Transgender woman CeCe Telfer currently sits at #2 in NCAA D2 100 hurdles - Watch her DOMINATE here (video)

The way that rojo jumps the gun on some things and doesn't look at the details or consider the nuance makes me want to visit this site less.

What the founding fathers wanted to protect was “robust public debate”. The concept, should be understood by a reasonable person to mean that, rather than arguing over whether the form of a comment is a conversation stopper or conversation starter, or whether the public forum is Twitter or Let’s Run, or how much snarkiness is acceptable, or whether they give their real name or remain anonymous, people should be able to express their opinions on matters of public concern without fear of reprisal from the government. Robust debate means people can express unsupported opinions criticizing other people who rely on legal precedents and legal experts to support their opinions.

BTW, when your conclusion is not clear, saying “clearly” in front of it doesn’t make it more convincing.

I wonder how the coach would feel if he had daughters who were losing to trans athletes. Or saw all the women's records being decimated by trans athletes - but not athletes he was coaching. Would he be ok with trans athletes sharing the same changing room facilities and showers with his female athletes, or his daughters? I know women who wouldn't be happy with that. Being supportive of someone's competitive aspirations isn't without its complications in cases such as these. For myself, the issue is ultimately clear-cut: whatever the gender identification a person may have their biological sex is the crucial factor in sporting categories that are biological and not social or cultural. XY athletes have no place in women's sport. This has nothing to do with whatever other roles they may play in society.

sub sub elite local hobby jogger wrote:

The way that rojo jumps the gun on some things and doesn't look at the details or consider the nuance makes me want to visit this site less.

Jumped the gun on what specifically? And what details and nuance?

I have read almost everything on this site regarding competition and allowing a male who identifies as a female to compete against other females. I remain conflicted. On one hand, for the athlete, the overwhelming desire to be identified as and respected as a female athlete must be important on many levels -emotionally, physically and mentally.

However, as the mother of a female D! athlete, as well as two male athletes who also compete at a high level, it is an unfair comparison to have a female (previously identified as a male) step onto a track, dive into a pool or otherwise be compared to another female.

To provide a different perspective on this point, my youngest, at 14, and a swimmer, has already attained 6 Olympic Trial cuts for female swimmers (He is 5' 6" and 115 lbs). By comparison, he only has one Winter Junior National Cut for boys and is still a far cry away from attaining even one Olympic Trial cut for a male. The reality is that if he were to compete as a female-even as a high school sophomore, against some of the best collegiate females in the country, he would quite simply be one of the best. As a male, he wouldn't even crack the top 200.

This doesn't mean the transgender athlete should be dismissed and I certainly would not want anyone to be discouraged from competing in sports. What is to be gained from the process of training and competition is invaluable to anyone who chooses to take advantage of what any sport has to offer.

But part of sport is fair play. And part of fair play should be acknowledging that a male is biologically stronger and faster than a female. It just is what it is. And, therefore, it would seem that all of these comments about what is fair and for whom really is just a way of saying that if you think its unfair for females you must be a bigot, and if you think its unfair for the transgender athlete you are somehow more evolved.

But trying to protect the transgender athlete, regardless of whether the motivation is good, will ultimately hurt female athletics and biologically born female athletes- simply because they will always remain at a biological disadvantage to their transgender biologically born male counterparts.

All of the name calling, and angry rhetoric won't change that simple fact. And if sport really is about fair play, then perhaps engaging in a fair and mindful discussion will result in a fair and mindful solution. Hopefully greater minds will find one.

You may want to look into learning more about what is and isn't transphobic speech. What you're doing here is outing a trans person's dead name, and opening a wide array of attention that Cece Telfer may not want.

I get what you are saying here, but the NCAA, is first and foremost about education. Yes the competition is serious, but ultimately its connected and supported by educational institutions. Because of that being equal and accepting is a pillar of the organization, not cut throat sports competition.

And what is most important to remember is that, the number of people who are transgendered and also in a focused state of mind to compete at a high level in athletics is extremely tiny. Being transgendered in this country is extremely painful and difficult, the rate of suicide and murder for this group of people is very high, mainly due to bigots as shown on this thread.

Thus the NCAA rules around MTF transgendered people will not have your expected results on female sports. If you accept the premise that desperate men will not fake being transgendered, in order to be successful in women's sports. This should be accepted because only specialized doctors give these hormone suppressants out for transgendered people, and those that do, ensure the person has been transitioning for quite sometime, changing their name and appearance, before the hormones can even begin. In addition the NCAA requires 1 year of hormones, so that is something like a 2 year process of living like a women, in order to win at womens sports in college....I doubt any normal person would do that. With that said, I would not be surprised if CeCe was already on hormone suppressants long before she officially transitioned to the womens team for NCAA (it has to be at least 1 year) and yes they do test testosterone levels, which would easily explain why there was no change in her performances since switching teams. Additionally if you have ever known someone to transition you would know its one of the best things that could ever happen to them after their entire lives of living a lie...

I think some of the people on this thread has never met a transgendered person or befriended one, to know really what its like. I've been lucky to have two friends who transitioned, and sadly one of them committed suicide. Its very frustrating for me when I read people who just don't get it, even a little a bit....

Congrats CeCe, woman to woman... great work!

The only lie that's being lived is that someone can change from male to female. It's just not possible. And no, I'm not talking about the minuscule number of folks born with both sets of reproductive organs. If you were born a male, you're always a male. Anything else is just semantics.

ClaireHuxtable wrote:

You may want to look into learning more about what is and isn't transphobic speech. What you're doing here is outing a trans person's dead name, and opening a wide array of attention that Cece Telfer may not want.

I have not been reading this thread, but it's nuts if we can't discuss facts or mention what's someone's past name was. I'm all for calling Cece whatever she wants to be called and using the gender pronoun she prefers. But I don't see any problem in mentioning her past name.

I guess Robert could have written, "Transgender woman CeCe Telfer, who was born and raised as a male and competed on the Franklin Pierce University men’s track and field team during her first three years of college, won the women’s 400-meter hurdles national title at the 2019 NCAA Division II Outdoor Track & Field Championships. "

instead of mentioning that she competed as "Craig Telfer". But I don't really see much difference. Plus mentioning her name is useful for anyone who wants to look up her times when she was competing as a man.

One could just as easily argue it's transphobic to mention the fact she competed as a male last year. Where is one supposed to draw the line?

Is it transphobic if someone mentions that Bruce Jenner won the 1976 Olympic decathlon gold?

My wife is in the process of changing her last name. Is it offensive for someone to mention what her maiden name was?

It is incredibly insensitive to mention a trans persons' former name, that is the line, mentioning CeCe competed for the mens team last year is not dead naming CeCe, saying her former name, is and it's unnecessary.

"If the individual uses a name different from the one assigned to them at birth, refrain from repeating or publishing that name without their explicit consent, which is sometimes called deadnaming." (HRC guide to transgender coverage)

But obviously you have not been close to someone transitioning to know why it is a very touchy subject. It is far more complex then what your wife is going through, changing her last name.... But I do applaud you for using CeCe's preferred pro-nouns.

You could try reading this book: She's Not There: A Life in Two Genders

“She’s been been incredibly motivated this year and I think the transition one million percent had something to do with that. It’s like night and day as far as what she was willing to do as an athlete and how committed she was,” said Emerson

Well duh. Going from a 200th ranked male to a top ranked female give you the motivation to win a national title. Luckily he/she will graduate and this will be behind us... Until the next shifty scammer comes around.

ClaireHuxtable wrote:

You may want to look into learning more about what is and isn't transphobic speech. What you're doing here is outing a trans person's dead name, and opening a wide array of attention that Cece Telfer may not want.

Of course Cece doesn't want attention. She wants everyone to accept that she is a great athlete and every other female athlete had a chance of doing what she's done if they only trained as hard and were as dedicated. She doesn't want anyone telling you she only ran so fast because of her y chromosome. But the fact is she has xy chromosomes and is going to have to accept scrutiny over that fact anytime she competes as a woman athlete. If I changed my name today, I wouldn't expect what I did under my previous name not to be a part of my history and Cece shouldn't either. Katelyn Jenner wants to be respected as a woman, but still takes credit for winning the olympics.

sbeefyk2 wrote:

“She’s been been incredibly motivated this year and I think the transition one million percent had something to do with that. It’s like night and day as far as what she was willing to do as an athlete and how committed she was,” said Emerson

Well duh. Going from a 200th ranked male to a top ranked female give you the motivation to win a national title. Luckily he/she will graduate and this will be behind us... Until the next shifty scammer comes around.

Will it? What's to say USATF won't let CeCe run at nationals? What's to say she can't keep competing unattached or even get in pro meets as a woman?

Taught history wrote:

What the founding fathers wanted to protect was “robust public debate”. The concept, should be understood by a reasonable person to mean that, rather than arguing over whether the form of a comment is a conversation stopper or conversation starter, or whether the public forum is Twitter or Let’s Run, or how much snarkiness is acceptable, or whether they give their real name or remain anonymous, people should be able to express their opinions on matters of public concern without fear of reprisal from the government. Robust debate means people can express unsupported opinions criticizing other people who rely on legal precedents and legal experts to support their opinions.

BTW, when your conclusion is not clear, saying “clearly” in front of it doesn’t make it more convincing.

The coach is certain welcome to share his opinions. But if his opinions show that he is not suited to mentor young men and women, then should absolutely lose his job. Nobody is threatening to throw him in jail.

If a high school teacher were to argue that adults should be able to have sex with minors on twitter, he'd be fired instantly and no jury in the world would find that to be a violation of his first amendment rights.

Martin V. Parrish is the best legal precedent you could cite, and it literally proves my point.

northeast female runner wrote:

But obviously you have not been close to someone transitioning to know why it is a very touchy subject. It is far more complex then what your wife is going through, changing her last name.... But I do applaud you for using CeCe's preferred pro-nouns.

You could try reading this book: She's Not There: A Life in Two Genders

I can see why it's a touchy subject but I don't think there is anything morally wrong with someone pointing out the factual name CeCe was competing under last year especially since people might want to look up past results.

I can see why some may not want that.

One could easily say it's offensive to say she's biologically male. People can take offense at anything.

But I guess in the other direction someone could say they're not going to call her CeCe "she". Personally I find that offensive and I think this all shows people take offense at different things. But just because HRC says something doesn't mean everyone has to follow it.

Well then....from this point on, I am identifying as a 12:50 5000 FEMALE runner and meeting Olympic qualifying standards. And even though I am not breaking 17:00 at this point, if anyone challenges me on it, I am claiming gender discrimination!! I’m sure I can find a few scuz-ball attorneys that will take that case. Funny....now that I mention it, I sure feel like a woman right now.

northeast female runner wrote:

It is incredibly insensitive to mention a trans persons' former name, that is the line, mentioning CeCe competed for the mens team last year is not dead naming CeCe, saying her former name, is and it's unnecessary.

"If the individual uses a name different from the one assigned to them at birth, refrain from repeating or publishing that name without their explicit consent, which is sometimes called deadnaming." (HRC guide to transgender coverage)

But obviously you have not been close to someone transitioning to know why it is a very touchy subject. It is far more complex then what your wife is going through, changing her last name.... But I do applaud you for using CeCe's preferred pro-nouns.

You could try reading this book: She's Not There: A Life in Two Genders

Isn't it insensitive to assume that all trans people are ashamed of their former names and history and don't want it mentioned?

Some might be very proud that they have overcome that and wish to encourage others. Some may equally be proud of who they used to be, without that detracting from who they are now.

Putting all trans people into the same box is insensitive. Stating facts is not insensitive.

I really appreciate Joanna Harper. A lot of trans activists kind of have their blinders on to how unfair it is to cisgender women. Parker Molloy just released this ridiculously long thread on twitter with all sorts of illogical arguments. Also it is such a slap in the face to cisgender women to suggest that being born XY is a "genetic advantage" as a woman, same as if someone was born tall or with fast twitch muscles. It is a slap in the face to all the work that women put in to fight for a playing field.

Keep in mind, women never asked to play alongside men during this fight. They asked for separate but equal.

The debate is ultimately quite simple. There are those who believe anyone has the right to be the gender they identify with and to be able to participate in all walks of life without discrimination or being subject to exclusion. Against that, there are those who say that this can't apply to sex categories in sport because they require to be biologically determined or they become unfair to the great majority of women if biological males are able to compete. Neither view can be reconciled with the other. They will never agree. I suspect that sports fans and participants largely fall into the latter group while non-sports fans are in the former.