Trans Women are not Women

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I do.

Great. Have you got the study?

Skeletal structure doesn't change with hormones. The Q angle of the knee is smaller for men than for women, as an example, which makes running more efficient for men. Neuromuscular efficiency will also remain different despite hormone treatment.

For example, the standing vertical jump (SVJ) for male athletes is much larger than for female athletes. The SVJ is a very interesting measure of athletic aptitude, because unlike strength, there's actually very little you can do to improve it. Football recruiters use it precisely because it's not really trainable, and so reveals information about an athlete's intrinsic potential. It's mostly a function of how fast your nervous system can recruit muscles to fire, and how many of them the nervous system can get to fire at the same time. Getting stronger doesn't change that, and does very little to improve the SVJ. Steroids likewise don't improve the SVJ. Which is why the loss of muscle mass due to hormone therapy won't really hurt the SVJ much either. But having a higher SVJ is an advantage in almost any athletic competition. So trans women will still have that neuromuscular efficiency advantage over biological women regardless of hormone therapy.

This might all be the case but I am not going to just take your word for it. And nor do I know how much of an impact this has on individual sports.

The entire premise of having women's sports is because of population differences.

As are all sorts of weird and wonderful arguments. So that's not a convincing start

If you can't consider population differences, then there's no reason to have women's sports at all. If that's really how you feel, then be honest about the logic, and advocate doing away with women's sports entirely. But the idea that you can't tolerate being judged as a member of a population if it excludes you from a league that is entirely premised on populations, well, that's a contradiction from the start.

No it really isn't. Because what we were talking about is the tails of two populations.

There is a huge difference between saying 'the best woman will never be able to compete with the best man' and 'the best woman will never be able to compete with any transwoman'.

I mean I hope you can see that. Do you disagree?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Examples of trans women being whalloped by women in sports like boxing or MMA?

I know you are provocative but you aren't thick. Do you think this is what I said? Honestly?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You picked a really bad example. Unemployment benefits function as a sort of insurance, which could potentially be used by more people than actually use them. Most people will never be under consideration for benefits to transgendered.

You assume. But they could have a family member or friend who is. Or might have one in the future. And they might just give a ****. I mean, I don't have any personal reason to support trans rights but I do anyway. Would the government not be representing me if they act in favour of trans people?

A better example would be welfare for the developmentally disabled, since most people aren't even potentially in that category. But even there, you've skipped over so many steps (like needs and justifications) that the comparison is still fairly pointless.

Well the comparison might be pointless, but it counters your argument. So your argument must be pointless too. Right and wrong are not based on numbers.

 

[cullennz]

I know you are provocative but you aren't thick. Do you think this is what I said? Honestly?

Ok. Fair point

Yep. And we have other examples where its just fine.

Can you post examples of it being just fine in competitions between trans women and women in boxing or MMA

 

[Ziggurat]

I mean, I don't have any personal reason to support trans rights but I do anyway. Would the government not be representing me if they act in favour of trans people?

Sure. But you're in the minority in regards to trans women competing in women's sports.

 

[Ziggurat]

Great. Have you got the study?

Not readily at hand. I might do some searching later.

As are all sorts of weird and wonderful arguments. So that's not a convincing start

It's a start and a finish to the idea that you can't judge based on population characteristics. If you can't do that, then you can't have separate women's sports to begin with, and arguing about who exactly should participate in a league that shouldn't exist in the first place is pointless.

There is a huge difference between saying 'the best woman will never be able to compete with the best man' and 'the best woman will never be able to compete with any transwoman'.

And there is a huge difference between saying 'the best woman will never be able to compete with the best man' and 'the best woman will never be able to compete with any man'. We don't need women to be unable to compete against any man in order to not let men enter women's competitions. Why would we need women to be unable to compete with any transwoman to exclude them?

Again and again, your logic circles around to there not being justification for separate women's sports at all. And that would be an intellectually consistent position to take. But your logic doesn't allow for picking and choosing.

 

[attempt5001]

Here again is the example i gave of a transwoman competing with other women in a non-elite but competitive environment.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/03/05/transgender-footballer-no-advantage-hormone-therapy/

Now she argues that her hormone therapy pretty much levels the playing field and i don't have any evidence that she is wrong in that.

Now she is not the biggest strongest best man in football suddenly deciding she wants to play in women's sport. But equally she isn't competing against the best women either.

i give this example because it was in the press here recently and I haven't seen anyone come out to argue it or say that they don't like playing against her or that it's unfair. and yet there are a handful of people here arguing that this needs to be stopped before it destroys women's sport entirely.

and that's why I don't like arguments from population differences, because they don't apply to individuals.

Okay. For non-elite team sport, but where there is still a spirit of competition, I'm sure trans-women could participate with minimal or no special accommodation required. Perhaps a reasonable cut off would be any league in which there is no drug testing program.

I think though, that if we are talking about "policy", we cannot escape talking about populations, unless each individual case is assessed by a panel of experts and tests, which seems impractical. And the only way to know if the personalized process was working well would be if trans women were winning at a proportional rate to their representation in the sport.

 

[Roboramma]

What utter nonsense, government is one of the ways societies decide to organise, government is just as much a part of society as a sporting organisation.

What utter nonsense. Government is a part of society, just like a sporting organisation, and when two different parties within society come into conflict, some sort of resolution will occur, but that doesn't mean that society as a whole somehow came to an agreement.

 

[sadhatter]

Okay. For non-elite team sport, but where there is still a spirit of competition, I'm sure trans-women could participate with minimal or no special accommodation required. Perhaps a reasonable cut off would be any league in which there is no drug testing program.

I think though, that if we are talking about "policy", we cannot escape talking about populations, unless each individual case is assessed by a panel of experts and tests, which seems impractical. And the only way to know if the personalized process was working well would be if trans women were winning at a proportional rate to their representation in the sport.

Every league that doesn't have drug testing has rules against ringers. You couldn't bring in Wayne Gretzky to play a city game, even if he lived in the city and was bored.

Same situation here. If a player is going to unbalance the game they need to step up their competition not whine.

 

[The Atheist]

Same situation here. If a player is going to unbalance the game they need to step up their competition not whine.

The only way women can step up their game against trans-women athletes is to take performance-enhancing drugs to give them far greater muscle mass.

We know how that ends up - you set a record that stands for 30 years then die at age 38.

 

[HansMustermann]

I don't think that's what sadhatter was saying. The "step up their competition" means compete in your appropriate class instead of trying to unbalance the class below.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Can you post examples of it being just fine in competitions between trans women and women in boxing or MMA

I don't, no. I don't know if such things exist. I couldn't care less about either of these activities to the point where I personally sometimes feel they aren't even sports at all.

It may be that transwomen can't compete fairly in these particular sports and that's OK. It doesn't mean they can't compete in other sports.

I would think that given that boxing and MMA already have weight classes (I think they do for MMA anyway) that it would be within the realms of possibility to simply create a new class which was for transwomen? Call it something contentious like 'Ultra Women's Class' just for giggles.

Sure. But you're in the minority in regards to trans women competing in women's sports.

Well I don't know if I am or am not. But again having a minority opinion does not make it wrong nor should lawmakers necessarily wait for a majority to support something before it happens.

It's a start and a finish to the idea that you can't judge based on population characteristics. If you can't do that, then you can't have separate women's sports to begin with, and arguing about who exactly should participate in a league that shouldn't exist in the first place is pointless.

And there is a huge difference between saying 'the best woman will never be able to compete with the best man' and 'the best woman will never be able to compete with any man'. We don't need women to be unable to compete against any man in order to not let men enter women's competitions. Why would we need women to be unable to compete with any transwoman to exclude them?

Again and again, your logic circles around to there not being justification for separate women's sports at all. And that would be an intellectually consistent position to take. But your logic doesn't allow for picking and choosing.

Well I don't necessarily agree with your argument but even if it could be used as an argument for doing away with women's sport entirely I don't particularly care because nobody is making that argument and nobody is being excluded from sport on the back of this argument.

And the opposite logic is just as true. If women can't compete with men and need a separate league then we really need separate leagues for Kenyan and Ethiopian distance runners, Afro-Caribbean sprinters, Tennis players called Williams and Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Which is why what we actually do is try to create an environment where sports can be played by as many people who want to participate to the best of their abilities against other people while maintaining a sizeable degree of sporting integrity, competitiveness and entertainment value.

None of this is ever going to be perfect but I am not comfortable with the idea that transwomen don't get to participate in sport even when their doing so would not create any issues whatsoever

Okay. For non-elite team sport, but where there is still a spirit of competition, I'm sure trans-women could participate with minimal or no special accommodation required. Perhaps a reasonable cut off would be any league in which there is no drug testing program.

I'm not sure why this would only apply to non-elite sport though.

I think though, that if we are talking about "policy", we cannot escape talking about populations, unless each individual case is assessed by a panel of experts and tests, which seems impractical. And the only way to know if the personalized process was working well would be if trans women were winning at a proportional rate to their representation in the sport.

I don't know if that would be the case I can think of possible reasons why transwomen might be disproportionately successful which aren't biological, and i don't even know how many cases we would be talking about.

I guess in an ideal world, and this is what I have been getting at, there would be more nuanced ways to determine who can compete in women's sports - whether that's measurement of hormone levels, muscle mass, strength or whatever which would allow a number of tranwomen (although probably still not all) to be able to compete.

 

[Ziggurat]

Well I don't know if I am or am not. But again having a minority opinion does not make it wrong nor should lawmakers necessarily wait for a majority to support something before it happens.

Minority opinions aren't necessarily wrong, but popularity does matter in sports. The entire enterprise requires it.

Well I don't necessarily agree with your argument but even if it could be used as an argument for doing away with women's sport entirely I don't particularly care because nobody is making that argument and nobody is being excluded from sport on the back of this argument.

If separate women's sports were abolished, that wouldn't exclude women. They would still (technically) be able to compete against men.

And the opposite logic is just as true. If women can't compete with men and need a separate league then we really need separate leagues for Kenyan and Ethiopian distance runners, Afro-Caribbean sprinters, Tennis players called Williams and Ronnie O'Sullivan.

No. That does not follow at all. A particular segregation might be justifiable, but that doesn't mean that it's required. You will always need the numbers, both of athletes and fans, in order to sustain a separate league. If fans aren't interested in watching Kenyan-only races or no-Kenyan races, then that suffices as a reason to not have them.

None of this is ever going to be perfect but I am not comfortable with the idea that transwomen don't get to participate in sport even when their doing so would not create any issues whatsoever

It is creating an issue. You may not care about the issue it's creating, but others do.

And transwomen should be allowed to compete against men, since they are in fact biological males. That's not excluding them.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Trans women are not women.
That said, some of them are still ******* hawt. Have you seen Blaire White? Jesus Christ.

 

[sadhatter]

I don't think that's what sadhatter was saying. The "step up their competition" means compete in your appropriate class instead of trying to unbalance the class below.

Very much.

In video gaming it is referred to as "seal clubbing", purposely playing against people with lower skill to gain more wins. It is seen as a dishonorable tactic, and ruins the sense of fair play ranked matching gives.

Essentially trans women athletes are seal clubbing, most likely unintentionally, but the effect is the same.

 

[sadhatter]

I don't, no. I don't know if such things exist. I couldn't care less about either of these activities to the point where I personally sometimes feel they aren't even sports at all.

It may be that transwomen can't compete fairly in these particular sports and that's OK. It doesn't mean they can't compete in other sports.

I would think that given that boxing and MMA already have weight classes (I think they do for MMA anyway) that it would be within the realms of possibility to simply create a new class which was for transwomen? Call it something contentious like 'Ultra Women's Class' just for giggles.




Well I don't know if I am or am not. But again having a minority opinion does not make it wrong nor should lawmakers necessarily wait for a majority to support something before it happens.



Well I don't necessarily agree with your argument but even if it could be used as an argument for doing away with women's sport entirely I don't particularly care because nobody is making that argument and nobody is being excluded from sport on the back of this argument.

And the opposite logic is just as true. If women can't compete with men and need a separate league then we really need separate leagues for Kenyan and Ethiopian distance runners, Afro-Caribbean sprinters, Tennis players called Williams and Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Which is why what we actually do is try to create an environment where sports can be played by as many people who want to participate to the best of their abilities against other people while maintaining a sizeable degree of sporting integrity, competitiveness and entertainment value.

None of this is ever going to be perfect but I am not comfortable with the idea that transwomen don't get to participate in sport even when their doing so would not create any issues whatsoever




I'm not sure why this would only apply to non-elite sport though.



I don't know if that would be the case I can think of possible reasons why transwomen might be disproportionately successful which aren't biological, and i don't even know how many cases we would be talking about.

I guess in an ideal world, and this is what I have been getting at, there would be more nuanced ways to determine who can compete in women's sports - whether that's measurement of hormone levels, muscle mass, strength or whatever which would allow a number of tranwomen (although probably still not all) to be able to compete.

Look at how often your posts contain phrases like " I don't know about sports" and " I don't care about this sport ".

You wouldn't listen to someone who knows nothing about trans people in regards to trans issues, so why should your opinion ( which constantly is "i dont know" and " I don't care") be taken seriously on sport?

And to cut off the " but it is a trans issue " , one person's right to swing their fist ends at the start of another person's nose. And if you do not understand the analogy give it a look up before replying.

 

[theprestige]

Very much.



In video gaming it is referred to as "seal clubbing", purposely playing against people with lower skill to gain more wins. It is seen as a dishonorable tactic, and ruins the sense of fair play ranked matching gives.



Essentially trans women athletes are seal clubbing, most likely unintentionally, but the effect is the same.

The term I've been using is "punching down".

 

[HansMustermann]

Yeah, that seems to be the more common term outside video games, but yeah, it's the same idea.

 

[Belz...]

Trans women are not women.
That said, some of them are still ******* hawt. Have you seen Blaire White? Jesus Christ.

I liked her face better before the surgery, in fact. Her profile has improved, mind you, but that's not what we usually see in her videos.

 

[attempt5001]

I'm not sure why this would only apply to non-elite sport though.

There are a few reasons I can think of that create challenges:
- Elite sport is where there is maximum (often the only) mainstream exposure and therefore maximum potential loss of such for biological women.
- Elite sport typically involves prize money, sponsorship, recognition etc. This creates a troubling incentive for abuse by trans-women and a disincentive for females to participate if those benefits appear un-achievable.

I don't know if that would be the case I can think of possible reasons why transwomen might be disproportionately successful which aren't biological, and i don't even know how many cases we would be talking about.

I guess in an ideal world, and this is what I have been getting at, there would be more nuanced ways to determine who can compete in women's sports - whether that's measurement of hormone levels, muscle mass, strength or whatever which would allow a number of transwomen (although probably still not all) to be able to compete.

Yes, I have no objection at all to discussing idyllic solutions as part of the process of giving the challenge due consideration. The biggest challenge I see with the idea of "qualifying maximum metrics" as you outlined is that inherent to elite sport is the process of dedicated training and practicing to achieve the best of which your body is capable. It seems to me that with trans women, this gets turned on it's head and instead, those capabilities are reduced until they are just below the acceptable thresholds. That's a big part of the challenge for which I can't yet think of a good and fair solution.