Transgender Olympians and the Future of Female Sport Part 2

Post Reply New Topic

I thought about necroing the old thread, but the original video is gone and it's a bit stale and musty. So I thought it might be better to make a new one. This is Dr. Emma Hilton, something of a hero in TERF circles talking about the physical differences between the sexes and the bizarre decisions of the International Olympic Committee:



As always, avoid being mean to trans folks, lest the mods come down on you like Fallon Fox.

The solution is simple.

If a physical trait is unfair, then ban it for all women.

well, behind everything is money
since gdp depends less on pruduction then on consumption,
every mean is valid, hence there's big pharma and big cosmectics
the "new" religion of psychology ties it all §§beneficially together

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... edirect=on (can't read that but the title)
big pharmaceutical companies are spending far more on marketing than research

Disease Economy: How the United States economy runs on "treating" chronic disease
https://www.naturalnews.com/019337_dise ... harma.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y73K2UO9nKU Hardcore Profits Part One BBC Porn Documentary

Well couldent they have womens sports, mens sports and transgender sports.

Like IDk I am not a sports person but seem the easier solution than constantly debating all this stuff is have womens sports, mens sports and transgender sport. But that said I never have really understood the appeal of sports ball to begin with.

That would be a fair solution, sure. But considering people are already complaining that women's sports don't generate the same revenue as men's sports, imagine how fractional trans sports would be.

The immediate response to that suggestion is "so... you're saying transwomen aren't women?"

Like having, or having once had, the genitalia of the opposite sex? I can see that.

This might disqualify Lorena Bobbitt but she could argue that she only borrowed them temporarily.

The central problem with Hilton's argument is that it's simply obvious that the current restrictions are working. Trans women have been competing alongside cis women for decades (and in the Olympics since 2004), and yet women's sports remain dominated, as you'd expect, by cis women. That suggests that the current restrictions aren't given trans women an advantage. If anything, the hormone blockers they take seem to give them a disadvantage in sports where muscle is important.

We've already seen cis women like Caster Semenya and Dutee Chand being subject to invasive testing, public humiliation, and having her gender questioned as a result of "trans panic". Introduce more stringent requirements for qualifying as a woman and you'll just subject more women to that sort of treatment. When a man is exceptional he is hero worshipped. When a woman is exceptional she's scrutinised by the gender police.

And of course, if you force people to compete as their assigned sex then you're going to end up with trans men competing as women. There was a case in Texas where a teenage boy taking testosterone was forced to compete with girls in wrestling. He won every single match.

Finally, what does the actual science say about this? See for yourself: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27699698

I never understood this controversy.

Sports have never been "fair" to begin with. Many cis women have HUGE biological advantages over other cis women. Many cis men have HUGE biological advantages over other cis men.

Why do I only hear complaints about the supposed advantages trans women have over other women?

https://nypost.com/2019/03/04/trans-ath ... ns-sports/

Might as well have banned Micheal Phelps from swimming competitions.

Pictured: "supposed advantages"

On the same note, is it just a coincidence that when I google "fractured skull women's mma", the only two instances I can find referenced are both women who went up against Fallon Fox?

Don't know and don't care. Sports will never be fair. I don't understand the point in whining and complaining about this stuff.

It's certainly a growing dilemma is sports. There are many competitors which have this dilemma:

Transexual
Intersexual (Caster Semenya)
Disabled with prosthesis better that natural

Remember, it's only a game . Yeah, that opinion goes nowhere fast.

I've experienced the prosthesis category myself. I run in races where the 1st place often goes to a wheelchair competitor. And one year a young woman with one prosthetic foot would come flying by me .

Sympathy with the smaller women - Lord knows I’ve had to tackle people who were bigger than me before - but that doesn’t justify banning the other woman from sport.

Well, I called your bluff and I did just that. And what did I find...

This literature review is mainly concerned with subjective experience of transgender individuals in sport. It looks at 8 studies the aims of which are listed as follows:

- To explore two transgender male individuals’ experiences of sport in an educational and recreational environment
- To explore the experience of a transgender female participating in women’s national ice hockey tournaments
- To explore androgen deprivation and androgen administration in transgender people
- To explore transgender people’s experiences of sport in relation to social exclusion and minority stress theory
- To explore the relationship between gender identity and physical activity
- To explore the experiences of transgender athletes, paying particular attention to whether gender identity or performance was related to participation
- To understand the issues surrounding transgender athletes' sport participation, specifically in relation to men’s netball in New Zealand
- To examine the re-negotiation of sex-based boundaries within the context of transgender inclusion in North American lesbian softball leagues

Mostly interviews, surveys etc and one exception: the bolded study, the only one that had experimental data on biological differences that might actually concern fairness in competition. It's the study Dr. Emma starts talking about at about 7:55 in the original video.

She says something along the lines of:

[They found] that muscle area in transwomen had decreased but remained significantly higher than in control females.

Or going to the source:

The conclusion is that androgen deprivation in M – F increases the overlap in muscle mass with women but does not reverse it, statistically. The question of whether reassigned M – F can fairly compete with women depends on what degree of arbitrariness one wishes to accept, keeping in mind, for instance, that similar blood testosterone levels in men have profoundly different biologic effects on muscle properties,rendering competition in sports intrinsically a matter of how nature endows individuals for this competition.

The rest is a fairly reasonable statement, translated into the literature review as:

Therefore, Gooren and Bunck concluded that transgender male individuals are likely to be able to compete without an athletic advantage 1-year post-cross-sex hormone treatment. To a certain extent this also applies to transgender female individuals; however, there still remains a level of uncertainty owing to a large muscle mass 1-year post-cross-sex hormones. While this study was the first to explore, experimentally, whether transgender people can compete fairly, the sample size was relatively small (n = 36). Additionally, they did not explore the role of testosterone blockers and did not directly measure the effect cross-sex hormones had on athletic performance (e.g. running time).

So that's all we get from this review. "Transfemales might have an advantage when it concerns muscle mass, but this study is small and bad so meh f**k you you're only going to read the headlines anyway".

That's it. The rest is about transgender feelings and not having support from sports authorities and the policies various sports associations or clubs employ. Hardly a slam dunk Walrus...

The good doctor also mentions several other studies done between 2004 and 2015 (this review was published in 2017). More studies on bone mass/ skeletal structure, musculature and athletic performance. All suggesting (some with further analysis) at least a potential competitive advantage. All mysteriously missing from this literature review. Welcome to Modern Science ladies and gentlemen.



Does it? According to your own link the primary barrier is:

In relation to sport-related physical activity, this review found the lack of inclusive and comfortable environments to be the primary barrier to participation for transgender people. This review also found transgender people had a mostly negative experience in competitive sports because of the restrictions the sport's policy placed on them.

Not effective policies on competitive fairness.