Trans activists: Trans women should not be required to suppress testosterone to play on women's teams

[repoman]

Right, so we can cis women with narrow hips and who don't undergo menstruation and are tall. Whe find a curve and we let only the middle compete even when the actual implication on advantage really isn't clear.

No. You haven't passed the first hurdle. Transwomen are men and they don't qualify to compete in women's sports, because they are the wrong sex.

Question: do we need to ban the short transgender girls from gymnastics?

I'm not at all sure what you mean by this. Men and women already have different events in gymnastics. For example, women don't compete in pommel horse or still rings, because of the extreme upper body strength required.

But if you are asking if natal males should be disqualified from girl's gymnastic events, yes. Or rather, they are not disqualified since they don't qualify in the first place.

There is a sex (not gender) based group cohesion factor to sports. Group cohesion of males and of females for most sports which are not co-ed. Then there is money from earnings,prizes and sponsorships.

Do you think that the girls who are suing to not have transgender MTF compete with them should be punished somehow?

In 10 years from now if the twitter mob finds out one of the women works for a tech company that is responsive to public pressure, will you be glad if she gets fired?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/may/28/connecticut-transgender-federal-civil-rights-lawsuit

 

[ruby sparks]

.. I pretty much dismissed Met's question as the bait-line that it so clearly was!

It was a gotcha, and possibly a bait-line, yes. But he had a point. Metaphor often makes good points, although imo he tends to go way too far with them.

The point was that differences in brains will affect stuff (including both the things under discussion, the on-topic one and the off-topic one).

Now, ever since bringing it up, some people have been running around in circles trying to do all sorts of things, such as claim they didn't avoid answering the question, or that the question was logically invalid and then got switched, or that it was a dumb or lazy question, and so on and so forth.

Anyways, back on topic.....

 

[ruby sparks]

I support the inclusion of transgender women where advantage has been adequately adjusted for. I've never really made firm statements on what that entails apart from the considered position that transgender women who never went through male puberty would not have advantages over cisgender women. I don't make strong statements on what restrictions should be in place because that is a matter for medical professionals and sciences specific to sports.

If advantages are nullified by appropriate measures, then by definition cisgender women are not at a disadvantage. It's kind of a tautology that.

And as far as I am aware (which is not that far) that is the way it sometimes operates, and I agree with you, as I did when you said it previously. It's a reasonable compromise imo.

 

[ruby sparks]

A transwoman who never went through a male puberty is likely to be taller than average....

Some humans will be taller than average.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

No. You haven't passed the first hurdle. Transwomen are men and they don't qualify to compete in women's sports, because they are the wrong sex.

A number of governing sports bodies disagree. In those cases, you appear to be wrong. I mean, perhaps morally or ethically you stand by your point, but factually, the people who set the hurdles say that being transgender in and of itself is not a disqualifying factor.

 

[ruby sparks]

Slightly away from the main OP but....

I would make a distinction between, on the one hand, the issue of whether trans women should be allowed to compete against cis women in sport, or indeed use women’s changing rooms, or women’s refuges, and on the other hand, the issue (or issues) of whether they should (a) be able to change their name (from Brian to Angela for example) or (b) be addressed or referred to with a female gender pronoun (ie she) or (c) be referred to as a woman.

The first one is probably a no-brainer (they should). The second, well in my opinion they should, if possible. The third is the slightly tricky one, I think. I can think of no better way off the top of my head to deal with it than to say yes, they should be referred to as a woman (a trans woman, a woman by gender, and an actual woman in that sense) but not a woman in the same sense as a cis woman. I don’t think cis women should have exclusive ownership of the word woman (ditto for cis men and the word man). And to me it’s not enough to have total sympathy with trans women while also denying them that valid descriptor. I wouldn’t do that if it were my own (trans) child and so I don’t think I should do it for other people’s children.

And after that, it should, imo, be dealt with on a case by case or a scenario by scenario basis as to whether it is reasonable to include trans women (or a particular trans woman) and cis women together in this or that category of activity (eg playing sport, using changing rooms or refuges etc).

The problem with this (with maintaining a distinction between types of woman) is that it may risk the continuation of discrimination and prejudice against trans women, which is imo the MAIN problem. But personally I think it would be better to tackle the discrimination while maintaining the distinction.

Probably not a perfect approach, but it’s the one that appeals most to me. But it has to be said that I am not affected, by and large, by the issues, directly or even indirectly, nor do I have personal experience of it, or of the problematic issues around it (eg discrimination, or even what it feels like, or more to the point is, to be trans) and so I am mostly offering an opinion from outside the topic.

 

[Jarhyn]

Slightly away from the main OP but....

I would make a distinction between, on the one hand, the issue of whether trans women should be allowed to compete against cis women in sport, or indeed use women’s changing rooms, or women’s refuges, and on the other hand, the issue (or issues) of whether they should (a) be able to change their name (from Brian to Angela for example) or (b) be addressed or referred to with a female gender pronoun (ie she) or (c) be referred to as a woman.

The first one is probably a no-brainer (they should). The second, well in my opinion they should, if possible. The third is the slightly tricky one, I think. I can think of no better way off the top of my head to deal with it than to say yes, they should be referred to as a woman (a trans woman, a woman by gender, and an actual woman in that sense) but not a woman in the same sense as a cis woman. I don’t think cis women should have exclusive ownership of the word woman. And to me it’s not enough to have total sympathy with trans women while also denying them that valid descriptor. I wouldn’t do that if it were my own (trans) child and so I don’t think I should do it for other people’s children.

And after that, it should, imo, be dealt with on a case by case or a scenario by scenario basis as to whether it is reasonable to include trans women (or a particular trans woman) and cis women together in this or that category of activity (eg playing sport, using changing rooms or refuges etc).

The problem with this (with maintaining a distinction between types of woman) is that it may risk the continuation of discrimination and prejudice against trans women, which is imo the MAIN problem. But personally I think it would be better to tackle the discrimination while maintaining the distinction.

Probably not a perfect approach, but it’s the one that appeals most to me. But it has to be said that I am not affected, by and large, by the issues, directly or even indirectly, nor do I have personal experience of it, or of the problematic issues around it (eg discrimination, or even what it feels like, or is, to be trans) and so I am mostly offering an opinion from outside the issue.

I think this is almost entirely the way "there" from the place I stand; what is missing is that I think that we should not consider "woman" in the first place for most things. There are solutions to the problems: community restrooms with more private stalls, individual restrooms "for families"; sports divided by hormone exposure, and yes, also historical exposure. There's a record of when someone started transition hormonally and everyone who transitions has it, and if it didn't start early enough, maybe that disqualifies you from sports. Maybe it doesn't, but there's a 7 year waiting period (OUCH!) For professionals. Who knows. Lots of ways that could work fairly well, or well enough.

I will just keep saying it: "sex" doesn't belong in ANY public discussion. The closest it gets to public is really second date territory, first date if you're planning on being reckless. Before "date" (or before giving them a medical exam) it's relevance is zero.

 

[Metaphor]

No. You haven't passed the first hurdle. Transwomen are men and they don't qualify to compete in women's sports, because they are the wrong sex.



I'm not at all sure what you mean by this. Men and women already have different events in gymnastics. For example, women don't compete in pommel horse or still rings, because of the extreme upper body strength required.

But if you are asking if natal males should be disqualified from girl's gymnastic events, yes. Or rather, they are not disqualified since they don't qualify in the first place.

There is a sex (not gender) based group cohesion factor to sports. Group cohesion of males and of females for most sports which are not co-ed. Then there is money from earnings,prizes and sponsorships.

Do you think that the girls who are suing to not have transgender MTF compete with them should be punished somehow?

In 10 years from now if the twitter mob finds out one of the women works for a tech company that is responsive to public pressure, will you be glad if she gets fired?

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/may/28/connecticut-transgender-federal-civil-rights-lawsuit

If you mean to address this to me, the girls who are suing to exclude natal males from competing in women's sports are a voice of sanity in a sea of unreason.

The two transgender athletes, Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller (jesus christ the irony - Andraya means 'manly'), should be publically fucking humiliated. They are fucking trash cunt men who have robbed female athletes of their chances.

But they will not be humiliated. They will not face repercussions. In fact, these men will be celebrated as 'strong women'.

The circus is in town.

 

[Metaphor]

A transwoman who never went through a male puberty is likely to be taller than average....

Some humans will be taller than average.

I know. I'm 6'8" (hi shorty).

I can only thank my lucky stars I'm not trans, because I wouldn't pass.

 

[Metaphor]

No. You haven't passed the first hurdle. Transwomen are men and they don't qualify to compete in women's sports, because they are the wrong sex.

A number of governing sports bodies disagree. In those cases, you appear to be wrong. I mean, perhaps morally or ethically you stand by your point, but factually, the people who set the hurdles say that being transgender in and of itself is not a disqualifying factor.

Yes, I am more than aware the world has lost her mind.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

No. You haven't passed the first hurdle. Transwomen are men and they don't qualify to compete in women's sports, because they are the wrong sex.

A number of governing sports bodies disagree. In those cases, you appear to be wrong. I mean, perhaps morally or ethically you stand by your point, but factually, the people who set the hurdles say that being transgender in and of itself is not a disqualifying factor.

Yes, I am more than aware the world has lost her mind.

Aw, I know muffin. Change is scary.

 

[Metaphor]

Yes, I am more than aware the world has lost her mind.

Aw, I know muffin. Change is scary.

No luv. Irrational change is usually a bad idea. There's nothing about 'change' itself that is either good or bad.

 

[Toni]

What do you suppose taking female hormones does for a transwoman?

I can tell you what it doesn't do: it doesn't change a body from male to female. It doesn't cause a male body to menstruate. And if it's a male that has been through a male puberty, it doesn't eliminate the height and strength and stamina advantages that males have in the first place.

Many cis female athletes do not menstruate. This can happen naturally: https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/womens-wellness-female-athletes-and-their-periods/

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: An elite athlete or some women who exercise a lot, their periods may stop. What is that called? What causes it, and should we be worried?

DR. PETRA CASEY: So that is called hypothalamic amenorrhea, and what that means is that the hormones that are produced in the brain and then kind of cascade down to signal hormones that are produced in the ovary are not produced. So GnRH, the gonadotropic releasing hormone that is produced, triggers the follicular stimulating hormone, and the luteinizing hormone that are produced in the ovary, that signal does not translate to production of estrogen and progesterone, so the woman loses her periods. They may become irregular initially and then they may stop completely.

The trigger for that has been studied, and it’s still a little unclear whether it’s body fat percentage, whether it’s weight, whether it’s cortisol levels that stimulate decrease in GnRH, based on stress and the intensity of workouts. All of that is a little bit unclear, but, at the end of the day, a woman will not have her period if she is too lean, and she may be working out too intensely too long. Many women athletes are trying to actually become quite lean, because, in endurance sports, it’s advantageous to be lighter.

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: And will it come back? Is it dangerous?

DR. PETRA CASEY: Generally, it is reversible once she either decreases the intensity of her workouts, perhaps gains a bit of weight, and generally kind of gets more into what we would consider average weight or body mass index.

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: It's interesting. It's almost like an evolutionary thing. Your body is protecting itself because it could not support a baby.

In addition, some birth control will suppress menstruation.

 

[Metaphor]

Many cis female athletes do not menstruate. This can happen naturally: https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/womens-wellness-female-athletes-and-their-periods/

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: An elite athlete or some women who exercise a lot, their periods may stop. What is that called? What causes it, and should we be worried?

DR. PETRA CASEY: So that is called hypothalamic amenorrhea, and what that means is that the hormones that are produced in the brain and then kind of cascade down to signal hormones that are produced in the ovary are not produced. So GnRH, the gonadotropic releasing hormone that is produced, triggers the follicular stimulating hormone, and the luteinizing hormone that are produced in the ovary, that signal does not translate to production of estrogen and progesterone, so the woman loses her periods. They may become irregular initially and then they may stop completely.

The trigger for that has been studied, and it’s still a little unclear whether it’s body fat percentage, whether it’s weight, whether it’s cortisol levels that stimulate decrease in GnRH, based on stress and the intensity of workouts. All of that is a little bit unclear, but, at the end of the day, a woman will not have her period if she is too lean, and she may be working out too intensely too long. Many women athletes are trying to actually become quite lean, because, in endurance sports, it’s advantageous to be lighter.

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: And will it come back? Is it dangerous?

DR. PETRA CASEY: Generally, it is reversible once she either decreases the intensity of her workouts, perhaps gains a bit of weight, and generally kind of gets more into what we would consider average weight or body mass index.

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: It's interesting. It's almost like an evolutionary thing. Your body is protecting itself because it could not support a baby.

In addition, some birth control will suppress menstruation.

Not menstruating because you've messed up the hormones that cause it is systematically different to being a sex that cannot and does not menstruate.

 

[Toni]

Many cis female athletes do not menstruate. This can happen naturally: https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/womens-wellness-female-athletes-and-their-periods/

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: An elite athlete or some women who exercise a lot, their periods may stop. What is that called? What causes it, and should we be worried?

DR. PETRA CASEY: So that is called hypothalamic amenorrhea, and what that means is that the hormones that are produced in the brain and then kind of cascade down to signal hormones that are produced in the ovary are not produced. So GnRH, the gonadotropic releasing hormone that is produced, triggers the follicular stimulating hormone, and the luteinizing hormone that are produced in the ovary, that signal does not translate to production of estrogen and progesterone, so the woman loses her periods. They may become irregular initially and then they may stop completely.

The trigger for that has been studied, and it’s still a little unclear whether it’s body fat percentage, whether it’s weight, whether it’s cortisol levels that stimulate decrease in GnRH, based on stress and the intensity of workouts. All of that is a little bit unclear, but, at the end of the day, a woman will not have her period if she is too lean, and she may be working out too intensely too long. Many women athletes are trying to actually become quite lean, because, in endurance sports, it’s advantageous to be lighter.

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: And will it come back? Is it dangerous?

DR. PETRA CASEY: Generally, it is reversible once she either decreases the intensity of her workouts, perhaps gains a bit of weight, and generally kind of gets more into what we would consider average weight or body mass index.

VIVIEN WILLIAMS: It's interesting. It's almost like an evolutionary thing. Your body is protecting itself because it could not support a baby.

In addition, some birth control will suppress menstruation.

Not menstruating because you've messed up the hormones that cause it is systematically different to being a sex that cannot and does not menstruate.

It is not 'messing up' the hormones. I did not mention post menopausal women or women who have had hysterectomies, neither of which will have periods nor do most pregnant women. Post menopausal women and women who have had hysterectomies or ovariectomies are still women.

I was merely responding to your comment when I asked what it is that you thought female hormones did to transexual women. You only mentioned that transexual women do not menstruate.

 

[Toni]

Yes, I am more than aware the world has lost her mind.

Aw, I know muffin. Change is scary.

No luv. Irrational change is usually a bad idea. There's nothing about 'change' itself that is either good or bad.

There is nothing irrational about a person seeking to resolve the disconnect between what their brain tells them they are and what the doctor decided they were when they were born.

What is irrational is such fear and loathing as is commonly exhibited by those who hate and fear transexuals.

 

[Metaphor]

It is not 'messing up' the hormones.

In the context you presented, sure it is. If your body is so lean that it shuts down menstruation because you are in starvation mode, you've messed up the hormones. If you take the pill each month without substituting out the sugar pills, you will stop menstruating. The pill specifically works by interfering with hormones.

 

[Toni]

It is not 'messing up' the hormones.

In the context you presented, sure it is. If your body is so lean that it shuts down menstruation because you are in starvation mode, you've messed up the hormones. If you take the pill each month without substituting out the sugar pills, you will stop menstruating. The pill specifically works by interfering with hormones.

Hormones are suppressed. That is not the same thing as 'messed up.' Messed up implies a diseased state and none of the scenarios I described (with the possible exception of women who have had their uterus or ovaries removed due to cancer) has anything to do with disease. Rather, an athlete who ceases, temporarily, to menstruate is instead switching from 'baby making mode' to survival mode. Women who take certain kinds of birth control are also voluntarily not in baby making mode. Do you think women are only good for making babies? That they should be compelled to menstruate even if it means not engaging in activities that they enjoy? Do you think that menopause is a disease state?

You have some extremely odd ideas about women.

In any case, a transwoman who does not menstruate would not be different in that regard from many of her cis female co competitors.

 

[Metaphor]

Hormones are suppressed. That is not the same thing as 'messed up.' Messed up implies a diseased state and none of the scenarios I described (with the possible exception of women who have had their uterus or ovaries removed due to cancer) has anything to do with disease. Rather, an athlete who ceases, temporarily, to menstruate is instead switching from 'baby making mode' to survival mode. Women who take certain kinds of birth control are also voluntarily not in baby making mode. Do you think women are only good for making babies?

God's nightgown, Toni, the leaps you make. I can't even.

That they should be compelled to menstruate even if it means not engaging in activities that they enjoy? Do you think that menopause is a disease state?

Toni, what you say here is...unhinged. How you go from what I wrote to 'women should be compelled to menstruate'....I can't even.

Honestly you need to sit down and think about what it is you are writing.

You have some extremely odd ideas about women.

Non. You have some extremely odd interpretations of words and sentences.

 

[Toni]