Austin Killips becomes first trans cyclist to win UCI women's stage race

capedcrusader wrote:

I am a bit late to this gender wars malarky, could anyone please enlighten me as to whether:

a) Gender reassigned people are only allowed to compete - which I would feel is kinda okay as they've gone the whole hog.

b) Transgender athletes are allowed whereby they lower their testosterone levels to match cisgendered women - which I would be against. 

Thanks.

B

To play devil's advocate, is it fair to be born with elite physiological capabilities?

No but you are competing with other "freaks" who are operating within similar bounds to yourself. At the elite level of almost any sports the top performers are genetic freaks. Usually injury resistent, abile to train hard without wearing out their bodies and have natural adaptations that make them good at a given sport. 

Now those people who are genetically gifted and have worked their arses off for 20 years are being beaten by genetic men who haven't an ounce of the talent but have essentially doped for decades before dropoing into womens sport with an unholy advantage. 

You only have to look at the trans women pre-transition and post to see that almost all of them go from middle of the pack to absolutely elite. Thats not right. 

The argument about working their arses off is BS as well. They all do. They think that just because they work hard means that they can stomp all over womens sport because they have earned it. No. I have zero issue with trans people in sport but they shouldn't be in womens sport. Your rights don't take precidence over everyone elses. 

"Your rights don't take precedence over everyone else's."  Nailed it right there.  Are we sympathetic to the challenges you face and would we like you to be included in a fair competition?  Yes, by all means.  Should you be in a competition in which you have an unfair advantage, admittedly through no decision of your own but nonetheless so?  No.

"Your rights don't take prec[e]dence over everyone elses."

Exactly. Two days ago there was an interview on a German radio with the lawyer of a Ghanaian intersexual football player. Her only argument were the human rights of these sportspeople, no word about the implications for the competition and the other competitors.

Now as far as I'm concerned sporting competitions could be ended today, and I wouldn't shed a tear given what they have largely become, a money-spinning business for the profit of the few. This won't happen anytime soon though I wager, so in the meantime, there have to be fair rules for everyone.

I'm - of course - totally in favour of the rights of trans, intersexual and other such people, but as you say, they can't trump every- and anyone else's.

"A fair competition" has long been confused with and by various class differentiations - by gender, age, weight and (at times) so-called race. "You should be excluded from this competition because you're in a class not approved of or liked in The Bigwigs' class system".

To cut the Gordian knot, why not do away with all these spurious classifications of people-types? Let all types of folk compete together in this or that mass participation event, with the places decided purely on their ability at the sport in question.

Of course, this will annoy those who like to bring their various prejudices about various imaginary classes of people to the sporting event. "I am a man so it shouldn't be allowed that a woman beats me as they are supposed to be weak and servile".  "Orange-white folk are superior so should never be allowed to be beaten by someone purple-yellow coloured". 

The essence of sport is: let the best person at the sport win. Supposed aspects of a person other than their ability at this or that sport are really irrelevant - unless the objective is not so much the sporting test of ability as the strict practice of hoary old Victorian ideological/religious people-classifications.

And there's nothing to stop the highly variegated participants of open mass events being awarded prizes or wins according to these various people-classifications, if that's "the culture". On the other hand, what would you think if there was a prize for "best brown-skinned person" or "fastest person with a low IQ"? 

Names and places will surely do.

Great, I'm looking forward to no woman ever winning a major trophy in any speed- or strength-based sport again, and boxing is going to be magnificent when the upstart flyweights have to mix it with men twice their size. 

In fact, it's pretty arbitrary that we restrict some sports to "humans" on the say-so of some fusty Victorian naturalist who probably supported eugenics. Let's see Constitution Hill lining up in the 10,000m and see how the Kenyans get on then. 

If you don't want women to have a chance of sporting success on a fair basis, just say so. 

Brauchsel wrote:

Great, I'm looking forward to no woman ever winning a major trophy in any speed- or strength-based sport again, and boxing is going to be magnificent when the upstart flyweights have to mix it with men twice their size. 

In fact, it's pretty arbitrary that we restrict some sports to "humans" on the say-so of some fusty Victorian naturalist who probably supported eugenics. Let's see Constitution Hill lining up in the 10,000m and see how the Kenyans get on then. 

If you don't want women to have a chance of sporting success on a fair basis, just say so. 

I see you're replete with the bog-standard current assumptions concerning the class systems employed to exclude these folk from competing against those folk. "I'm looking forward to no women ever winning .... etc.").  As a mental experiment, how about if Beryl Burton could be a team member of a currently succesful men's professional cycling team?  Do you think she would get dropped .... or even beaten? 

But you classification differentiators have this great advantage in these discussions - your support and enforcement of these class systems mean that you have a self-fulfilling prohecy. No women (or others class-type) excluded from your competitions because "they're not one of class N" will ever win an all-comers competition because they never get the chance to.

Instead of sticking to blind prejudices and arranging the world to suit them, why not actually try the alternatives and see what happens?  Reality always trumps ideology. 

"No women (or others class-type) excluded from your competitions because "they're not one of class N" will ever win an all-comers competition because they never get the chance to."

Have a look at the men's and women's world records in any athletics event. Even Flo-Jo, probably doped beyond the gills, didn't have a PB that would see her anywhere near the standard of even a moderate professional male sprinter. 

Serena Williams was on record as saying that she'd be lucky to win a game against a top-100 male player, let alone a match. Do you know more about her tennis ability than she does? (Bobby Riggs was 55 when he lost to King).

Professional women's football teams have lost (heavily) to teams of 15-year-old boys.

I know Beryl Burton set some all-comers UK records (at long distances, where the sex gap is smaller) and she was a tremendous athlete. I'd be surprised if she'd have any chance of winning a pro-level men's race, just as Vos or van Vleuten wouldn't.

The alternative has been tried, and we've seen what happens. Reality does indeed trump ideology. 

"Serena Williams was on record as saying that she'd be lucky to win a game against a top-100 male player, let alone a match."

Karsten Braasch, 30 years old and ranked 203, smoking and drinking beer during changeovers, beat her 6-1, and just afterwards her sister 6-2 in 1998

"If you don't want women to have a chance of sporting success on a fair basis, just say so."

But when "women" compete with "men" on a fair basis "men" nearly always come out on top. It is not just speed and strength competitions where the difference shows, what about darts and snooker (just the first two sports or games which spring to mind) when everyone competes together? In case you haven't noticed, the "men" come out on top. Does that seem fair?  There must be a distinction between classes but it is beyond me to come up with an answer which will please everyone