Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Sheilbh]

I don't know if you can apply every day social realities (trans women are women and should be treated as such) and spaces like sports. Women's division exist for "fairness" in competition. Whatever that nebulous fact of that fairness entails. So I flip flop on whether person who is XY (or XXY) should be able to compete in women's events. And I agree with Sophie and  don't think a hetero male would undergo the rigours to compete at an advantage*. That's not where my reservation sit. I fall on the "wont someone think of the women" side of the equation, I guess.

*there weird outliers like the brouhaha in the Canadian women's weight lifting federation where a non transitioned and hormonally unmodified contestant participated.

Yeah I broadly agree and my view is that I'm not sure there is a consistent answer that will be "fair" in all cases and in all circumstances. So probably take it sport by sport.

[Josquius]

And to the Olympian's are genetic freaks argument, sex provides advantages over an above genetic "gifts", which is why the average male would outcompete the average female (ignoring the trained male vs female). But the idea is why I do sometimes reconsider. Although, beyond like the Olympics season I don't really think about it

The average male who has just gone through years of rigorous hormone therapy?
Iirc the science shows there's a slight advantage remaining in running speeds but for weight lifting the advantage is gone.
So yes.
As you said in the other post leave it sport by sport.
 But even in those that veer towards men having a big advantage stay clear of an outright literal ban, even if there is a practical one

The problem is how to be inclusive of trans folks, treating them fairly, but making sure they don't retain any natural advantages from being formerly male, whilst at the same time not screwing things up for cis women who won the genetic lottery for doing their sport.

[Sheilbh]

The average male who has just gone through years of rigorous hormone therapy?

But to be clear you do not need to have gone through any hormone therapy as a trans person to be living in your gender and treated as such.

And legally in the UK gender recognition has nothing to do with hormones or any other medical procedures, which I think is right. It shouldn't have anything to do with that.

[Sophie Scholl]

One of the other issues with trans athletes is that new rules are popping up that any trans woman who went through male puberty is forbidden from competing regardless of how long they've been on HRT (hormone replacement therapy). This is going on at the same time that any trans healthcare for youth is being heavily restricted or outright banned. Those will combine for a more or less de facto ban on all trans women athletes in competitions. Which sucks.

Heck, even current folks generally have only had access to support and care of any legitimate and semi-easy to obtain format in this century and more specifically in the past decade.

[crazy canuck]

I mean, Michael Phelps might as well have been designed in a lab for the express purpose of being an amazing swimmer due to all of his genetic quirks. He absolutely demolished the competition due to those quirks and yet he is celebrated as one of the greatest Olympians ever. Weird how that works. 

(For the record, I am perfectly fine with him winning as much as he did and think it was perfectly fair.)

Yeah, there seems to be an implicit assumption that Olympic gold medalists are normal human beings.  As you explained with the Phelps example, they are exceptional, in every sense of that word.

[Josquius]

The average male who has just gone through years of rigorous hormone therapy?

But to be clear you do not need to have gone through any hormone therapy as a trans person to be living in your gender and treated as such.

And legally in the UK gender recognition has nothing to do with hormones or any other medical procedures, which I think is right. It shouldn't have anything to do with that.

Sure.
But this goes back towards the fallacies the transphobes love to put up. That at the next women's world cup Messi and the gang will just rock up in skirts.

Obviously if you identify as a woman but have made FA effort to actually change your sex you're clearly excluded from high level women's sports - though there is a tricky debate around the low levels there. Sadly it can't be left to common sense with the number of terfs and bigots out there.

[grumbler]

Which was necessary due to the prudishness of the times and men and women existing in two quite seperate worlds with the idea of them playing sport together quite outlandish.
The stuff you hear these days about giving women a fair shot didn't really come into it.

What "times" were these?  Mixed Doubles Tennis (men and women playing the sport together) was played at the 1900 Olympics and in 1892 in the US Open.  Outlandish!

[Josquius]

Which was necessary due to the prudishness of the times and men and women existing in two quite seperate worlds with the idea of them playing sport together quite outlandish.
The stuff you hear these days about giving women a fair shot didn't really come into it.

What "times" were these?  Mixed Doubles Tennis (men and women playing the sport together) was played at the 1900 Olympics and in 1892 in the US Open.  Outlandish!

1912 or thereabouts at Wimbledon iirc.
Your answer is there in these dates. All curiously around the end point of the reign for which the age is named.

[grumbler]

Which was necessary due to the prudishness of the times and men and women existing in two quite seperate worlds with the idea of them playing sport together quite outlandish.
The stuff you hear these days about giving women a fair shot didn't really come into it.

What "times" were these?  Mixed Doubles Tennis (men and women playing the sport together) was played at the 1900 Olympics and in 1892 in the US Open.  Outlandish!

1912 or thereabouts at Wimbledon iirc.
Your answer is there in these dates. All curiously around the end point of the reign for which the age is named.

Women's tennis was first played at the Olympics in, guess:  1900.  The very same year as mixed doubles tennis.  The first organized tennis tournament in the US was in 1880, and included mixed doubles.

I don't think that some consideration of "outlandishness" explains women's sports.  Occam's Razer, history, and common sense tell us that it was because women were disadvantaged in many sports and so play was separated (where it was) in the name of fair competition.

[Valmy]

Yeah well competition isn't fair at the highest levels. All sorts of luck and genetics go into it.

I think occam's razor and history clearly demonstrate that the segregation of sports along gender lines is entirely because most everything was segregated on gender lines. Keeping men and women separate is a key component in keeping women in their place.

[HVC]

Yeah well competition isn't fair at the highest levels. All sorts of luck and genetics go into it.

I think occam's razor and history clearly demonstrate that the segregation of sports along gender lines is entirely because most everything was segregated on gender lines. Keeping men and women separate is a key component in keeping women in their place.

Wait, wouldn't keeping women in their place entail NOT having segregated sports in the olden days? No better way to keep them off the field and in the kitchen then by making them compete against men for their spots.

[Sheilbh]

Wait, wouldn't keeping women in their place entail NOT having segregated sports in the olden days? No better way to keep them off the field and in the kitchen then by making them compete against men for their spots.

Yeah, exactly.

Not in all sports but on average. People talk about luck and genetic freaks which is true at the very top, but I think there is also a general on average element. But there's a very good reason for having women's sport which is to enable participation and winning - the sports then often develop differently. I'm always struck at the difference (and both are good) between women's and men's football or tennis for example.

[Josquius]

Yeah well competition isn't fair at the highest levels. All sorts of luck and genetics go into it.

I think occam's razor and history clearly demonstrate that the segregation of sports along gender lines is entirely because most everything was segregated on gender lines. Keeping men and women separate is a key component in keeping women in their place.

Wait, wouldn't keeping women in their place entail NOT having segregated sports in the olden days? No better way to keep them off the field and in the kitchen then by making them compete against men for their spots.

Only if you have an Outlook that winning is everything.
Having women interfering in mens business and acting so indecent...

[HVC]

Yeah well competition isn't fair at the highest levels. All sorts of luck and genetics go into it.

I think occam's razor and history clearly demonstrate that the segregation of sports along gender lines is entirely because most everything was segregated on gender lines. Keeping men and women separate is a key component in keeping women in their place.

Wait, wouldn't keeping women in their place entail NOT having segregated sports in the olden days? No better way to keep them off the field and in the kitchen then by making them compete against men for their spots.

Only if you have an Outlook that winning is everything.
Having women interfering in mens business and acting so indecent...

But they wouldn't get far enough to interfere. And as grumbler shows above, where fairness is kept (equal and required teams) coed sports do exist. Hardly a way to keep the weak fainting women out of men's hair.

[HVC]

Also, as for the outlook about winning not being everything, no one is as relaxed and uncompetitive as Olympic athletes