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

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

Because the sports rules are bit more nuanced as Caster Semanya will tell you.

Caster is intersex which isn’t the same as transgender.

Bedsides sport is not necessarily fair as those Irish born players who missed on playing in Irish football team because someone in England happens to have an Irish granny know. The disappointment those players who worked for their whole life hoping to end in Irish team and they are beaten by someone who never lived in Ireland.

Great so you are admitting unfairness here. You were saying that it had nothing to do with trans people but the rules, as if these new rules appeared out of nowhere.

You now seem ok with the rules. And their inherent unfairness.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

Was it voodoo?

No. It was transactivism. Which doesn’t mean just trans people of course.

In fact the Olympics aren’t yet up to full compliance with what some activists want.

Victor

For context, 11,091 athletes are expected to compete in the 2020 Summer Olympics.

If non-binary people represent ~1% of the population, there should be around 111 competing.

Victor

Victor wrote: »

For context, 11,091 athletes are expected to compete in the 2020 Summer Olympics.

If non-binary people represent ~1% of the population, there should be around 111 competing.

Non binary is completely different to transgender.

Couldn't give a **** if a female Pangender astral gendered two spirit was weightlifting as long as they were doing it with others that were the same biological sex.

Kaybaykwah

fvp4 wrote: »

Interestingly enough a few years ago to suggest tha7t the trans movement would do away with female sports was considered reactionary. Now we have people arguing for “genderless” sports.

It's no wonder the transsexual progressive agenda is moving us closer to another level of transhumanism. It would be easy to entertain a conspiracy theory based on the highly profitable move toward augmentation of powers in humans. The Six Million Dollar man and the Bionic Woman are just around the corner.

Kaybaykwah

Kaybaykwah wrote: »

It's no wonder the transsexual progressive agenda is moving us closer to another level of transhumanism. It would be easy to entertain a conspiracy theory based on the highly profitable move toward augmentation of powers in humans. The Six Million Dollar man and the Bionic Woman are just around the corner.

Don’t think there is any relationship there, tbh.

KeepItLight

Kaybaykwah wrote: »

It's no wonder the transsexual progressive agenda is moving us closer to another level of transhumanism. It would be easy to entertain a conspiracy theory based on the highly profitable move toward augmentation of powers in humans. The Six Million Dollar man and the Bionic Woman are just around the corner.

It's more about subverting traditional identies such as gender, race, nationality, religion and ethnicity, so you can construct your own identity and be part of an atomized consumer culture.

kildare lad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Interestingly enough a few years ago to suggest that the trans movement would do away with female sports was considered reactionary. Now we have people arguing for “genderless” sports.

Sure let's not bother keeping scores and give everybody a medal just so everybody feels inclusive . Actually come to think of it, it'd be quite entertaining to watch mix gender rugby. It'd be quite funny watching 20 st south Africans go full tilt straight at the females . They'd want more that 8 subs mind .... Funnily enough there isn't a big push for it to happen from the female rugby players . I'm gonna go out on a limb and reckon they'd be happy enough playing against women for the next while . I think there's could be a bit of a loophole in their plan because what happens if a male player decides to identify as a female . Who are we to tell him that he's not ... We don't wanna hurt anyone's feelings and being inclusive and all .

ceadaoin.

kildare lad wrote: »

Sure let's not bother keeping scores and give everybody a medal just so everybody feels inclusive . Actually come to think of it, it'd be quite entertaining to watch mix gender rugby. It'd be quite funny watching 20 st south Africans go full tilt straight at the females . They'd want more that 8 subs mind .... Funnily enough there isn't a big push for it to happen from the female rugby players . I'm gonna go out on a limb and reckon they'd be happy enough playing against women for the next while . I think there's could be a bit of a loophole in their plan because what happens if a male player decides to identify as a female . Who are we to tell him that he's not ... We don't wanna hurt anyone's feelings and being inclusive and all .

No, the women should be able to come up with strategies to negate the effect of a 20 stone man crashing into them. If they don't well thats their own fault apparently.

BloodBath

BluePlanet wrote: »

But the thing is, Sport is just entertainment.
It should serve a societal good, not create and copperfasten injustices.

It's not all that different to the arguments that people made to keep black athletes out of sport.
By segregating women in this way, you are supporting the idea that they are inferior or something. It becomes rational to pay them less because they don't capture as much viewership etc

However, say in football, if every team was composed of an equal number of men and women, all paid nearly the same. Well that would open a lot of opportunity to women athletes, and would also put immense pressure on countries that are more sexist.

It's not just entertainment. It has evolved into that. It's a competition to see who is the best at it's roots. Men are naturally more competitive than women hence the field is dominated by men and supported heavily by men.

They are segregated because they are not equal competitively and it would be downright dangerous in some sports if they weren't.

If they want equal pay then they need to support women's sports as well as men support men's sport's. It's that simple. It's men that are predominately paying to go to stadiums, buying sports equipment, paying tv subscriptions etc for these sports.

You're living in a communist fantasy land that doesn't work in reality.

KeepItLight

KeepItLight wrote: »

It's more about subverting traditional identies such as gender, race, nationality, religion and ethnicity, so you can construct your own identity and be part of an atomized consumer culture.

Panem et circenses

meeeeh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Caster is intersex which isn’t the same as transgender.



Great so you are admitting unfairness here. You were saying that it had nothing to do with trans people but the rules, as if these new rules appeared out of nowhere.

You now seem ok with the rules. And their inherent unfairness.

I didn't say I'm OK with the rules, I'm OK with trans woman competing if it's inside the rules.

I will emotional over reaction to those more hormonal than me.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

I didn't say I'm OK with the rules, I'm OK with transferring woman competing if it's inside the rules.

So then any laws or rules that previously existed that have now been changed because they were unfair... you'd have been fine with prior to the change?

If I may, that seems like an odd position.

Tilden Katz

Victor wrote: »

For context, 11,091 athletes are expected to compete in the 2020 Summer Olympics.

If non-binary people represent ~1% of the population, there should be around 111 competing.

Of what relevance is that to the displaced athlete?

Also, non-binary is different to being transgender.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

I will emotional over reaction to those more hormonal than me.

What do you mean by that. (I mean once I’ve corrected it in my head and added the missing word).

Who is more hormonal than you? Women in general?

Larbre34

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Panem et circenses

Indeed.

The only thing is, this kind of appeasement isn't actually very popular.

YouGov did a big study a year ago on public attitudes to transgender rights and recognition in the UK

While the population was either broadly split or slightly in favour of issues like legal change of gender, transgender use of toilet and changing facilities etc, when it came to permitting transgender persons to compete in sports of their new gender, opinion was over 2:1 against.

Rugby Union have actually banned transgender women from competing in official sanctioned women's rugby competitions, on safety grounds.

Sam Quentin

Is that all yaaaa got!?.... Grrrrrrrrrrrr


Yes miss we've run out of weights.

meeeeh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So then any laws or rules that previously existed that have now been changed because they were unfair... you'd have been fine with prior to the change?

If I may, that seems like an odd position.

Imagine that rules changing with new scientific research.

Come on, rules change all the time especially around banned substances. It's not set in stone. I suspect rugby or contact sport is different to running or weight lifting or synchronised swimming. So every sport can be looked at individually and whatever new research pops up it can be incorporated into rules.

FileNotFound

I hope they break all records and finally end the discussion on fairness in sport on this topic.

Sport is supposed to be outside of politics and all the challenges of life. Where people can fairly challenge each other. If it's unfair it's just not sporting in my mind.

Guess we will wait and see - power lifting will be one of the sports we should in theory see a greater difference in.

meeeeh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What do you mean by that. (I mean once I’ve corrected it in my head and added the missing word).

Who is more hormonal than you? Women in general?

I'm a woman (I was not 100% serious). I was making a point this is often more emotional than rational debate.

Airyfairy12

I wonder if a sports game was played solely by transgender men and women would it still be considered fair? Would both teams ignore the fact that the trans men have a different physical makeup compared to the trans women? Would they consider it fair in this instance?

FileNotFound

Airyfairy12 wrote: »

I wonder if a sports game was played solely by transgender men and women would it still be considered fair? Would both teams ignore the fact that the trans men have a different physical makeup compared to the trans women? Would they consider it fair in this instance?

Sure why have gender events at all - just put everyone in the same event and let the strongest win.

As a man that sounds fair to me :D:D

JimmyVik

Homelander wrote: »

I suspect if she doesn't win a medal as well it'll be "look, being trans doesn't mean you're displacing anyone or unfairly competing".

We are talking about a person who is 43 - almost two decades older than the peak age for the sport - and after transitioning can compete with the best in the world.

She's also far, far bigger and heavier than the other competitors, putting aside the obvious physical advantages from having been a man who went through puberty, regardless of the current test levels.

It's a crazy decision and I cannot see how anyone would support it in the name of inclusion. Inclusion shouldn't be at the considerable displacement and exclusion of others.

Did they beat out any other female NZ weightlifters to book the spot in the Olympics? If so, they might feel hard done by.

BloodBath

JimmyVik wrote: »

Did they beat out any other female NZ weightlifters to book the spot in the Olympics? If so, they might feel hard done by.

Not as hard done by as the ones missing out on medals will feel. She's going to deny someone a gold, silver and bronze medal if she wins in a sport where you maybe only get 2-3 chances if you're lucky enough not to be injured. So brave.

Kaybaykwah

KeepItLight wrote: »

It's more about subverting traditional identies such as gender, race, nationality, religion and ethnicity, so you can construct your own identity and be part of an atomized consumer culture.

That, of course, but the consumer culture is also headed toward augmentation in cognitive and physical abilities, and there is big money at play.

If you open the door to quotas, or all out gender-freed competition, this legimitizes the advent of DNA restructuring via in vitro for humans, all sorts of manipulations pre and post birth.

Women have been inseminated artificially with sperm by donor smart cookies, and donor hunks for awhile now. The next steps will be moremoremore of the SF variety.

FileNotFound

Didn't spot the age, well think the fairness question has been answered already.

I remember reading that the current rules for entry are due to levels of hormones in your system for X time.


Which actually means a person could plan to switch gender - win gold and switch back before the next olympics.

Nozebleed

saddest thing about this is Women don't have the balls to boycott the event.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

Imagine that rules changing with new scientific research.

Come on, rules change all the time especially around banned substances. It's not set in stone. I suspect rugby or contact sport is different to running or weight lifting or synchronised swimming. So every sport can be looked at individually and whatever new research pops up it can be incorporated into rules.

Okay but you said "I didn't say I'm OK with the rules, I'm OK with trans woman competing if it's inside the rules."

It just seems strange to be okay with people taking advantage of rules that you are not okay with.

For example, if no rule was written into competitive cycling about the bicycle having to be entirely manual, and someone showed up with an electric bicycle that gave them a distinct advantage, then, sure, I would think the rules need changing to account for that—but I would also certainly judge the person who used that unfair advantage to get an edge in the competition.

I understand you concern about trans women being "blamed", but "fairness", according to an increasing body of psychological study, seems to be so deeply ingrained within us (and other species) as to be instinctive. It is natural for us to notice unfairness, and natural for us to take issue with it. And if the person who is gaining an unfair advantage in a particular sport happens to belong to a group that is by other measures treated unfairly in other arenas, that does not "cancel out" the unfairness in their playing the sport, whether that's doping in swimming, male anatomy in sports, bicycle tampering, finding a wallet and keeping the contents, or whatever.

Nozebleed

Nozebleed wrote: »

saddest thing about this is Women don't have the balls to boycott the event.

Nor do men, who will never been impacted by it but can nonetheless see the same thing as everyone else.

Shield

For those asking why this decision is unfair to biological women, here's a helpful visual of Hubbard's previous winning margins and the probability statistic of this ever occurring...