First olympic transgender athlete to compete at Tokyo 2020 **MOD NOTE IN OP**

Shao Kahn

This is the plan from the progressives. They're systematically ruining almost all other areas of life with their woke garbage.

Now they're coming after sport.

And of course, most people are too polite to aggressively fight back against it. Because they don't want to be labelled as a big horrible prejudiced person. And I don't really blame them tbh. Anyone with their head screwed on, wouldn't willingly invite the wrath of these loony progressives.

As usual, it will take something ridiculous for this nonsense to be properly addressed. It will have to be seriously farcical, before people finally say enough is enough.

Rothko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118187805#Comment_118187805

Some people will still make excuses for it though. The funny thing is that some of it will come from people who otherwise passionately defend women in regards to any other topic.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118187900#Comment_118187900

For someone who cares as much as you do about scientific evidence, doesn’t it then become imperative to be able to determine whether or not there is definitive scientific evidence that athletes who are transgender have advantages in competitions which athletes who are not transgender do not have? The problem isn’t one of scientific fallacies, it’s a philosophical problem, which is why you’re having to refer to “male bodied people”, and don’t tell me there’s anything scientific about your method of classification - it’s based entirely upon crude observation, in much the same way as sex testing in womens sports was historically based entirely upon crude observation (“nude parades” were a thing in womens sports) -

https://www.mic.com/articles/82163/the-story-behind-the-olympics-outrageous-sex-testing/amp

The IOC aren’t telling ISFs to do anything, the IOC guidelines are just that - guidelines. The IOC guidelines have no bearing on what criteria are determined by ISFs, who can make their own determinations they want about whatever criteria in whatever sports competitions they oversee. Caster Semenya’s case against the WA is a good example of how fairness in sports, in anything, cannot be scientifically determined. Fairness in policies demands that all aspects are examined, and not just what specific advantages or disadvantages individual athletes have compared to others. ISFs always had and still have the authority to determine what is or isn’t fair in their policies in relation to the sports and competitions they oversee, even when their arguments are based entirely upon presenting a misleading interpretation of scientific evidence in order to justify their opinions in relation to their policies -

https://www.news24.com/amp/sport/othersport/athletics/testosterone-study-corrected-caster-semenyas-lawyers-call-for-world-athletics-to-lift-ban-20210820

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118189534#Comment_118189534

It isn’t about being progressive or anything else. A four year old who never opened a science book could tell you that correlation does not imply causation -

https://www.memoriapress.com/articles/sciences-useful-fallacy/

Podge_irl

For someone who cares as much as you do about scientific evidence, doesn’t it then become imperative to be able to determine whether or not there is definitive scientific evidence that athletes who are transgender have advantages in competitions which athletes who are not transgender do not have?

We know that non-athletes have a significant advantage. The IOC have stated that the default position should be that, for some unknown reason, athletes do not. You are correct there are no studies specifically focused on highly trained transgender athletes. There is no a priori reason to suspect the outcome would be any different.

The Caster Semenya case (which is not that relevant to the trans issue) shows that it is complicated. Someone is entirely entitled to have a different philosophical view about these things. The IOC have made up their own scientific basis. Had they proclaimed that while there is highly likely a significant advantage for transgender athletes but they have valued inclusion higher I would have less of an issue with it. Stating that there is no reason to believe there is any advantage is scientifically illiterate manure.

Also I don't think I have ever referred to "male-bodied people" though I have referred to androgenized people, because that is the literally of going through a testosterone fueled puberty.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118195974#Comment_118195974

I’m guessing you mean to say there that we know non-transgender athletes (and more specifically, men) have a significant advantage, and it would still hold true to say that there is no a priori reason to suspect outcomes would be any different, precisely because our a priori knowledge is predicated upon axioms which we already assume to be true. In reality, they’ve never actually been tested to any great degree and we’re just taking what we know as a given. Those assumptions are fine in most circumstances, however there are circumstances where exceptions should be acknowledged, as opposed to being dismissed because they contradict our previous fundamental assumptions. Outright refusal to acknowledge them is just bad science.

The IOCs new default position is the correct one, from both a scientific and social perspective - they’re proposing a new framework in which scientific evidence is not the only deciding factor in determining eligibility for participation in sports, but there are numerous ethical, legal and human rights factors to consider, so to suggest that their reasons for recognition of the status of people who are transgender in sports is unknown, is just not true. They’ve laid out their reasoning very clearly in this document, and have pretty much said that if sports governing bodies wish to continue to discriminate against any group, then they should have legitimate reason for doing so. They’re not saying international sports federations can’t discriminate (the IOC don’t have that authority), they’re suggesting that they shouldn’t, by issuing guidelines which promote sports, and uphold everyone’s right to participate in sports without discrimination (which they maintain has always been the philosophy of the IOC) -

https://stillmed.olympics.com/media/Documents/News/2021/11/IOC-Framework-Fairness-Inclusion-Non-discrimination-2021.pdf

Scientifically illiterate manure? Meh, possibly, but no more scientifically illiterate than suggesting “androgenised people” is the literally of going through a testosterone fuelled puberty, as though you’re intending to imply androgens (and more specifically testosterone, and more specifically a specific type of testosterone), is limited exclusively to men. It’s not -

https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/androgen-deficiency-in-women

Look I’m not interested in breaking your balls over it because to be fair to you, you’ve always used the term “androgenised people” and as silly as it sounds, I still knew what you meant from the context in which you used the term. It’s just that in your last post you used the term “male bodied people” and I figured “fine, we’ll go with that then, still inaccurate but fcuk it!”. I doubted myself for thinking you had used the term and the reason I did doubt myself is because being dyslexic I DO often imagine I picked something up wrong. I went back to check it and to your credit at least you didn’t edit it out of your post to make it look like I was imagining it (it’s been done, it’s a pain in the hole, but if the evidence isn’t there, y’know?). How does that relate to what we’re talking about here? Well, in terms of advantages and disadvantages - some people consider being dyslexic is an advantage to them like a ‘superpower’, and yeah that might be true for them, but for the millions of people who are dyslexic and are oftentimes overlooked and excluded from equal opportunities to participate in society on the basis that they are presumed to be illiterate, you guessed it - it’s a pain in the hole. Reading Richard Branson’s latest contribution on LinkedIn and the comments underneath will give you some idea where I’m coming from -

(Well that’s just fcuking peachy - LinkedIn doesn’t allow hot-linking! 😒)

https://www.virgin.com/about-virgin/latest/this-is-what-a-founder-looks-like-happaning

The idea has as much scientific validity as imagining that the earth is flat because ships fall off the edge - explaining causation by axiomatic correlation is just bad science. It was acceptable at the time when people didn’t know any better, but now there’s no excuse for it other than wilful ignorance.

It really isn’t that complicated either, certainly not as complicated as you’re trying to make out anyway - Semenya’s exclusion from certain competitive events was based upon assumptions made about the influence of testosterone on athletic performance. That way the WA completely avoided the whole gender debacle, by suggesting their policies were based upon scientific evidence. It’s that same and similar scientific evidence which was used to preclude people from equal participation in sports and equal participation in society on the basis of certain characteristics. It’s undoubtedly discrimination, but whether it’s reasonable or not, or whether it has any legitimacy, is what’s debatable. That’s the new position the IOC have taken with their proposed framework, and it is the correct one based upon their already held philosophical principles of equal participation without discrimination.

The WA aren’t obligated to abide by it, nor are any IFS. They can continue to ignore the fact that the lack of scientific evidence to support their position means their policies are without foundation, in much the same way as one charity shop which I’m aware of were oblivious to the fact that people in wheelchairs might wish to enter their shop through the same door as everyone else, rather than being told by the shop assistant there was another door further down the street, when they were already in the shop (they’d have been butting their wheelchair up against the step all day if I hadn’t helped them pop a wheelie to overcome the step!), and it reminded me of this nonsensical “third space” argument in relation to people who are transgender - the reasons for their consignment to a third space constitute discrimination, with no valid basis for it other than clutching at straws in an effort to maintain the status quo because it’s far more convenient than having to make accommodations for anyone who doesn’t quite fit the mould of the ideal person the structure or the institution was intended for by its construction. Considerations which should have been thought of in the first place, doesn’t place anyone at a disadvantage.

Overlooking people or excluding them because their concerns are considered unreasonable, is not trying to be fair to everyone, it’s the opposite of being fair when you try to deny people equal opportunities to participate in anything, whether it’s sports, employment, or a whole multitude of other environments and areas in society which weren’t designed with their equal participation in mind. In that case it IS imperative to go back to the drawing board, or whatever design equipment one is using (don’t even get me started on hot-desking and secondary monitors - having to explain to the IT staff who bolted the monitors to the right hand side of the desks WHY I can’t see the monitor on that side and I needed it on the left within my peripheral view was fun… not 🙄).

ProfessorPlum

Good podcast discussing the recent IOC guidelines.

I'd agree with Ross Tucker - the guidelines are 'politically motivated, cowardly and unscientific.'

The UK sports council and got it right IMO.

https://play.acast.com/s/realscienceofsport/s3-e27-why-the-iocs-recent-guidelines-on-transgender-athlete

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118192364#Comment_118192364

Numerous self proclaimed feminists.

Well they're not feminists.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118208242#Comment_118208242

Is there any other kind of feminist besides a self-proclaimed feminist? 🤔

In just the same way that it’s true that women are not a hive mind, the same is true of feminists, notwithstanding the fact that the whole idea of “gender as a social construct” was promoted by early feminist ideology as a means to counter pseudoscientific nonsense about biological determinism and how women were thought to be incapable of participating in public life as a consequence of biology -

A typical example of a biological determinist view is that of Geddes and Thompson who, in 1889, argued that social, psychological and behavioural traits were caused by metabolic state. Women supposedly conserve energy (being ‘anabolic’) and this makes them passive, conservative, sluggish, stable and uninterested in politics. Men expend their surplus energy (being ‘katabolic’) and this makes them eager, energetic, passionate, variable and, thereby, interested in political and social matters. These biological ‘facts’ about metabolic states were used not only to explain behavioural differences between women and men but also to justify what our social and political arrangements ought to be. More specifically, they were used to argue for withholding from women political rights accorded to men because (according to Geddes and Thompson) “what was decided among the prehistoric Protozoa cannot be annulled by Act of Parliament” (quoted from Moi 1999, 18). It would be inappropriate to grant women political rights, as they are simply not suited to have those rights; it would also be futile since women (due to their biology) would simply not be interested in exercising their political rights. To counter this kind of biological determinism, feminists have argued that behavioural and psychological differences have social, rather than biological, causes.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-gender/

ceadaoin.

Another recent convert to womanhood is destroying women's records, this time in swimming. I guess the woman she beat by 38 seconds just needs to stop thinking her biology is holding her back and try harder?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/penns-transgender-swimmer-breaks-us-records

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118286407#Comment_118286407

The more they destroy the records the more of a farce it evidently is. Which is a good thing surely. It must be very disheartening for those not born with this advantage.

1:41.93 for 200 yards, WR for 200 metres is 1:52.98. Push on a little bit and that lady will have a World Record which will presumably be recognised by everyone. Funny old world.

What a brave lady

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118286407#Comment_118286407

They we’re teammates?

Lia Thomas, a 22-year-old biological man who identifies as a woman, commanded the pool Sunday at the Zippy Invitational event in Akron, Ohio, winning the 1,650-yard freestyle race 38 seconds faster than teammate Anna Kalandadze, according to a report.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118286434#Comment_118286434

Ahh sure I’m sure it’s great altogether -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuyler_Bailar

ceadaoin.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118286819#Comment_118286819

What does them being teammates have to do with anything? It was an individual event. I suppose you'll say 'oh well, she is happy to reap the benefits of having this person on the team, she can't complain', but it's not like the swimmers have any control over who's on the team with them.

According to Thomas "being trans hasn't affected my ability to do this sport and being able to continue has been very rewarding". Pretty sure others may have been affected but who cares about them, right?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287203#Comment_118287203

It has everything to do with your suggesting there would be any animosity between them towards each other. There isn’t likely to be any animosity between them because one won and the other came second.

I have no doubt the other competitors are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves. Generally speaking people don’t pay much attention to the losers in any competition in any case. Look at the way some people even took the opportunity to sneer at Simone Biles and tried to make a political football out of it when she decided not to continue in the Olympics. Did her teammates display any animosity towards her? Nope. She also knows that more important than medals is her mental health -

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1275224

As to where she stands on the issue, well, she’s quite outspoken in her support -

https://www.outsports.com/platform/amp/2020/11/9/21556528/simone-biles-uber-eats-jonathan-ven-ness-one-million-moms-defense

The point being that you’re projecting your own feelings onto other women simply because they’re women, but there’s no evidence to suggest that women generally feel the same way you do about what matters to you or what you care about.

ceadaoin.

I never said there would be animosity between them and I'm not sure how this sentence even implies that?

"I guess the woman she beat by 38 seconds just needs to stop thinking her biology is holding her back and try harder?"

It was more a comment on the general sentiments from some people that males don't have a biological advantage at all and it's all due to women thinking they are inferior and if they just got over that they could compete.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287406#Comment_118287406

Can we say clean athletes are dismayed at athletes that take steroids, or would that be projecting also 🙄

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287515#Comment_118287515

Yeah, my point is that’s you projecting your own feelings onto other women as though they feel the same way you do. I was making the point that she’s unlikely to feel the same way as you do about it given that they’re teammates.

As for the general sentiment from some people that males don’t have a biological advantage at all and it’s all due to women thinking they are inferior, in my experience it’s generally been men who think women are inferior which is why they sought to exclude women from participating in sports because they were of the opinion that women shouldn’t compete with men.

That kind of sentiment is indicative of men with an inferiority complex IMO, it doesn’t indicate anything about women.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287588#Comment_118287588

Is that a trick question?

You’ve just said it already.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287639#Comment_118287639

Because they are on the same team she's going to not mind being beaten? If there's anyone projecting here it's you. Anyone that has played competitive sport or if even part of a team (see how selfish a lot of top goal scorers are) will know how important individual achievements are.

And I think we can agree an elite level female athlete will be just as competitive as a male athlete.

Can I ask what was the highest level of sport you have competed in - did it take a significant amount of time, and sacrifice?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287664#Comment_118287664

No trick question. If I say clean athletes are dismayed at athletes that take steroids - am I projecting?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287677#Comment_118287677

I didn’t say she’s not going to mind being beaten, actually nobody said that. What I said was that ceadaoin was projecting her own feelings about it onto someone else on the basis that she’s a woman, as though the woman in question shares her feelings on the subject. I was making the point that it’s unlikely she feels that way given that they’re teammates. That’s not me projecting. It would be me projecting if I said she’s overjoyed for her teammate on the basis that we’re both elite athletes (I’m obviously not an elite athlete, the point I’m making is I’d be projecting on the basis of something I identified we have in common).

What’s the highest level of sport I’ve competed in? Well, back in primary school, all the boys used to have pissing contests to see who could reach the highest level on the wall. So one day this girl sauntered up and assumed the position at the urinal. We all looked at her like fine, whatever. We’re all getting our stream on when the girl steps back off the step, nobody’s paying any attention to her, we’re all too concerned with getting as high up on the wall as we can. From behind us there suddenly appears a stream that’s at least a foot higher than any of us can go… she didn’t need balls, she had brains 😏

That’s totally a joke btw, the point being that much like the idiots on X factor who point out that Simon Cowell can’t sing, whatever level I have competed at in sports is irrelevant. I’ve already given you the example of an elite sports athlete who doesn’t share your opinions if your attempt is to point out that I know nothing of the sacrifices and time it takes to participate at an elite level in anything, whether it’s sports, employment, education, politics, all the things in public life which previously women were excluded from on the basis that they were thought to be incapable of participating in at all due to what was argued were the biological differences between the sexes.

ceadaoin.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287961#Comment_118287961

Yeah but I DIDNT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT HER FEELINGS OR ANIMOSITY FFS. Again here is what I said and for which you accused me of projecting feelings of animosity onto the competitors

"Another recent convert to womanhood is destroying women's records, this time in swimming. I guess the woman she beat by 38 seconds just needs to stop thinking her biology is holding her back and try harder?"

You just read what you want into things and run with it. And then run even more lol. Any to have an excuse to dig up completely unrelated articles and quotes in order to derail!

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288015#Comment_118288015

You posted the article in the first place, and then you made the sarky remark about your guessing the woman she beat just needs to stop thinking her biology is holding her back and try harder, as if she was disappointed she had lost to the other person. It was you assuming she feels the same way about the person as you do. You’ve posted numerous examples of the same sort of thing before as though because they’re women, they feel the same way as you do.

Some women do feel the same way as you do, some men feel the same way as you do too. You then went on to make the point that the person being interviewed didn’t appear to show any consideration for the losers as though people generally care about losers in any case and somehow because the winner in this case didn’t, that’s unusual.

I’m not derailing at all, I was making the point that it’s just another example of an attempt to whip up a bit of moral panic. Ignore the fact that there are thousands of people who are transgender who participate in sports and women’s sports still hasn’t collapsed or been over-run by male competitors. Ignore the reality that there are men involved at every level in womens sports already, many of them in positions of authority such as the WA who will actually get to determine the outcomes in womens sports. You’re aiming your ire at the wrong targets.

yerwanthere123

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118286407#Comment_118286407

Is there anybody who supports transwomen competing against women? Genuinely can never see any support, all I ever see is people (rightly) complaining about their unfair advantages.

From a superficial point of view it's a shame she transitioned, she was smoking hot previously.

Quantum Erasure

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288141#Comment_118288141

ok, from a straight male point of view, i couldn't verify 'smokin hot', but she was a good looking 'male presenting individual' (is that the right terminology?) before she transitioned...

https://content.api.news/v3/images/bin/a01c4cba0b245a748a7e54416649f5e4?width=768

One Eyed Jack "I’ve already given you the example of an elite sports athlete who doesn’t share your opinions"

My opinion is that elite athletes will care if there's an advantage they cannot biologically compete with. I missed where you linked an elite athlete doesn't have a problem with this. I've not read the entire thread. Although, I'll get my excuse in early, I'd be pretty sure if an elite athlete came out and said they'd have no problem with trans women competing against them as being afraid of being "cancelled" and is following PR advice.

I've never been at elite level, but even at the level I did compete I would not have been happy to compete against someone that had a biological advantage.

I'm not following your point about males holding females back in sport - not sure what the context is, but I'll be honest I'm not bothered to delve down to far into that here. It certainly wasn't promoted much if that's what you mean.

newhouse87

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288102#Comment_118288102

Did this transgender woman in the swimming who beat her nearest female competitor by 38seconds which is an outrageous amount in swimming have any advantage being born a male? Its a yes or no.

Yeah_Right

I swam competitively in my teens and 20s. It's an individual sport. Except for relays. I absolutely hated losing to my teammates and loved beating them in training and in competition. Sure if they won it was good for the club in the overall standings but it meant they were taking a gold medal home and I wasnt.