SHOCKING. Lia Thomas appears to be done. NCAA IMMEDIATELY changing transgender regulations

Umm.. ever heard of Marcus Rehm? If he had been allowed to compete in the Olympics, he would have been a serious medal contender. (He has 8.62 PB in LJ.) But he was denied, and rightfully so. His synthetic leg gives him an unfair advantage, unless he agrees to take off on his natural leg.

So instead of competing in the women's division where they have unfair advantages, trans women could compete in their own category. And some of the para categories have even smaller parent population than trans people. They are also mixture of people with different types of disability, primarily grouped based on their competitive abilities. So if there aren't enough trans women to create their own category, they can include trans women, trans men and people with DSD all in one category.

I also think there is difference between "different" and "abnormal." Trans people should not be considered as abnormal, but we should acknowledge they are different.

Since the NCAA can't even give good guidelines on NIL, I suspect that leaving the science to governing bodies of individual sports is a good move for them, that is, if they can avoid any legal consequences.

You stated that the topic is sensitive yet title the thread "Lia Thomas is DONE"

So professional...

Beautifully said and you are on point with everything. The unfortunate thing is (as with almost any social/societal issue in the US) is that this idiotic over-correction driven by these crazy zealots (love that description) is only temporary before the retaliatory over-correction will eventually occur. I mean you know it's coming right - it is always is. Same with #metoo, same with BLM - this country can never ever find a common sensical and rational middle ground/compromise with anything because the only voices that are ever heard are the self-righteous a$$wipes with agendas to pedal of their own which are almost always not even related to the "cause" they support The saddest part about this? It ultimately won't affect these twits - the backlash will affect innocent people just trying to live their lives (though I agree in the cause of Lia Thomas it appears as if it is far from an innocent party just caught in the crosshairs).

Pretty sure this is the third time I'm saying this, but yeah, I think they should compete in their own category.

There is a difference between different and abnormal. Different means not like something else. Abnormal means not typical. Transgender people are certainly outside the norm. I think a lot of people don't like using "abnormal" when it comes to transgender people because it can carry a negative connotation, but I think it's a losing fight to try to keep people from saying they're not normal.

It’s great we are seeing some pushback and sanity to this whole transgender insanity.

Peach Pit wrote:

Pretty sure this is the third time I'm saying this, but yeah, I think they should compete in their own category.

I’m not opposed philosophically, but here are a few big logistical issues with the separate category idea:

A) There just aren‘t that many trans athletes to field a competitive team in all sports. If a title-9 type thing in college inevitably is applied (where an equal # of teams must be fielded per gender category), you’d have to shut done M and F teams. Because let’s be real, how many trans athletes at a state college are playing competitive sports.

B) Popularity in Olympic sports (due to depth of fields and lack of interest) would be low, but networks would still have to broadcast the events (because otherwise they’ll get the transphobic label). There’s no way there will be a separate event called “The Trans Olympics.” It will have to be part of the standard games. This applies to WCs, DL, etc. too.

I think for these and other reasons like optics, “Open” vs “Female” is the only viable solution.

SOLVED - Let Trans compete in the male division and at the end of the race place them in the 'open' division for awards and records, M-F and F-M can be in this division. Their time won't count in the male or female division or team standings. And by competing in the men's heats they won't deny a girl a chance to advance to the finals, I am assuming that she wouldn't advance in the male division.

Reminder to all that Title 9 is the single worst thing with the most negative impact in our sport.

Of course the networks would not show any transgender events. It’s a business and few people will expect a network to televise a race where effectively no one will watch. People that purchased a ticket will not want to watch as well. The those that are supportive of transgender athletes want them to be allowed to compete against women and everyone else has no interest in watching transgender athletes in any competition.

flyingfrog wrote:

SOLVED - Let Trans compete in the male division and at the end of the race place them in the 'open' division for awards and records, M-F and F-M can be in this division. Their time won't count in the male or female division or team standings. And by competing in the men's heats they won't deny a girl a chance to advance to the finals, I am assuming that she wouldn't advance in the male division.

I like the idea of that because it comes off more humanely. If it could work, that might be a good option, but that, too, has some things that present challenges:

A) It'd be no issue in huge heats like the 10,000m or long jump, but what about the 100, 200, 400, 800, where lanes are at a premium? Obviously, the best 8-9 athletes will be overwhelmingly male, so how do you run the finals for the three categories?

-Take the top three from each category (M->F, F->M, M). I hate that because who wants to only have the top three male athletes in the final?

-Just take the best M->F and F->M times in the early rounds and rank them. I don't think that will pass, because you aren't giving those athletes a chance to compete in a final against their peers. Optically it basically implies they aren't as worthwhile as the pure M and F categories, so it won't be accepted.

B) You still have a host of other sports in college (and the Olympics) that are team sports. For obvious reasons, you can't have trans athletes compete alongside male athletes, but still in a separate category in basketball or volleyball.

C) If the trans athletes are competing alongside the males, but in their own category (even though they won't beat the males, but can still "win"), I think you are going to face a lot of heat in justifying why trans women can't just compete with females, and there will just be two divisions (F winner and M->F winner). Maybe that's the compromise that would have to be made. I don't really like that idea, but there's no way that doesn't come off as transphobic, because it essentially implies that only "real" men and women can actually break the tape.

I'm not trying to be a hater on the idea. Really, I probably agree with you on what is fair and all, but I also know that any weakness in a proposal is gonna be shot down for a whole host of reasons. You gotta convince people like Lenny Leonard, et. al who believe that changing your gender identity changes everything and makes it right to compete in the category of your choice. They don't have to love the idea, but there can't be terrible optical issues either.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Of course the networks would not show any transgender events. It’s a business and few people will expect a network to televise a race where effectively no one will watch. People that purchased a ticket will not want to watch as well. The those that are supportive of transgender athletes want them to be allowed to compete against women and everyone else has no interest in watching transgender athletes in any competition.

I agree that there would be very little interest. But think of how networks level the playing field in other sports. Men's tennis gets much better ratings, but a network that has a major makes sure to essentially show 50/50 M/F. The WNBA is not that popular, but ESPN promotes it constantly, and I've seen it often Network television. I think the creation of another division that gets relegated to ESPN8, the ocho, isn't a viable proposal. It'll be seen as "othering" the trans community and part of the systemic bias against them.

Personally, none of that bothers me. I don't care if networks show it, and I don't care if they don't. What is important is that there is a place for trans athletes and that place is NOT in traditional women's sports. But my indifference to the logistics will be outweighed by trans advocates who will be supporting "optically viable" proposals. So if we care about integrity of the sport, we can't just take the free market approach because the advocates will steamroll us.

Rippling Hysteresis wrote:

I agree that there would be very little interest. But think of how networks level the playing field in other sports. Men's tennis gets much better ratings, but a network that has a major makes sure to essentially show 50/50 M/F. The WNBA is not that popular, but ESPN promotes it constantly, and I've seen it often Network television. I think the creation of another division that gets relegated to ESPN8, the ocho, isn't a viable proposal. It'll be seen as "othering" the trans community and part of the systemic bias against them.

There is no evidence that men's tennis gest "much better" ratings (at least in the US), and 96% of all sports on American TV are men's sports.

There is no way this person has been competing without realization that they have a massive advantage over their playing field, and yet they have been shown that they do not care.

I, personally, don't care for any sugarcoating. Give it to em straight. This has gone on far enough and it's time to give the opportunities to the people they were made for.

Proponents want to see transgender females compete in the women's category and not some bizarro world, open transgender division. It would probably be comprised of people not suppressing testosterone so it would be like D level men's athletics. A few percent of the population will not be steamrolling anyone.

A couple of ancillary points on this quite honestly ridiculous saga

1) Still waiting for the ascendance of a transgender male to start destroying "cis" males in competitive sport. I would question that if we can't meet this basic condition of equality with respect to transgender athletes then why is this even any issue. Question to ponder as this is clearly a very "one-way" situation - is it possible that this issue and womens rights have (incorrectly) had their wires crossed and intertwined here?

2) I've always questioned how an athlete like Lia Thomas can at a basic level feel good about this. I mean you know yourself what the situation is - when you are beating the competition by such a margin and breaking records at ease is there not a part of your conscience that this doesn't sit well with? What joy and satisfaction do you really garner from this? I ran the 800m. By the age of 15 I had already run well inside the womens WR - maybe if you lined me up one time vs the fastest women in history and I f-ing annihilated them I would have taken some immature satisfaction from it, but every time? I would have to have something wrong with me to enjoy that.

3) Sort of related to the above point - the benefit of the doubt we are affording transgender females in terms of intention baffles me. So not all of these athletes are deliberately flaunting the current social and political climate for their own benefit - but we seem to have closed the door on the possibility that some most definitively are and will. We have let empathy for the greater plight of the LGBTQ completely fuzz over the fact that could be and will be in the future athletes who will go down the path of "gender reassignment" to be successful in sports. The lengths to which some sportspeople go to "cheat to win" know no bounds. Stick a condom up your @ss with someone elses urine in it to cheat a drug test? No worries. Do I feel disenfranchised from society and see that I could "earn" notoriety, money etc in sports by changing my identity? Why is this concept so out of the realms of possibility? People will always push the boundaries of what they can get away with - it's human nature. To think that transgender people are exempt from this concept is a big oversight.

If you don't think trans advocates are powerful, frankly I don't think you've been paying attention. I never disputed that the ratings would be bad. I'm saying it won't fly for advocates to stuff trans people into an "other" category. These people don't watch sports, but they certainly make executives nervous enough to listen.

rojo wrote:

PS. Update from Rojo. A poster below has pointed out that the international swimming guidelines don't have an rules on a minimum testosterone level so it's possible this doesn't change much for Thomas.

It will be interesting to see if swimming adopts new rules as well. I guess it will depend if Thomas starts setting every women’s WR I don’t know how good Thomas is on a global scale. Typical bureaucrats love to kick the can down the road instead of making proactive decisions.

Rippling Hysteresis wrote:

If you don't think trans advocates are powerful, frankly I don't think you've been paying attention. I never disputed that the ratings would be bad. I'm saying it won't fly for advocates to stuff trans people into an "other" category. These people don't watch sports, but they certainly make executives nervous enough to listen.

This is a very good point. Almost nobody here beating drums and sharpening knives don't even watch sports, let alone have ever competed themselves.

Do they know that Elaine Thompson-Herah probably wouldn't even make the final of the Texas high school boys 100m final? Even if they did would they know the reasons why?

It's ironic isn't it - it's the "facts and science" crew that uhh, well, have no idea about the facts and science but are more than willing to get involved in matters they have no business doing.

I wrote this earlier, it's just agenda pedaling by any means necessary - these are actually the worst type of humans - those that leverage important, emotional issues for their own gain. Are they really "trans advocates"? No. They are "themselves" advocates. You see this in the comments of Jenner who as trans woman actually understands the situation and has nothing to gain by nefariously pushing the conspiracy theory of the fake "advocates"