UCI to make "eventual decision" on transgender policy in August and will "take into account all elements" of heated debate

Trans women have been through male puberty and biological development, and have an unfair advantage over "cis" women. This is scientifically proven, and anecdotally demonstrated by athletes who failed in men's events but are podium-level competitors in the women's field. 

Sport will find itself irrelevant and ignored by younger generations of women unless it understands that the importance of basic biology and fairness take precedence over some transwomen's (rather stereotypically male) wishes to assert themselves over women.

Anyone should be free to dress how they like, call themselves what they like, and behave according to whatever socially-determined gender norms they like. But that doesn't circumvent the brute fact that there are biological males and biological females and a tiny number of intersex people: everyone is fixed before birth as one of those, and is therefore not one of the other categories. 

I've been through "male puberty and biological development" and I definitely don't have an unfair advantage over any of the women in that race. I'd bet a substantial sum every single one of them would beat me to the line.

paulnettles wrote:

I've been through "male puberty and biological development" and I definitely don't have an unfair advantage over any of the women in that race. I'd bet a substantial sum every single one of them would beat me to the line.

Well yeah, me too. But I'm currently doing more running than cycling, and my no-more-than-moderately-good race times would see me winning or in the places in women's races for my age group. Talentless men like me shouldn't be permitted to take the rewards, at any level, intended for women who have trained hard for a shot at winning. 

Have a look at your most recent ride/run on Strava.

Choose a segment at random, check your ranking in the male category then look where you'd rank in the female category.

Then realise that you have a significant advantage.

paulnettles wrote:

I've been through "male puberty and biological development" and I definitely don't have an unfair advantage over any of the women in that race. I'd bet a substantial sum every single one of them would beat me to the line.

That's because you're comparing yourself, and average male presumably, to the absolute top women.

If you don't understand why that comparison is invalid, you need to study population distributions.

🤣. Yeah right. Women deserve to be protected by real men in every aspect

Fake, current craze will soon be crushed by the backlash

CXR94Di2 wrote:

🤣. Yeah right. Women deserve to be protected by real men in every aspect

Fake, current craze will soon be crushed by the backlash

Women "deserve to be protected? By "real men"? Perhaps you're suggesting this will be "crushed by the backlash" ... from the 19th century?

Never mind the trans question, it sounds like feminism is still a novelty in some quarters.

alexcr wrote:

Trans women are women, and trans rights are human rights.

However much we'd like to let this be true, the physiological reality is that it is not quite true. While in 99.999% of things in life the difference doesn't matter, there happen to be the odd cases where it does matter. And "Who has the best physiology?" is a prime example.

Someone who developed as male, with male sex hormones, has intrinsic physiological advantages to someone who developed (almost entirely) without those, but with female hormones instead. If the person went through puberty, the differences are _vast_.

That someone with a physiology that would have them mid-pack at national category, or lower, in the male category of the physiology they developed with; can then go compete in the female category - with much of their male performance advantage intact - and suddenly be competitive at elite international level - even world-beating, is *not a fair, or equitable outcome*.

There is *no* human rights or fairness outcome that is served by allowing someone borne and developed with mediocre male physiology, to become world-class in the women's category.

It is simply allowing *retained* , vestigial _male privilege_ to trump women's rights.

Someone who had NO CHANCE of being a top-performing athlete, given their developmental physiology compared to others who developed with similar sex hormones, does NOT lose anything by being prevented from using their male-retained advantage to compete against women.

alexcr wrote:

Trans women are men masquerading to be like women, but categorically are not women on any sense of the word

Edited to what is common knowledge amongst the vast majority of men and women

Five hundred years ago it was common knowledge that the sun revolved around the earth. How did that work out? 

And 150 years ago it was common knowledge that black people were genetically inferior in every sense to white people. Wow, that argument really stood up for itself.

You'll all learn, the hard way if necessary, that trans people are here to stay.

On the bright side, at least now that blokes are dominating women's sport the cash prizes are the same value.