Martina Navratilova and Trans Athletes

[canker2323]

Not sure the title is appropriate. This is not political or religious, I think, so I put it here.

Anyways, I agree with her. Transgender women should not be allowed to compete against biological women in certain sports. I'm not anti-transgender so do not take it that way.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/20/tenn...a-dropped-lgbt-group-scli-spt-intl/index.html

I also think it is ridiculous to label her transphobic.

 

[mynameisjonas]

Common tactic. Instead of debate the issue throw out the appropriate slur: Racist, sexist, transphobic, etc...

 

[Rabbuk]

I think if using antiandrogens they can get down to a range that is consistent with biologically female athletes it might be ok

 

[Sigmapolis]

Common tactic. Instead of debate the issue throw out the appropriate slur: Racist, sexist, transphobic, etc...

Cautious, reasoned arguments are hard. And not really much fun.

Ad hominem is easy. And fun. Tickles our "us versus them" monkey brains.

 

[Knownothing]

In no way should they be allowed to compete against women. Even if they lower the levels. They are still physically different. Like the Transwomen playing rugby. She is 6'2 225 pounds and mows women down. Yet, her levels are down. She was born different and it's not a fair game.

That is why you see a lot of Trans track athletes who actually suck competing against boys, then make the transition and become state champs against women. It's just flat out not fair. I would be in favor of a 3rd division in sports where they can compete against each other.

 

[capitalcityguy]

The fact that this issue is even debatable in some circles is beyond me.

Agree this isn't political. This is a competitive sport's topic. (but I'm sure someone will blow it and get it to the cave somehow)

One perspective has science on its side, the other does not. That can't be disputed. It boils down to simply whether you're willing to ignore science to hold the opposing viewpoint.

Kudos to Navratilova for speaking up and sticking to her guns!

 

[3TrueFans]

In my opinion the competitions are split for a reason and that's because male and female physiology is inherently different. I support anyone who wants to live as the gender they believe is right for them, but in the spirit of fair play it shouldn't change who you compete against if the sport has separate men's and women's events.

 

[Knownothing]

My example has always been Labron James. What if LBJ decided to change his sex and take the hormons to transition to female. So he would not be the same LBJ. However, he is still 6'9 inch, has all the same basketball moves and basically would destroy every WNBA player that ever though she could d him up.

 

[HFCS]

The fact that this issue is even debatable in some circles is beyond me.

Agree this isn't political. This is a competitive sport's topic. (but I'm sure someone will blow it and get it to the cave somehow)

One perspective has science on its side, the other does not. That can't be disputed. It boils down to simply whether you're willing to ignore science to hold the opposing viewpoint.

Kudos to Navratilova for speaking up and sticking to her guns!

It seems to often be debated on both extreme stupid spectrums.

You had the girl in Texas taking male hormones the state of Texas forced to compete against girls when she did not want to. Then you had the two boys in Connecticut the state allowed to compete in girls events who looked like college linebackers.

Texas is wrong to force girls taking male hormones to compete against girls. Connecticut is wrong to allow students who are physically grown men to compete against girls. The girl in Texas should have been allowed to compete against boys like she wanted to and the kids in Connecticut should have been forced to compete against boys if they wanted to participate.

I also think everyone needs to chill on being upset with the use of pronouns, I have someone I love very dearly who recently came out as transgender. I'm very concerned about the person because of the very young age, anyone on the board knows I'm very liberal/open minded and I'm sure I don't always use the 'correct' pronoun etc.

 

[247cy]

Why don't we just say eff it and take this to the "logical conclusion" and eliminate gendered competition all together? Let girls/women compete directly with the boys/men. Think of the time and money we waste holding these events separate. Just call it human basketball, or human track, etc, and let the best humans win. Obviously, we want to bar the Michael Phelps vs "A Shark" swim meet type stuff so we need the "human" modifier.

Jimlad

 

[3TrueFans]

Why don't we just say eff it and take this to the "logical conclusion" and eliminate gendered competition all together? Let girls/women compete directly with the boys/men. Think of the time and money we waste holding these events separate. Just call it human basketball, or human track, etc, and let the best humans win. Obviously, we want to bar the Michael Phelps vs "A Shark" swim meet type stuff so we need the "human" modifier.

Jimlad

"Oh this is just for humans? No no, that's fine, I'll just leave."

 

[HFCS]

My example has always been Labron James. What if LBJ decided to change his sex and take the hormons to transition to female. So he would not be the same LBJ. However, he is still 6'9 inch, has all the same basketball moves and basically would destroy every WNBA player that ever though she could d him up.

Connecticut would allow him to do that.

Texas would force Serena Williams to play against women while effectively taking PEDs even if Serena wanted to compete against the men.

Silly policies all around, hopefully common sense just takes care of both scenarios. It's quite obvious that if you've taken male hormones or naturally have male hormones the only choices are you compete against men or you don't compete.

 

[heitclone]

Not to try to take this off topic but what impact do the hormones one may take have on their athletic performance? I'm admittedly ignorant on this topic, so I don't really know. If it gives them a competitive advantage, should they be allowed to compete at all?

 

[Knownothing]

Connecticut would allow him to do that.

Texas would force Serena Williams to play against women while effectively taking PEDs even if Serena wanted to compete against the men.

Silly policies all around, hopefully common sense just takes care of both scenarios. It's quite obvious that if you've taken male hormones or naturally have male hormones the only choices are you compete against men or you don't compete.

It's crazy. I honestly have no problem with Girls who transition to male to compete against Males. They are at a disadvantage big time. However, Males that transition should never be allowed to compete against girls. Google Fallon Fox and watch her compete against biological females in MMA. It's crazy.

 

[HFCS]

It's crazy. I honestly have no problem with Girls who transition to male to compete against Males. They are at a disadvantage big time. However, Males that transition should never be allowed to compete against girls. Google Fallon Fox and watch her compete against biological females in MMA. It's crazy.

While a man transitioning to a woman competing against men would likely face a lot of harassment...any rule on the book for decades probably already supports that as the standard. That one is just stick with the way it is rather than what we saw in Connecticut where I imagine some new policy must have allowed for that.

The Texas situation where they're forcing girls taking male hormones to compete against girls probably takes some new policies to create a more fair outcome for everyone.

 

[HFCS]

Not to try to take this off topic but what impact do the hormones one may take have on their athletic performance? I'm admittedly ignorant on this topic, so I don't really know. If it gives them a competitive advantage, should they be allowed to compete at all?

I'm curious about it too. I would think it automatically gives a girl some physical advantage over other girls to take male hormones. I would guess the male hormones she takes wouldn't be enough to eclipse what is naturally typical in a male who naturally has the same hormones, maybe that's a safe assumption or maybe it's a foolish one. Any scientific look at it would be interesting.

 

[Knownothing]

While a man transitioning to a woman competing against men would likely face a lot of harassment...any rule on the book for decades probably already supports that as the standard. That one is just stick with the way it is rather than what we saw in Connecticut where I imagine some new policy must have allowed for that.

The Texas situation where they're forcing girls taking male hormones to compete against girls probably takes some new policies to create a more fair outcome for everyone.

All they would need to do is take testosterone levels. Look if you are a females taking hormones to transition you can't compete against other girls. It's like taking HGH legally and competing.

 

[HFCS]

All they would need to do is take testosterone levels. Look if you are a females taking hormones to transition you can't compete against other girls. It's like taking HGH legally and competing.

That is obvious...well obvious to most because look at that Connecticut track and field situation.

The question is could a girl transitioning to a boy ever take enough male hormone to have an advantage on an average boy of the same age. I'm sure it probably matters when they start taking them, my guess would be that it's not really possible but who knows. Maybe there are some extreme cases if the woman/girl is already an elite athlete, I doubt it would ever be common or the norm.

 

[HFCS]

Cautious, reasoned arguments are hard. And not really much fun.

Ad hominem is easy. And fun. Tickles our "us versus them" monkey brains.

We're 19 posts in and I'd say the second post is the the one closest to being guilty of this.

There's also something to be said for giving people a chance before condemning them (pointing finger at myself sometimes on this).

 

[harimad]

Not to try to take this off topic but what impact do the hormones one may take have on their athletic performance? I'm admittedly ignorant on this topic, so I don't really know. If it gives them a competitive advantage, should they be allowed to compete at all?

It's huge. I was able to bench reps of 225 pretty easily prior to transition. I struggle to do 135 now, four years later.