June Eastwood runs 4:45 mile

Streak wrote:

June started the season with a 5:04 mile, for 2nd place. June then ran a 4:59 mile, for 2nd place one week ago.

Today June ran a 4:45 mile for 19th place at the Husky Classic. June was the 13th collegiate.

I am a female runner, and I don’t believe June should be competing against female runners. June is not female and therefore doesn’t belong in that category of competition.

0/10 no female runners visit this cesspool.

Smoove wrote:

June should live her best life, but we can’t sit here and conclude that hormone therapy negates the advantages of two decades of male biology.

We also can't conclude the reverse. Right now the evidence is that 12 months (or whatever) of hormones is a bigger disadvantage than 2 decades of male biology as she is a worse female runner than she was as a man. But I expect she is still adapting to her new reality and will get faster. Run 5s faster and we are talking comparable performances. Run 15 and we are talking about a pretty undeniable benefit.

all day i dream about shoes wrote:

Lol good freak out. If you're a female running a 4:45 mile than you're a nobody in competitive world. Nothing wrong with it. But nobody's really going to care about that slow a time.

Come back when June is crushing a 4:15 mile.

So out of touch

Maybe June does not identify as a male, but June does not struggle with the obstacles in running that a bonafide woman has to deal with. I am a female runner, and although I respect transgender and want them to have fulfilling lives without prejudice or discrimination, I do not think of transwomen as fellow women. There is so much more to being a woman than simply altering your hormones.

It is ridiculous to me that we are now inserting men into women's sports and actually debating the fairness of it. They are not women. Maybe they are not totally men either, I don't know. But they are not women. If you still have a penis, and you went through puberty as a male you are never going to be the equivalent of a natural born woman.

This is not harmless. Just because they have not taken over our sports just yet does not make this okay. How are we going to feel about this in 20 years when it could be an anomoly to see a natural born woman on a podium at all? It will be back to men's and more men's sports.

I am also white. If I suddenly identified as black and applied and won an scholarship that was meant for a black student, there would be freakin pandemonium. How is this different? Men have had all of the advantages for so long. Women finally get some equal footing and now we are expected to concede that back to men. This is so utterly ridiculous! Our PC society has jumped the shark.

Slo-Jo wrote:

Men have had all of the advantages for so long. Women finally get some equal footing and now we are expected to concede that back to men. This is so utterly ridiculous! Our PC society has jumped the shark.

You wouldn't be conceding it back to men. You are conceding it to transgenders, just as men conceded it to you. Of course, women had to fight for that power as it's never freely given away. In the same manner now transgenders are fighting women for power. Welcome to the club, Slo-Jo.

PS: Anyone who can't see June has put on a substantial amount of bodyfat is straight up blind. Based on the IAAF points table June is not performing at quite the same level Jonathan did.

June is also under a microscope now and can run less free then when he ran under his true sex.

It’s hard to track how much they’re slowed down they choose to identify as a different gender. Mental illness is too big of an x-factor to get reliable data.

got it in one.

you need to repost this every time.

i have huge sympathy for trans, but we need to have a fair women's competition. if trans want their own ....

What bothers me about the tone of discussion on this website (not from everyone, but from a fair number) is the vitriol directed towards the person. We should acknowledge that June is a person, treat her with respect, and understand why she might want to continue running competitively.

I am of the opinion (along with most on this site) that women’s running is a protected class of sport and should remain that way. Women (either intersex or males who have transitioned) with male biological features which bestow a measurable advantage should not be allowed to compete in the female class.

We should, however, recognize why these women want to compete. The answer usually (unlike how some on here would have you believe) is not because they want to win. These are individuals who identify as women who want to compete in the sport they love against other women. This shouldn’t result in personal attacks.

If there is a way for these transitioned or intersex individuals to compete with women where they DO NOT have a measurable advantage, we should applaud and encourage it. Ultimately, it may be impossible to impose a set of rules or criteria which allows this, as each sport/event requires a specific set of skills and everyone’s biology is different.

However, for better or worse, there is a current set of rules in the NCAA which June appears to be following. All evidence points to the fact that this rule (at least in June’s case) is having the desired outcome. She is performing no better now than she was as a male. Without further evidence, I don’t think we can call this unfair.

On the world scene 4:45 for a female isn't that good, but I think that a woman running 4:45 at the collegiate level is going to make a big enough impact on her team and conference to consider her pretty good. This debate though shouldn't be about whether 4:45 is good or about what time is good enough to make us care. If it is, then basically what we are saying is that transgender athletes can run up until a point where they meet some arbitrary standard of doing well. "You can be here, as long as you can't be successful. Once you get too good, you're out."

I think there are valid arguments on both sides as to whether a transgender athlete should be allowed to compete and under what set of circumstances (what treatments), but the argument cannot be that a transgender athlete can compete in the female category as long as she is slow.

+1 love this post. I get sick of the vitriol too. I hope people who believe this is unfair realize they aren't helping their case with sick comments. Because it just makes you appear hateful.

truth be told. wrote:

You really think taking hormones can change biologically fixed factors that are advantageous to men like height, heart size, blood volume? Educate us, please.

Since when is height an advantage in distance running? I am 6'1" and I sure see a lot of 5'7" guys ahead of me. As far as June Eastwood goes, now she has her male height but without the testosterone to move all that mass around. It seems like that is a disadvantage.

But to be honest, we have a very small sample size here. June seems about as fast as Jonathan, and the same goes for that one guy from Runners World like 15 years ago. We need more data.

I’ve said it once, I’ll say it 1,000 times.

Legalize everything, all PED’s, genetic modification, EvERYThiNg!

The masses need to know the absolute limit of human performance.

A 3:50 1500 is a 4:07 mile you idiot

Destroying women's sports, award after award.

https://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/june-eastwood-big-sky-tweet.jpg

Concerned Philosopher wrote:

Also ran an altitude adjusted 4:50 almost a month ago at a MSU indoor meet. Again as she ran 3:50 for 1500 that works out to about 4:38 if converted and the 12% rule is applied.

This!

June's 4:45, as a female, age grades (assuming an age of 20y) to a 88.54%

June's 3:50, at 1500m, as a male, age grades to 89.57%

So June was actually a little better relative to the men when she was running with them compared to now how good she is relative to her female competition (but the women's field is less deep so it doesn't necessarily appear that way)

The fact that June is performing exactly how a comparatively good cis female would perform is further evidence that when hormones are strictly managed over a long period of time the vast majority of the net male advantage goes away in distance running. Advantages may still remain, but the disadvantages of the transition appear to cancel out whatever remaining advantages a person keeps post-transition.

there was a poster in attendance who June was just cruising and someone else chimed in stating that June put on some weight.

I wouldn't be surprised to see June drop into the lower 4:30s soon.

just saying man wrote:

there was a poster in attendance who June was just cruising and someone else chimed in stating that June put on some weight.

I wouldn't be surprised to see June drop into the lower 4:30s soon.

Would it be that unusual for a woman to drop from 4:41 to the lower 4:30s. When entered in the male rales, her equivalent performance in a female race would be 4:41 (not 4:45). Sure if she runs 4:30 flat, that would be a big improvement. But if she drops down to say a 4:34, I think that would be within the range of normal improvement for an NCAA runner of a good year.

Yes, it would be unusual for a woman to drop that low.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

But.... June is a female and therefore does belong in that category.

?