https://bleacherreport.com/articles...r-athletes-in-womens-sport-is-insane-cheating
Here's Joe Rogan's take:
Surprised I haven't seen this posted here.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Martina Navratilova: Transgender Athletes in Women's Sport Is Insane, Cheating
- Thread starter AnotherDayAnotherDollar
- Start date
- Status
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...r-athletes-in-womens-sport-is-insane-cheating
Here's Joe Rogan's take:
Surprised I haven't seen this posted here.
OP
OP
Ah yes, all those men just lining up to hormone treatments and snipping away their junk just to win at women's sports/olympics (though I don't know if gender reassignment surgery is necessary to be applicable as a woman to whatever sports aren't so bigoted that transgender women are banned?). Think of the fame and prestige they can get as celebrated top athletes!
Not.
Not.
Don't use the algorithm as an excuse, stand by your OP.
OP
OP
Nah, by what the article mentiones she is coming from complete ignorance on how transition works and which rules are in place.
Like it is not even "they are stronger since they are still dudes"... it is just plain "need rules or else cis dudes will take impotence pills that grow breasts because of reasons"
I don't think this is a black and white issue as it often gets painted on our forums. There hasn't been sufficient research done (to my knowledge, anyway) to either prove or disprove whether or not a woman who has transitioned from being a man has any competitive edge over a woman who was born female.
It has been proven that if there is an edge it is minimal because we have no register of any tran woman ever winning a gold medal or breaking the country's record, let alone a world record.
Ah, yet another queer cis person whom would seem to be in favor of taking the "T" out of LGBT(Q). Line starts over there, Martina.
And Renee has said that if she transitioned in her early twenties instead of her forties, that no cis women could have beaten her. Martina may know from learning from the coaching.
Which makes ZERO sense.
But then again, internalized transphobia in the 70's ...
I'm sure hormone therapy is better now, but I also believe someone who transitioned would know their capabilities. For her to become a highly ranked player after transitioning in her forties makes it seem there may have been some residual advantage. Although I don't believe testosterone testing was done like the current IOC guidelines.
Things are only going to get muddier if the IAAF rules about athletes with differences of sexual development having to suppress their testosterone levels are upheld by the court of arbitration for sport.
athletes in their 40s are well past spent. That in itself is an indication of where things stand.
Can we please stop signal boosting bad faith transphobia and not repeat the same threads on these "issues" in cyclical perpetuity? I'm sick of legitimizing these bigots with discussion as if there's anything behind their reasoning aside from hatred and faulty science that's been debunked time and time again.
Serena Williams is 37 years old and still ridiculously better than Richards ever was
But yeah, we don't know the guidelines in the late 70's
Serena is still great, but not better than she ever was.
And also, she's not in her 40s. The only athletes to be remarkable in their late 30s to early 40s are physical freaks way beyond their peers, such as Serena and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. To try to compare them to typical athletes is so far beyond absurd as to be disingenuous.
Do we really need Joe Rogan's opinion on this? Why not some actual research that has been done on this exact topic:
http://jrci.cgpublisher.com/product..._RaceTimesforTransgenderAthletes_FinalOF.pdf?
Forgive me for rolling my eyes at all of the cisgender people "just asking questions" about transgender people's lives and bodies without bothering to do the work to research on their own and be informed.
http://jrci.cgpublisher.com/product..._RaceTimesforTransgenderAthletes_FinalOF.pdf?
Forgive me for rolling my eyes at all of the cisgender people "just asking questions" about transgender people's lives and bodies without bothering to do the work to research on their own and be informed.
That is exactly my point, because that's what Richards was doing
And I mean Richards when I said "she" before the edit . That Serena is now ridiculosly better than Richards
I agree so much. These threads never go well, because it always inevitably boils down to posters just finding any excuse to spew an "acceptable" level of transphobia without getting banned. If people haven't read the studies by now that have been linked time and time again (in staff posts even), then they are purposely choosing to remain ignorant and bigoted.
User Banned (1 Week): Exclusionary rhetoric and transphobic talking points
I think we're more in agreement than disagreement. I'm super in support of trans rights and the many issues involved therein. But sporting competition is a very complicated thing, especially where these two issues intersect. Women's sports are separated for a reason, and the reason is that in a level playing field, women can't physically compete. If they could, women's sports wouldn't exist.
As such, I'm generally inclined to support the amazing athletic women among us who are capable to doing remarkable things, and I appreciate the idea of protecting them against the others who can physically dominate them due to genetic advantages.
Trans women pose an additional challenge due to hormone therapy and other circumstances. Those make for an exceptionally challenging environment for creating a fair - but separate - playing field for women athletes.
Trans women have been able to compete at the Olympics for like 15 years now. I am not aware of any winning gold ever.
If there has been a trend of trans women winning there that I missed I am happy to be corrected.
But I realize accepting there is likely no notable advantage means accepting trans women are women on a physical level instead of simply a social level and some might struggle a bit more with that idea.
If there has been a trend of trans women winning there that I missed I am happy to be corrected.
But I realize accepting there is likely no notable advantage means accepting trans women are women on a physical level instead of simply a social level and some might struggle a bit more with that idea.
I thought based on the many times passed up refuting to this and the same/like paper was disingenuous to link it because it lacked a large sample data and size. It's just running and only 8 people. I'm not saying this research isn't valid or useful, but there just isn't enough research yet - that I've seen in the last thread - to definitively prove there isn't any sort of inherent advantage.
The more research the better, obviously, but I think linking a research paper with a ridiculously small sample size isn't really helpful in the argument of refuting advantages post-op. The margin of error is essentially in the extremely high double digits with this small of a size. If this were done with at least a thousand people and across multiple sports, activities, tests, etc.
It just seems the lack of critical thinking and by posting one article of research (at least in the last thread) that this is the be-all for the entire argument as the objective truth.
Edit: Also, the methods used in this research paper are super wonky if you've actually read it.
Last edited:
The effects of hrt erode a lot of the "advantage" transwomen would have.
This whole thing is just so groanworthy to see over and over.
How do you get more data without trans women being able to compete?
And again the floodgates have been opened 15 years ago and if there was a large list of trans women dominating the Olympics we would not hear the end of it.
Yeah, there is not enought research but if women's sports didn't die in that timeframe and it lead to no male athletes transitioning just to win (fearmongering but it pops up often) I think the sensible stance is to just keep trans women being able to compete while we gather data.
And even if we came to the conclusion there is an unfair advantage you'd have to differ between trans women who went through male puberty and those who didn't. Because the only reason to ban the later is transphobia. No way around that.
Is there any better proof that you pointing out gold medals and world records? The sample size of trans people going on to compete at the highest level must be very small that I don't think you can make conclusive statements like that.
I assume you will agree your source fact checked this:
McKinnon says it is also worth considering that trans people have been able to compete in the Olympics since 2004. "Not only is anyone yet to win a medal, but as far as we know, not a single trans person has gone to the Olympics," she said. "In terms of Olympic sports, there have only been two world champions and I'm one of them."
This is wrong. There is the case of Austrian ski driver Erik(a) Schinegger who won a gold medaille in 1966. Two years later a medicinical test during the olympic games determined that Schinegger had XY chromosomes and internal male sex organs. He then decided to live as a man and transitioned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Schinegger
That is a trans man not a trans woman. Since obviously sex determined at birth was female. And before the guidelines from 2004 were established. And internal male organs unchecked can very well lead to an advantage.
And what's with the Erik(a)? People sure like to bring up deadnames :p
I know, but winning a world championship isn't very different of a Olympic medal and they're going to win medals too in the next years.
Looks like is okay for some people because trans people don't win tournaments, but it'll will change and must be accepted equally.
That's the case Stone Cold was talking about though:
to which Platy replied
Not quite. There are in general xy cis women who appear and develop like women.
If he didn't initially look like a woman they would not have him let compete in the first place. The added internal male organs might have changed hormone levels to an inagreeable degree.
So this seems to be a xy chromosome trans man. This is not really what this discussion is about I think.
User Banned (Permanent): Transphobia, history of similar infractions
Anyone with even a basic understanding of anatomy and physiology knows it's not fair to women born as women. But apparently we can't debate that here because some "researcher" looking for a specific outcome studied 8 transgender runners once.
The video that contributes to the basis of this thread seems to be from a source that is questionable and inflammatory and not appropriate OP material. This thread is closed to further replies.
- Status