No, you didn't. wrote:
"Did I get that right?"
No, you didn't, you wrote "other female athletes", you should have written 'the female athletes', thus not implying the subject person is female.
Yeah, I know. It was an olive branch to the other side of the discussion. I didn't want to be labeled transphobic.
el rato mickey wrote:
No, you didn't. wrote:"Did I get that right?"
No, you didn't, you wrote "other female athletes", you should have written 'the female athletes', thus not implying the subject person is female.
Yeah, I know. It was an olive branch to the other side of the discussion. I didn't want to be labeled transphobic.
Fair enough, the LBGTetc brain washing is starting to affect us all without us realizing it. FMD, I'm beginning to have doubts myself about that thing hanging between my legs.
What is noble? They're doing what the others have done. Cheat.
People will do anything to have "success" in athletics. Doesn't matter is you are talking about winning a stupid soccer game for 8 yr olds, qualifying for Boston, or the Tour de France... people will cheat to get recognition and even little token awards.
9Lives wrote:
What is noble? They're doing what the others have done. Cheat.
Calling their motives "noble" elevates the discussion. We are trying to give them the benefit of a doubt. The same reason we don't punish people for having mental issues. We treat them.
It'll be interesting to see the recruitment to college.
el rato mickey wrote:
You make a good point. Since the transgenders’ motives are more noble than "regular" cheaters' motives, it makes it acceptable to disenfranchise the other female athletes. Did I get that right?
No the difference is that the people you listed are cheating (well only some. A couple like redshirting are a grey area and things like cover up rape isn't really athletic cheating.It is just being a criminal). The transgender athletes are following the rules and hence are not cheaters. You happen to not like the rules. That is fine. But is a huge gap to think some random guy is going to decide he is going to be state champion by entering the girls event. It isn't going to happen very often if at all.
Once you accept that you are going to be dealing with a small subset of people that have an issue, you can then debate which group to discriminate against. There is no great answer to this. It isn't same as the bathroom issue (i.e. I have been in bathrooms for 40 years. I don't remember see very many guys penis's. Of course I am not looking either).
asdfasfads wrote:
No the difference is that the people you listed are cheating (well only some. A couple like redshirting are a grey area and things like cover up rape isn't really athletic cheating.It is just being a criminal). The transgender athletes are following the rules and hence are not cheaters. You happen to not like the rules.
You are either confused or responding to another poster. I haven't posted any lists and I have not mentioned any rules as being an issue. All I asked was if you were OK with disenfranchising the o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶ female athletes. And if yes, then please explain why.
That is fine. But is a huge gap to think some random guy is going to decide he is going to be state champion by entering the girls event. It isn't going to happen very often if at all.
WTF? It happened in CT. That's what this whole thread is about.
I know this isn't the main point of the thread, but those times aren't that fast for state even for HS girls. And it isn't just because it's in a smaller HS classification. The CT class M is equivalent to my state's (WA) class 2A (roughly 400-900 students).
-His/her 100m time of 12.68 would rank him/her 18th in WA for 2A (and even 9th in 1A which is tiny asF)
-His/her 200m time of 26.08 would rank him/her 16th in WA for 2A.
And WA is more known for its distance runners than its sprinters. I can only imagine how s/he would fare in TX.
So in many states this wouldn't be a big issue. Sure he would keep some deserving girl out of districts but it just doesn't make as big a story.
At some point the bureaucrats who make these inane rules, based on politics rather than the reality of sport, need to get out from behind their isolated, insulated desks and go out to talk to all the athletes and their coaches and get input from them.
seattle dude wrote:
...
At some point the bureaucrats who make these inane rules, based on politics rather than the reality of sport, need to get out from behind their isolated, insulated desks and go out to talk to all the athletes and their coaches and get input from them.
This is the problem. We expect some "bureaucrat" somewhere to fix this for us. It won't happen.
If they asked for input from athletes and coaches what kind of responses do you think they'd get? What did the athletes, coaches, and parents in CT say? Nothing! They're scared to death about what the PC fascists will do to them.
Everyone thinks someone sane somewhere will put an end to this insanity. Nope. No one is going to fix this. Who is publicly pushing back on this from a position of authority? No one.
When I was in 8th grade the girls team was doing a 440 relay time trial and I said I could beat the team by myself. I did, easily. I was one year younger than Yearwood. That didn't take courage and it was nothing to be proud of. It made the girls feel like crap and I was a jerk for doing it.
Yearwood's a jerk for stealing a State championship from a girl and I'm calling him out on it. Everyone supporting this guy is a jerk too, or worse.
Anyone who says we need to cater to this guy's mental illness because he might hurt himself needs to remember that I identify as a 15 year old Napoleon, and I demand that you join me in my march on Northern Canada this Jan 1st. You MUST join me or I might hurt myself. You made the rules, now live by them.
What? I'm crazy? I need professional help you say?
Exactly.
DiscoGary wrote:
This is the problem. We expect some "bureaucrat" somewhere to fix this for us. It won't happen.
If they asked for input from athletes and coaches what kind of responses do you think they'd get? What did the athletes, coaches, and parents in CT say? Nothing! They're scared to death about what the PC fascists will do to them.
Everyone thinks someone sane somewhere will put an end to this insanity. Nope. No one is going to fix this. Who is publicly pushing back on this from a position of authority? No one.
How can you be so certain that the athletes, coaches, and parents in CT said nothing? Maybe they haven't said anything publicly, for the same reasons you mentioned. I could be wrong but it sounds like this issue only came up this year, without any time to discuss a potential rules change.
I just qualified for my first Boston last weekend. I ran as a 61 year old female because that is what I identified with as I signed up and ran. They tried to tell me that I was going to be DQd since I am (obviously) a 32 year old male. When I told them they were infringing on my rights and I was going to put this on social media and instagram to my 400+ followers, as well as contacting the ACLU, they relented. Whoo hoo. I wish I would have figured this out great scam sooner.
seattle dude wrote:
At some point the bureaucrats who make these inane rules, based on politics rather than the reality of sport, need to get out from behind their isolated, insulated desks and go out to talk to all the athletes and their coaches and get input from them.
I get the uneven playing field that can be created by rules and don't see it as necessarily beneficial to protect a tiny subset of the population's right to compete with an unfair advantage at the disadvantage of roughly half of the population.
The problem is, where do you draw the line? Is undergoing hormone treatment enough to qualify for the women's field? Do you have to be born a woman? What about women with unusually high testosterone levels? If a woman has testosterone levels 5x that of the average, or even 3, is she not allowed to compete? How do you regulate what is biologically and anatomically allowed for competition in the women's races, without conducting a comprehensive hormonal/biological analysis of every athlete in the field (which would obviously be asinine, especially at a high school/college level)?
My condolences go out to the Canton athlete who lost her chance to compete at the New England championships.
Question: Does anybody know if the Council of New England Secondary Schools Principals' Association who runs the New England Championships have different rules regarding this issue?
I say in order to compete as a transitioned transgender athlete you need medical confirmation, which means you have completed the transition process through hormone therapy.
The IAAF, state athletic associations, all sports federations need to come together on this.
I don't care what parts you have. When it comes to competition and physical characteristics it's all about hormones.
Alan
el rato mickey wrote:
That is fine. But is a huge gap to think some random guy is going to decide he is going to be state champion by entering the girls event. It isn't going to happen very often if at all.WTF? It happened in CT. That's what this whole thread is about.
And the point is that there are half dozen cases a year. You will not have random males (like the guy posting above) who are going to cheat to win the girls division. It will happen once or twice as a stunt and then not again.
Xanax wrote:
seattle dude wrote:At some point the bureaucrats who make these inane rules, based on politics rather than the reality of sport, need to get out from behind their isolated, insulated desks and go out to talk to all the athletes and their coaches and get input from them.
I get the uneven playing field that can be created by rules and don't see it as necessarily beneficial to protect a tiny subset of the population's right to compete with an unfair advantage at the disadvantage of roughly half of the population.
The problem is, where do you draw the line? Is undergoing hormone treatment enough to qualify for the women's field? Do you have to be born a woman? What about women with unusually high testosterone levels? If a woman has testosterone levels 5x that of the average, or even 3, is she not allowed to compete? How do you regulate what is biologically and anatomically allowed for competition in the women's races, without conducting a comprehensive hormonal/biological analysis of every athlete in the field (which would obviously be asinine, especially at a high school/college level)?
"Where do you draw the line?"
Your idea is indeed asinine, as you said. Testosterone may be a huge factor in determining success, but as has been pointed out numerous times in this discussion, it's far from the only advantage created by male physiology. You can contort yourself in knots, but almost no one but those who are the hapless products of Women's Studies Classes see a difficult conundrum.
Reread your own first paragraph. Stop there.
If you've been following the thread, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, moderates, the politically indifferent, and almost everyone else except for a very limited number of confused post-Modernist SJWs see a simple solution.
The girls' race is for girls.
Jordan Peterson wrote:
If you've been following the thread, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, moderates, the politically indifferent, and almost everyone else except for a very limited number of confused post-Modernist SJWs see a simple solution.
The girls' race is for girls.
Cool, you didn't answer the question at all. How is "girl" defined?
Sad State wrote:
My condolences go out to the Canton athlete who lost her chance to compete at the New England championships.
Question: Does anybody know if the Council of New England Secondary Schools Principals' Association who runs the New England Championships have different rules regarding this issue?
Mine as well. And I would be curious to know if the NE Championships have different rules. At this point, the right thing would be for Andraya's parents to be grateful for the season and pull Andraya out of New England's, thereby giving the Canton athlete her rightful chance to run.
Also, Stonington HS would have come in second in the Class M championships if their runner had been allowed to be the champion of the 100 and had been allowed to be second in the 200. That school's team really took a hit.
Xanax wrote:
The problem is, where do you draw the line? Is undergoing hormone treatment enough to qualify for the women's field? Do you have to be born a woman? What about women with unusually high testosterone levels? If a woman has testosterone levels 5x that of the average, or even 3, is she not allowed to compete? How do you regulate what is biologically and anatomically allowed for competition in the women's races, without conducting a comprehensive hormonal/biological analysis of every athlete in the field (which would obviously be asinine, especially at a high school/college level)?
The IAAF isn't exactly helping, by letting this complete muddle and farce develop out of its desire to be politically correct, and as a result, indirectly discriminating against half the population in the process. Its actually not that difficult. While there are several hormones dependent on people being XX or XY, testosterone is easily quantified by a blood test.
But in the case of Dutee Chand, the ruling didn't accept that testosterone gave a clear advantage in performance. The Court of Arbitration for Sport also ignored all other differences between the sexes and focussed on testosterone, because the IAAF has only ever had a rule requiring females to have less than 10 nmol/L (and it was dropped in 2015). Most females actually have testosterone levels lower than 3.08nmol/L, not the 10nmol/L previously permitted and most doctors say that XX women will never even approach 5nmol/L, never mind 10.
I'm not sure that I believe that "hyperandroginism" exists. I do believe that male XY individuals with poor sensitivity to testosterone exist, but that doesn't make them female and should not give them the right to compete against XX individuals. I do believe that Klinefelter's and Turner Syndrome exist (extra chromosomes) but since they cause life limiting physical problems, it is highly unlikely that any athletes have them.
Its incredible that XY men think that taking HRT, with its tiny levels of female hormones to assist menopausal women, alleviates all the physical differences between the sexes. And obviously no healthy woman of reproductive age would be affected by taking HRT, because the levels of female hormones contained in it would be so miniscule compared to what they produce naturally that it would have minimal effect.
Its also incredible that the whole issue is clouded in a lack of information, presumably to protect and mollycoddle the XY individuals who are winning medals against XX women, lest they become upset. It is a very biased response against women, but lets face it, until the 1980s, women were barely allowed to race in distance races at all!
Also, cases like the one in the UK involving the "transgender" athlete Lauren Jeska, who stabbed 3 UK Athletics officials as a result of being investigated for stopping taking female hormones and thus racing at an advantage against women, aren't publicised enough, in this race to enable men to race against women.
http://www.athleticsweekly.com/news/fell-runner-lauren-jeska-jailed-for-attempted-murder-of-uk-athletics-official-58771BlaseBill wrote:
But in the case of Dutee Chand, the ruling didn't accept that testosterone gave a clear advantage in performance. The Court of Arbitration for Sport also ignored all other differences between the sexes and focussed on testosterone, because the IAAF has only ever had a rule requiring females to have less than 10 nmol/L (and it was dropped in 2015). Most females actually have testosterone levels lower than 3.08nmol/L, not the 10nmol/L previously permitted and most doctors say that XX women will never even approach 5nmol/L, never mind 10.
Then get rid of sex categories completely and just have testosterone level categories instead. This would be like having weight categories in boxing or weightlifting. If testosterone can be quickly measured just have it done at regular intervals and on the night before or within a few hours of the competition. The last measurement would be like boxers weighing in before their fights. Every competitor would be free to identifiy as male or female in this scencario without causing any problems to their competitors.