Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Rachel McKinnon wins Worlds gold at UCI masters track cycling

Options
1…457910…14

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,596 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Michael Phelps has huge genetic advantage over me as a swimmer. I think it is only fair he is given GH supressors until his feet are the same size as mine.

    The truth of the matter is that every good athlete has a genetic advantage over me, all doping aside, the winner in most sports always has a huge advantage.

    The question could be, if Rachel McKinnion had been born female and arrived at this point exactly the same as she is now, would people still call for her hormone suppression. Or would she simply be a genetically advantaged athlete no better or worse than Mr. Phelps is to swimming.


  • Options
    #183
    0cp71eyxkb94qf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 198 ✭✭0cp71eyxkb94qf


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #184
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Michael Phelps has huge genetic advantage over me as a swimmer. I think it is only fair he is given GH supressors until his feet are the same size as mine.

    The truth of the matter is that every good athlete has a genetic advantage over me, all doping aside, the winner in most sports always has a huge advantage.

    The question could be, if Rachel McKinnion had been born female and arrived at this point exactly the same as she is now, would people still call for her hormone suppression. Or would she simply be a genetically advantaged athlete no better or worse than Mr. Phelps is to swimming.

    I’m not sure that’s the question but a way around the question. A lot of elite female sports could now be dominated by transwomen. The fact that Michael phelps has a genetic advantage over you is neither here nor there.


  • Options
    #185
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    robyntmorton wrote: »
    I'm going to declare firstly that I have a horse in this race: I am a transgender woman.

    With that in mind, it is hard for me to not show some bias in this, but the level of vitriol thrown at this person, and any other trans person who dares to follow their passion for their sport, is quite frankly disgusting.

    She competed, and won, within the rules that were laid down by UCI for the sport (as far as we know, and I'm sure anyone winning a rainbow jersey will be checked to see that they won it fairly)

    We can not hold this against her. What we can do, as I have said many times before, is to question whether the rules themselves are fair. This can only be done by scientific discovery, and not by shouting the loudest that this is wrong. And again, as has been said before, the difficulty with this is that there are so few elite athletes who are trans. With so little data available, it is nearly impossible to give an accurate assessment, and we can't exclude them from competing altogether, or segregate them into a trans only category, because that totally removes the motivation for them to take part, and for the data to be collected allowing a full assessment to be made.

    On the other hand, do segregate them into trans only events. I'd be a shoe in for gold then!

    Best of luck to you on life.


  • Options
    #186
    Subcomandante Marcos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,683 ✭✭✭Subcomandante Marcos


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Michael Phelps has huge genetic advantage over me as a swimmer. I think it is only fair he is given GH supressors until his feet are the same size as mine.

    The truth of the matter is that every good athlete has a genetic advantage over me, all doping aside, the winner in most sports always has a huge advantage.

    The question could be, if Rachel McKinnion had been born female and arrived at this point exactly the same as she is now, would people still call for her hormone suppression. Or would she simply be a genetically advantaged athlete no better or worse than Mr. Phelps is to swimming.

    You could put Phelps on estrogen therapy and t blockers for 5 years and he'd still absolutely destroy the women's world record in almost every swimming discipline.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    wexie wrote: »

    The problem for me comes when people who question whether or not the rules are fair get shouted down as transphobes or whatever else may insults may be flung around in order to get the debate shut down.

    The topic doesn't matter they like the shouting down.

    The modern Left is like the 1950s church at this stage.

    The ****ing sanctimony, righteousness and lecturing is shocking.

    It is getting worse, not better.

    I'm fairly Left but please get down from the pulpit.


  • Options
    #188
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    nee wrote: »
    But what circumstances? Growing up in a stable, supportive home gives you a much bigger boost than almost anything else, is that an unfair circumstantial advantage? years and years of psychological torment and serious physical effects of same aren't doing anyone any favours.
    Some people are genetically more suited to some things more than others- it's the Yates's slightness an unfair physical advantage over Marcel kittel's bulk going uphill? And visa versa on the flat?
    There are more variants within each ciss gender than between a ciss woman and a trans woman. Look into the hormonal regimes of trans people, really have a look, and then see if it's still an advantage.
    Arguments are made about bone size etc. I would argue that there are as big of differences between say Kristen Wild and Maya Abbott proportionally if you break of down.

    Jesus lol.

    Burn the Science books, shoot the biologists.


  • Options
    #189
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,734 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Danzy wrote: »
    The topic doesn't matter they like the shouting down.

    The modern Left is like the 1950s church at this stage.

    The ****ing sanctimony, righteousness and lecturing is shocking.

    It is getting worse, not better.

    I'm fairly Left but please get down from the pulpit.

    Seems the opposite is actually true though, with competitive female cyclists on here having no issue with this while people such as yourself rock up to this forum for a rant, without seeming to show any previous interest in cycling or this forum. Why is that do you think?


  • Options
    #190
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,172 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Danzy wrote: »
    The topic doesn't matter they like the shouting down.

    The modern Left is like the 1950s church at this stage.

    The ****ing sanctimony, righteousness and lecturing is shocking.

    It is getting worse, not better.

    I'm fairly Left but please get down from the pulpit.

    I think what you're trying to say is a certain grouping of people who are politically left wing behave like that, as opposed to everyone who claim to be on the left, like yourself?


  • Options
    #191
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,734 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »
    You could put Phelps on estrogen therapy and t blockers for 5 years and he'd still absolutely destroy the women's world record in almost every swimming discipline.

    You could be right, but it's unproven speculation at best. Phelps could equally end up a total mess as a result of this treatment and not manage competition at any level. Also speculation. We simply don't know.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    terrydel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭terrydel


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Michael Phelps has huge genetic advantage over me as a swimmer. I think it is only fair he is given GH supressors until his feet are the same size as mine.

    The truth of the matter is that every good athlete has a genetic advantage over me, all doping aside, the winner in most sports always has a huge advantage.

    The question could be, if Rachel McKinnion had been born female and arrived at this point exactly the same as she is now, would people still call for her hormone suppression. Or would she simply be a genetically advantaged athlete no better or worse than Mr. Phelps is to swimming.

    In all fairness, thats an bloody enormous if.


  • Options
    #193
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    smacl wrote: »
    Seems the opposite is actually true though, with competitive female cyclists on here having no issue with this while people such as yourself rock up to this forum for a rant, without seeming to show any previous interest in cycling or this forum. Why is that do you think?

    The competing athletes against McKinnon have been vocal as well.

    I have zero interest in cycling but this isn't about cycling is it.


  • Options
    #194
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Danzy wrote: »
    The competing athletes against McKinnon have been vocal as well.

    I have zero interest in cycling but this isn't about cycling is it.

    The runner up was upset.

    https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/not-fair-runner-fumes-transgender-world-champion-075054632.html?guccounter=1

    .. but I thought this thread was about somebody else.


  • Options
    #195
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,596 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    terrydel wrote: »
    In all fairness, thats an bloody enormous if.

    But it is a reasonable question. If Rachel had been born female and due to random genetic variation and upbringing, ended up exactly the same physically (to the point her competitive attributes were pretty much identical), would people still call for hormone suppression?


  • Options
    #196
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,824 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    this is still an interesting read on the topic - malcolm gladwell on caster semenya.

    https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/caster-semenya-and-the-logic-of-olympic-competition


  • Options
    #197
    TGD
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭TGD


    robyntmorton wrote:
    Finally, the headline, as used by Sticky Bottle, is a travesty, used for the specific purpose of gaining clicks. It implies that Jillian Bearden is an imposter, a fraud - essentially a cheater. ...
    I have no particular axe to grind here and, like most, I’m trying to get my head around the issues. But I don’t understand your criticism above of this headline in Stickybottle. - “Transgender woman wins gold at UCI World Champs; dismisses “bigots””. It seems entirely factual with me. How would you have written the headline so that it wouldn’t be as you described?


  • Options
    #198
    TGD
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭TGD


    robyntmorton wrote:
    Finally, the headline, as used by Sticky Bottle, is a travesty, used for the specific purpose of gaining clicks. It implies that Jillian Bearden is an imposter, a fraud - essentially a cheater. ...
    I have no particular axe to grind here and, like most, I’m trying to get my head around the issues. But I don’t understand your criticism above of this headline in Stickybottle. - “Transgender woman wins gold at UCI World Champs; dismisses “bigots””. It seems entirely factual with me. How would you have written the headline so that it wouldn’t be as you described?


  • Options
    #199
    TGD
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭TGD


    robyntmorton wrote:
    Finally, the headline, as used by Sticky Bottle, is a travesty, used for the specific purpose of gaining clicks. It implies that Jillian Bearden is an imposter, a fraud - essentially a cheater. ...
    I have no particular axe to grind here and, like most, I’m trying to get my head around the issues. But I don’t understand your criticism above of this headline in Stickybottle. - “Transgender woman wins gold at UCI World Champs; dismisses “bigots””. It seems entirely factual with me. How would you have written the headline so that it wouldn’t be as you described?


  • Options
    #200
    robyntmorton
    Registered Users Posts: 4,263 ✭✭✭robyntmorton


    TGD wrote: »
    I have no particular axe to grind here and, like most, I’m trying to get my head around the issues. But I don’t understand your criticism above of this headline in Stickybottle. - “Transgender woman wins gold at UCI World Champs; dismisses “bigots””. It seems entirely factual with me. How would you have written the headline so that it wouldn’t be as you described?

    The headline was originally written differently 2 years ago, and as a result of it being changed, my comment has had its context taken away.


  • Options
    #201
    terrydel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭terrydel


    CramCycle wrote: »
    But it is a reasonable question. If Rachel had been born female and due to random genetic variation and upbringing, ended up exactly the same physically (to the point her competitive attributes were pretty much identical), would people still call for hormone suppression?

    And its reasonable to question the legitimacy of someone who merely identifies as a women, rather than meet scientifically well-established, biological determinants of what defines a female of the species, competing against actual biological females.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    TGD
    Registered Users Posts: 649 ✭✭✭TGD


    terrydel wrote: »
    CramCycle wrote: »
    But it is a reasonable question. If Rachel had been born female and due to random genetic variation and upbringing, ended up exactly the same physically (to the point her competitive attributes were pretty much identical), would people still call for hormone suppression?

    And its reasonable to question the legitimacy of someone who merely identifies as a women, rather than meet scientifically well-established, biological determinants of what defines a female of the species, competing against actual biological females.
    I agree: “it is reasonable to question” and that doesn’t make us bigots.


  • Options
    #203
    mloc123
    Registered Users Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    CramCycle wrote: »
    But it is a reasonable question. If Rachel had been born female and due to random genetic variation and upbringing, ended up exactly the same physically (to the point her competitive attributes were pretty much identical), would people still call for hormone suppression?

    If my aunt had balls she'd be.... oh


  • Options
    #204
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    CramCycle wrote: »
    But it is a reasonable question. If Rachel had been born female and due to random genetic variation and upbringing, ended up exactly the same physically (to the point her competitive attributes were pretty much identical), would people still call for hormone suppression?

    If Rachel had been born female she wouldn't have the shape or lung capacity or bone structure she does.

    If she was born female but had the testosterone of an average male injected in as she grew up then she would have that advantage.

    As seen in East Germany in the 80s.


  • Options
    #205
    wexie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,480 ✭✭✭wexie


    Danzy wrote: »
    As seen in East Germany in the 80s.

    That reminds me of the old joke about a female Russian/East German shotputter complaining to her doctor about developing chest hair.

    Doctor : really? how far does it go?
    Shotputter : ehm....down to my balls

    :pac:


  • Options
    #206
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    wexie wrote: »
    That reminds me of the old joke about a female Russian/East German shotputter complaining to her doctor about developing chest hair.

    Doctor : really? how far does it go?
    Shotputter : ehm....down to my balls

    :pac:

    Just looked at the shot put figures from them and an athlete in question, still wouldn't have made nationals in mens novice events in Germany. Yet won Olympic medals.

    It is the level of denial to avoid cognitive dissonance that gets me.


  • Options
    #207
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,824 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    who'd want to be a woman anyway?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85HT4Om6JT4


  • Options
    #208
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,596 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Of course it is reasonable to question. That is the basis of civilised society. I only have a problem with said questions when, even unbeknownst to the asked, they are clearly loaded and attempting to steer opinion against an already marginalised part of society. I don't have many trans friends, and excluding people online, that list whittles down quite quickly. I can count them on one hand with fingers to spare. If I didn't have any, that wouldn't affect my view. As someone pointed out, percentage wise, it is a small minority of the population. It's surprising I know more than one in person.
    The issues though are simple, out of the group I know on a face to face basis, half do not refer to themselves as trans, they are their chosen sex. The other half do. They are still both their chosen sex.
    As a society, I hope we have chosen that once you have made your choice, that is the way the world should view you. If that gives a minority of a minority an advantage in a sport, well then **** it, it is our duty as a civilised society to live with that.
    I am not left wing either, in case it wasn't clear by some of my views on here, I am very much a zero tolerance kinda person on crime and have no qualms about more extreme sentences. Being central right doesn't make you an asshole (maybe a little bit) in the same way being left doesn't make you sympathetic to every minority.
    The athlete being discussed here today is a woman, unless she is doping or cheating, then she deserved to win. Athletes may feel cheated, but the truth is they were, at best, second best on the day, that's my opinion.
    I respect all the other points brought up as I can see why they were brought up but I do not agree with them.


  • Options
    #209
    Danzy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,494 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Of course it is reasonable to question. That is the basis of civilised society. I only have a problem with said questions when, even unbeknownst to the asked, they are clearly loaded and attempting to steer opinion against an already marginalised part of society. I don't have many trans friends, and excluding people online, that list whittles down quite quickly. I can count them on one hand with fingers to spare. If I didn't have any, that wouldn't affect my view. As someone pointed out, percentage wise, it is a small minority of the population. It's surprising I know more than one in person.
    The issues though are simple, out of the group I know on a face to face basis, half do not refer to themselves as trans, they are their chosen sex. The other half do. They are still both their chosen sex.
    As a society, I hope we have chosen that once you have made your choice, that is the way the world should view you. If that gives a minority of a minority an advantage in a sport, well then **** it, it is our duty as a civilised society to live with that.
    I am not left wing either, in case it wasn't clear by some of my views on here, I am very much a zero tolerance kinda person on crime and have no qualms about more extreme sentences. Being central right doesn't make you an asshole (maybe a little bit) in the same way being left doesn't make you sympathetic to every minority.
    The athlete being discussed here today is a woman, unless she is doping or cheating, then she deserved to win. Athletes may feel cheated, but the truth is they were, at best, second best on the day, that's my opinion.
    I respect all the other points brought up as I can see why they were brought up but I do not agree with them.

    That is fine , for women who train at 6am every day to be the best it may not.



    I'm a 40 yr old male, don't train now but have seen women who trained and got Olympic medals.

    The effort they put in I will never beat

    I could match the Women's record for deadlift without training.

    I do a physical job so have that as a mitigating factor but I'm no longer an athlete, maybe never was,lol, A months stretching and if lift a w omen's record.

    I could do it now but would be frightened I'd pop a muscle

    An average power lifting gym in a small town will have men who would win women's Olympic medals and they will not make provincials. In running it will take a 17 yr old male nqtional Irish title to set a world women's record.

    It is grand to say Athlete's feel cheated when you haven't run at 6 am in pissing rain for years.

    Come down from the pulpit.


  • Options
    #210
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    GreeBo wrote: »
    However if a 12 year old decided that they actually identified as a 9 year old that would be ok then I guess.

    I don't know. I used to play waterpolo when I was 15 and my trainer made me identify as 13 so I could play in the under 14s.
    I got a league gold medal out of it. My team only came second in the under 16s.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,596 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Danzy wrote: »

    Come down from the pulpit.

    Not on a pulpit. Just my view. I am physically active. I can lift a decent weight and can squat lift more than most gym trainers would think. Could I deadlift 300+ kg, I would seriously doubt it, I'd doubt most men could without training. If you can, as claimed, without training, well **** me, with training you might have a WR in you.


Advertisement