Transgender debate continues as Dr Rachel McKinnon retains world title

jigr69 wrote:

There is a way to end this argument in terms of whether someone born a male, goes through puberty, gets the muscle mass increase and then decides to be known as a female competing against born females is fair or not, its this:

 

• If someone like Mike Tyson decided that he wanted to be known as Michelle Tyson and compete in the world of female boxing, would anyone in their right mind say that was okay and fair? Would anyone want to see that particular bout?

• Another is that the top 400 male professional tennis players in the world, are better than Serena Williams, argueably the worlds best female tennis player. If anyone of those decided to become female, they could after a year of hormone suppressing, enter the female arena of professional tennis and go on to win all of the tournaments going. After a couple of years and many millions in prize money, they could revert to being male again and live happily ever after. Much to the detriment of the female tennis players that were genuinely good.

• Has any women who has transistioned to become a man, entered the male arena of any sport and done particularly well? Doesn't that in itself say that the sexes aren't born equal and cannot become equal regardless of what drugs they take?

 

This isn't fair and although live isn't, we separate male and female sports for the precise reason that they are unequal and to compare apples with apples.

I've no problem with anyone who isn't born the sex that there brain aligns to, however, they have to realise that it does not mean they can be included for the sake of inclusion in [womens] sports.

We have the para-olympics so that disabled people can compete with other disabled people for a reason. What next, someone who identifies as being disabled, being allowed to enter the para-olympics! (Before anyone shoots me down for saying that I need to physically be disabled to be categorised as disabled, why does that not apply to Dr McKinnon, as he/she still has male sex organs.)

(I think I will identify as female for the likes of Strava, then go out and win all of the local QOMS, that will cheese off a good majority of women around here.)

How would you classify people who are born intersex? (e.g. ambiguous genitals, having XXY or XXX chromosomes etc.)

hawkinspeter wrote:

jigr69 wrote:

[snip]

We have the para-olympics so that disabled people can compete with other disabled people for a reason. What next, someone who identifies as being disabled, being allowed to enter the para-olympics! (Before anyone shoots me down for saying that I need to physically be disabled to be categorised as disabled, why does that not apply to Dr McKinnon, as he/she still has male sex organs.)

(I think I will identify as female for the likes of Strava, then go out and win all of the local QOMS, that will cheese off a good majority of women around here.)

How would you classify people who are born intersex? (e.g. ambiguous genitals, having XXY or XXX chromosomes etc.)

Personally think it would be worth investigating similar classification to para-sports, e.g. banded events, time/distance/whatever scaling where mixed groups compete together and so on. The devil would clearly be in the details but it might be better than the simple black-and-white split we have now.

hawkinspeter wrote:

jigr69 wrote:

There is a way to end this argument in terms of whether someone born a male, goes through puberty, gets the muscle mass increase and then decides to be known as a female competing against born females is fair or not, its this:

 

• If someone like Mike Tyson decided that he wanted to be known as Michelle Tyson and compete in the world of female boxing, would anyone in their right mind say that was okay and fair? Would anyone want to see that particular bout?

• Another is that the top 400 male professional tennis players in the world, are better than Serena Williams, argueably the worlds best female tennis player. If anyone of those decided to become female, they could after a year of hormone suppressing, enter the female arena of professional tennis and go on to win all of the tournaments going. After a couple of years and many millions in prize money, they could revert to being male again and live happily ever after. Much to the detriment of the female tennis players that were genuinely good.

• Has any women who has transistioned to become a man, entered the male arena of any sport and done particularly well? Doesn't that in itself say that the sexes aren't born equal and cannot become equal regardless of what drugs they take?

 

This isn't fair and although live isn't, we separate male and female sports for the precise reason that they are unequal and to compare apples with apples.

I've no problem with anyone who isn't born the sex that there brain aligns to, however, they have to realise that it does not mean they can be included for the sake of inclusion in [womens] sports.

We have the para-olympics so that disabled people can compete with other disabled people for a reason. What next, someone who identifies as being disabled, being allowed to enter the para-olympics! (Before anyone shoots me down for saying that I need to physically be disabled to be categorised as disabled, why does that not apply to Dr McKinnon, as he/she still has male sex organs.)

(I think I will identify as female for the likes of Strava, then go out and win all of the local QOMS, that will cheese off a good majority of women around here.)

How would you classify people who are born intersex? (e.g. ambiguous genitals, having XXY or XXX chromosomes etc.)

Intersex / hermaphroditism is a totally different thing. The athlete in those cases, has no choice, they are playing with the cards that nature dealt them. It's a very rare thing to happen, in the grand scheme of things. If a ( true natural )intersex athlete wishes to use the ( naturally assigned ) advantage, I've got no problem with it at all, that's just the way it goes. It's such a rare occurrence, it's not going to influence much at all in reality. But having someone who has used surgery / therapy / treatment, to assign a new gender, and take on the assumed gender, is completely wrong, and rules need to be put in place to prevent it. I'd go as far as to say, any titles 'won' by such an unfair advantage should be retrospectively stripped, and that 'athlete' gets a lifetime ban, from any events designed for, and competed in by the gender, which is artificially assumed, by said 'athlete'. It's all fine and well having people have these sorts of procedures, but there should be rules and boundaries, regarding certain activities, from which the person involved is excluded, should they wish to go through such an artificial procedure. There are certain jobs, which are legally withheld from certain genders, so why should sport be any different?

Judge dreadful wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

How would you classify people who are born intersex? (e.g. ambiguous genitals, having XXY or XXX chromosomes etc.)

Intersex / hermaphroditism is a totally different thing. The athlete in those cases, has no choice, they are playing with the cards that nature dealt them. It's a very rare thing to happen, in the grand scheme of things. If a ( true natural )intersex athlete wishes to use the ( naturally assigned ) advantage, I've got no problem with it at all, that's just the way it goes. It's such a rare occurrence, it's not going to influence much at all in reality. But having someone who has used surgery / therapy / treatment, to assign a new gender, and take on the assumed gender, is completely wrong, and rules need to be put in place to prevent it.

...snip...

Erm - I think you'd be hard-pushed to find a trans person who did it as some sort of fashion statement.  It's major surgery and treatment, undergone as a last resort.

Trans people, er..., 'trans' because they believe that the cards nature dealt them are from the wrong deck.

brooksby wrote:

Erm - I think you'd be hard-pushed to find a trans person who did it as some sort of fashion statement.  It's major surgery and treatment, undergone as a last resort.

Trans people, er..., 'trans' because they believe that the cards nature dealt them are from the wrong deck.

The issue is that a high number of trans people, going from male to female, still retain the male sex organs and don't undergo major surgery. I'm sure that I read that Dr McKinnon hasn't had such a procedure, merely the hormone treatment. Therefore it is very plausible that Dr McKinnon could well decide later on, to become male again.
 

Judge dreadful wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

jigr69 wrote:

There is a way to end this argument in terms of whether someone born a male, goes through puberty, gets the muscle mass increase and then decides to be known as a female competing against born females is fair or not, its this:

 

• If someone like Mike Tyson decided that he wanted to be known as Michelle Tyson and compete in the world of female boxing, would anyone in their right mind say that was okay and fair? Would anyone want to see that particular bout?

• Another is that the top 400 male professional tennis players in the world, are better than Serena Williams, argueably the worlds best female tennis player. If anyone of those decided to become female, they could after a year of hormone suppressing, enter the female arena of professional tennis and go on to win all of the tournaments going. After a couple of years and many millions in prize money, they could revert to being male again and live happily ever after. Much to the detriment of the female tennis players that were genuinely good.

• Has any women who has transistioned to become a man, entered the male arena of any sport and done particularly well? Doesn't that in itself say that the sexes aren't born equal and cannot become equal regardless of what drugs they take?

 

This isn't fair and although live isn't, we separate male and female sports for the precise reason that they are unequal and to compare apples with apples.

I've no problem with anyone who isn't born the sex that there brain aligns to, however, they have to realise that it does not mean they can be included for the sake of inclusion in [womens] sports.

We have the para-olympics so that disabled people can compete with other disabled people for a reason. What next, someone who identifies as being disabled, being allowed to enter the para-olympics! (Before anyone shoots me down for saying that I need to physically be disabled to be categorised as disabled, why does that not apply to Dr McKinnon, as he/she still has male sex organs.)

(I think I will identify as female for the likes of Strava, then go out and win all of the local QOMS, that will cheese off a good majority of women around here.)

How would you classify people who are born intersex? (e.g. ambiguous genitals, having XXY or XXX chromosomes etc.)

 

Intersex / hermaphroditism is a totally different thing. The athlete in those cases, has no choice, they are playing with the cards that nature dealt them. It's a very rare thing to happen, in the grand scheme of things. If a ( true natural )intersex athlete wishes to use the ( naturally assigned ) advantage, I've got no problem with it at all, that's just the way it goes. It's such a rare occurrence, it's not going to influence much at all in reality. But having someone who has used surgery / therapy / treatment, to assign a new gender, and take on the assumed gender, is completely wrong, and rules need to be put in place to prevent it. I'd go as far as to say, any titles 'won' by such an unfair advantage should be retrospectively stripped, and that 'athlete' gets a lifetime ban, from any events designed for, and competed in by the gender, which is artificially assumed, by said 'athlete'. It's all fine and well having people have these sorts of procedures, but there should be rules and boundaries, regarding certain activities, from which the person involved is excluded, should they wish to go through such an artificial procedure. There are certain jobs, which are legally withheld from certain genders, so why should sport be any different?

Do you mean that it would be okay for intersex children to be assigned a gender by their parents/surgeon shortly after birth, but not okay for intersex children to later on decide which gender is more appropriate?

CXR94Di2 wrote:

I heard this rider twitter'd something like they haven't produced testosterone in a decade. But lets ignore the fact that this person was a man and retains much of the muscularity of a man, which immediately disadvantages the true women competition

Yes, she did.  However, that seems somewhat disingenuous since she's in her thirties (IIRC) and that seems to be ignoring any physical advantages gained by producing testosterone from (say) 13/14 until whenever she transitioned.

As I've said before on this: "It's difficult".

brooksby wrote:

CXR94Di2 wrote:

I heard this rider twitter'd something like they haven't produced testosterone in a decade. But lets ignore the fact that this person was a man and retains much of the muscularity of a man, which immediately disadvantages the true women competition

Yes, she did.  However, that seems somewhat disingenuous since she's in her thirties (IIRC) and that seems to be ignoring any physical advantages gained by producing testosterone from (say) 13/14 until whenever she transitioned.

As I've said before on this: "It's difficult".

McKinnon transitioned in her late 20's. So by that stage her skeleton was fully developed. As for not producing testosterone I find that debatable as no suppressant fully shuts down testosterone. McKinnon may have experienced some muscle loss through drugs but looking at pics she is definitely much more muscular than her competitors and her build is definitely masculine. 
 

The authorities have to look at this, bite the bullet and come up with something to protect women's sport. Otherwise everything that has been achieved by women over the years will count for nothing. As Transwomen inspite of what McKinnon claims will always have the edge. And while they may not be setting records left right and centre they will most certainly dominate the fields they are in. It is interesting that Transmen are not as successful in sports and usually retire shortly after transition. 

giff77 wrote:

brooksby wrote:

CXR94Di2 wrote:

I heard this rider twitter'd something like they haven't produced testosterone in a decade. But lets ignore the fact that this person was a man and retains much of the muscularity of a man, which immediately disadvantages the true women competition

Yes, she did.  However, that seems somewhat disingenuous since she's in her thirties (IIRC) and that seems to be ignoring any physical advantages gained by producing testosterone from (say) 13/14 until whenever she transitioned.

As I've said before on this: "It's difficult".

McKinnon transitioned in her late 20's. So by that stage her skeleton was fully developed. As for not producing testosterone I find that debatable as no suppressant fully shuts down testosterone. McKinnon may have experienced some muscle loss through drugs but looking at pics she is definitely much more muscular than her competitors and her build is definitely masculine. 
 

The authorities have to look at this, bite the bullet and come up with something to protect women's sport. Otherwise everything that has been achieved by women over the years will count for nothing. As Transwomen inspite of what McKinnon claims will always have the edge. And while they may not be setting records left right and centre they will most certainly dominate the fields they are in. It is interesting that Transmen are not as successful in sports and usually retire shortly after transition. 

"Transmen"? Is that like the Cybermen?  

Rick_Rude wrote:

Of course the rules need changing. As I said before, socially I don't care. From a competitive standpoint it matters. You seem quite happy to throw women athletes under the bus though.

So first you lie about what you previously said - you responded to someone suggesting the rules were the problem with a random sneer, now you finally relent and admit that the rules are indeed the point. Then you lie about what I said. Seems to be a pattern with you.

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Rick_Rude wrote:

Of course the rules need changing. As I said before, socially I don't care. From a competitive standpoint it matters. You seem quite happy to throw women athletes under the bus though.

So first you lie about what you previously said - you responded to someone suggesting the rules were the problem with a random sneer, now you finally relent and admit that the rules are indeed the point. Then you lie about what I said. Seems to be a pattern with you.

What are you ranting about? The rules are indeed a problem AND the point at the same time. THis person isn't a biological woman. End of.

You say you don't even like competitive sport, so why are you even arguing about this when you're not the sort of person that likes to see it? I like cycling and l like seeing the elite of cycling compete, I don't care if you just like bimbling about but the fact you hate competitive sport tells me something. Go and read some Lovecraft and calm down.

Velomark wrote:

This is obviously a complicated debate and we may get to some sort of satisfactory resolution in future but might it be sensitive for Dr McKinnon not to take part until that is the case.

It might be necessary for sports governing bodies to say that athletes compete in the category of their gender at birth rather than the one they chose or believe they are as they grew up. This removes any issues of social conditioning, deluded thoughts and choice on behalf of the athlete.

If an athlete does not wish to do this then they can go in the 'trans only' category by choice. 

However, we must consider athletes such as some of the former East Germans, who were possibly undergoing hormonal transitioning without knowing, but this could be covered by testing hormone levels to make sure they are within normal limits for each gender. At least they were women competing in the womens field. Not blokes who decided to compete against women.

Velovoyeur wrote:

Velomark wrote:

This is obviously a complicated debate and we may get to some sort of satisfactory resolution in future but might it be sensitive for Dr McKinnon not to take part until that is the case.

It might be necessary for sports governing bodies to say that athletes compete in the category of their gender at birth rather than the one they chose or believe they are as they grew up. This removes any issues of social conditioning, deluded thoughts and choice on behalf of the athlete.

If an athlete does not wish to do this then they can go in the 'trans only' category by choice. 

I think that's the problem, isn't it?

Trans people consider that their 'birth person/gender' isn't who they really are.  I think the term is 'dead-naming'.   So, insisting that athletes compete in the category of their gender at birth rather than the one they chose or believe they are as they grew up would be horrendously offensive to those people.

However, there is a lot to be said for the advantages held by someone who was born with male bits and later transitioned to female over and above the 'average' person who was born with female bits and stayed with those female bits.

(To be honest, more and more I think I'm just going to keep my head down and leave this particular Gordian knot for my kids or grandkids to sort out when I've turned into an 'Old Man Who Shouts At Clouds' (TM).  Assuming we haven't suffered an extinction level event by then...).

Velovoyeur wrote:

Velomark wrote:

This is obviously a complicated debate and we may get to some sort of satisfactory resolution in future but might it be sensitive for Dr McKinnon not to take part until that is the case.

It might be necessary for sports governing bodies to say that athletes compete in the category of their gender at birth rather than the one they chose or believe they are as they grew up. This removes any issues of social conditioning, deluded thoughts and choice on behalf of the athlete.

If an athlete does not wish to do this then they can go in the 'trans only' category by choice. 

However, we must consider athletes such as some of the former East Germans, who were possibly undergoing hormonal transitioning without knowing, but this could be covered by testing hormone levels to make sure they are within normal limits for each gender. At least they were women competing in the womens field. Not blokes who decided to compete against women.

Your ignorance is showing. Hormone levels are already tested for athlete who self identify, in  awa y they are not tested for those who are cis - which is in itself a kind of discrimination.

exilegareth wrote:

Your ignorance is showing. Hormone levels are already tested for athlete who self identify, in  awa y they are not tested for those who are cis - which is in itself a kind of discrimination.

But the argument isn't about hormone levels at competition time. It's about the physiological advantages conferred on a person if they grow up with nominal* levels of male hormones.

* - in the NASA sense of the word. Didn't want to use "normal" in case I hurt someone's feelings.