent's backs.



Got to ask...  What percentage of parents want to "brag" to their friends as a motivation for pushing their underaged child to getting gender surgery?   Or is this an extreme case of fear mongering, like when the Right were up in arms about gay marriage and citing some baseless example of people marrying their <insert kitchen appliance here>. 

Even if there was one sick individual out there that did actually have that as a motivation.  IMO no one would admit to that.  I think you are just bringing up a pointless example that probably has a 0.0% chance of actually happening.


----------



## Hrafn

rdrr said:


> Got to ask...  What percentage of parents want to "brag" to their friends as a motivation for pushing their underaged child to getting gender surgery?   Or is this an extreme case of fear mongering, like when the Right were up in arms about gay marriage and citing some baseless example of people marrying their <insert kitchen appliance here>.
> 
> Even if there was one sick individual out there that did actually have that as a motivation.  IMO no one would admit to that.  I think you are just bringing up a pointless example that probably has a 0.0% chance of actually happening.



What if it’s solar flares making them do it?  I’m on the fence when it’s flares.


----------



## Russell Jackson

I was recommended this.








						That's Gender Dysphoria, FYI
					

A resource for those questioning their gender, already on a gender journey, or simply wanting to learn more about what it is to be transgender.




					genderdysphoria.fyi
				




Also, when searching for this thread, I came across a Reddit post bearing the same name.

Transgender, a Challenge for the Conservative Mindset from
      trans

Ever heard of informed consent?





						What is the informed consent model of transgender care?
					

Semen is a whitish fluid that contains seminal fluid and sperm. It is generally expelled from the penis when a man ejaculates. But men may...




					www.issm.info
				




You might want to take a look at this!








						Erin's Informed Consent HRT map of the US - Google My Maps
					

Support the creator of this map with a donation: https://ko-fi.com/erininthemorn  Lets make informed consent easier to access. Follow me on twitter @erininthemorn. Let me know there if anything has changed or if any of these are wrong, or if I'm missing any!




					www.google.com
				




I also see this term thrown around a lot on social media.





						TERF - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------

