Trans women and women's sports

[GuitarStv]

There has been a lot about trans women and women's sports in the news recently (and since one of the women's Olympic weight lifters this year will be a trans women, I expect that it will become even more in the spot light soon).  I've been thinking about the topic a lot, and discussing it with a family friend who is trans (although female -> male, so it doesn't directly impact his situation I guess)

Long story short, I think that the current 'debate' about trans people and women's sport is mostly stupid. It seems to be pitting a bunch of transphobic people against people who are pro-trans rights but seem to have little grip on physiology.  And I think there are a lot of reasonable people somewhere in the middle who aren't really being heard.  Anyway, balancing trans right with the purpose of women's sport is a complicated topic and it gets people very riled up. If you try to remove emotion from the debate and break things down logically though, I think that there is a better way to approach the issue.  This results in a few grey areas but mostly simple black and white rules that can be followed to both maximize the ability of trans women to compete as women while also keeping things fair for female athletes.





First, background. There are indisputable physiological differences between men and women. Given two athletes of the same size and training level, one male and one female, the guy will be stronger, carry more muscle mass, have denser bones, and have stronger tendons.  This directly translates into sport - running faster, jumping higher, moving more weight.  Men and women share the same genes and genetic makeup. The best current scientific explanation for the sexual dimorphism in humans is the effect of sex hormones on the body - predominantly testosterone vs estrogen (although a few others also play a role, these are the major ones).

OK, first tricky question.  Why does women's sports exist at all?  The name is kind of a misnomer- it has nothing to do with boobs and wieners. We need to think about it differently. Fundamentally, 'women's' sport exists to provide people with a different hormonal balance (and the physiological changes from this balance) a place to compete fairly against each other, so that they aren't all backbenched by people with more testosterone.  And there is a huge, measurable difference that has been estimated as a benefit of between 10 and 50% (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3) depending on the sport.  Incidentally, this is also why testosterone is one of the most heavily regulated performance enhancing drugs in sport - it's a huge benefit for just about all athletic activity and confers an unfair advantage.  Even when used by people who already have plenty of testosterone.

Tiny sidebar - Hold up GS!  Doesn't skill matter in sport?  Shouldn't a way more skilled person beat someone who's stronger?  Absolutely!  Floyd Mayweather is an incredibly skilled boxer, and was recently able to not only hold his own but also to win against a younger, taller, heavier, and stronger Logan Paul.  However, raw strength and speed is a huge advantage in most things.  We're talking about making sports fair here, and this means levelling the playing field so that someone who is hormonally disadvantaged doesn't need to be way more skilled than all the rivals in order to compete and hang in there.

Trans women are at an interesting intersection here, in that sometimes they have the hormonal balance of men, and sometimes women depending on what stage they are at in their treatment.  Trans men typically experience significant increase in musculature after undergoing hormone therapy (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31794605/) but nobody is complaining about trans men competing with men, so maybe we can leave that discussion for another day.



So given this, some thoughts in point form:
- Trans children before puberty should be allowed to play on whatever team they want. There is significantly less advantage pre-puberty as far as physiological differences go.
- Non-competitive high school and college sports post puberty should be open to whoever wants to play them. Trans women will have an advantage here, but at a non-competitive level, does that really matter? I believe that there is no reason to argue against inclusiveness here.
- No trans woman who has transitioned after puberty and has not completed hormone replacement therapy for an extended period should be allowed to compete in a competitive women's sport as a matter of fairness.  The period of time should correspond to the period of time necessary for the hormonal advantage conferred by years of testosterone to disappear.  This does not happen right away.  Studies I've read indicate that typically after 12 months of hormone therapy, a trans women shows very minimal difference in muscle mass (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3).  Even three years after hormone replacement has been undergone, trans women are still measuring higher than natural women for muscle mass (https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/28/bjsports-2020-103106).  There obviously needs to be some sort of waiting time to ensure that fairness. This point is likely to change depending upon the sport in question.  It is certainly dependent upon further research though, as there isn't enough that has been completed to say exactly what time this is*.  I believe that it's unfair to allow trans women to compete until we know when they will be competing fairly here.
- Competitive sports post puberty in high-school should allow trans women only if hormonal treatment was started before puberty (this effectively means that they have never experienced hormonal benefits, so there's no need for a waiting period). The current practice in some places of allowing trans women who have recently transitioned to play competitive women's high school sport is extremely unfair to female athletes and should end.
- Women like Castor Semenya who are natural women with all the lady bits and identify as women, but are born with significantly higher than normal male growth hormone should be required to chemically reduce these levels in order to compete fairly in women's sport just as any trans woman would.  This was a difficult position for me to accept, as I was previously holding on to the man/woman divide within women's sports rather than realizing that women's sport is largely about hormones and physiological changes from them, not being female.
- In similar vein, should natural born men with abnormally low levels of testosterone be allowed to compete in competitive women's sport?  I'm unclear on this, again - more research is necessary.

*If research shows that there are permeant sporting advantages due to bone density/tendon strength from undergoing puberty as a male before transitioning, then obviously the viability of competitive sport for post-puberty transitioned women not acceptable without some other redress (and the redress may depend upon what advantage is shown and what sport is being competed in).

This is the big open ended question regarding trans women in high level competitive sport right now - determining how much advantage is conferred by transitioning post-puberty.  We need more and better research to answer these open questions.  If ignore this we allow trans women to compete with obvious physical advantages I believe that we are risking long term doing damage to both women's and trans sport.  Women's sport will suffer as resentment over an unfair practice builds, trans sport will suffer as the transphobic will have real and very valid ammunition to use to argue against allowing trans women in sport at all.

[Kris]

If we truly must classify people into competitive groups, why not just do it by weight class? Or hell, by testosterone level, depending on the sport?

As you say, it has nothing to do (or should have nothing to do) with people’s genitals. Do away with “men’s” and “women’s” sports entirely, since the classifications are, at bottom, meaningless in sports.

[seattlecyclone]

Good thoughts. I am likewise all in favor of full inclusion in less-competitive situations. Seems like muscle mass does tend to revert more toward cisgender woman levels after some time on hormone replacement therapy. Height does not. Someone who went through puberty as a male will be taller than that same person who went through puberty as a female. That matters for some sports (basketball, volleyball), while it's little to no advantage in some other sports.

At what point does a height advantage become an unfair advantage? That's a fine question. Maybe it depends on the heights involved. Someone who grew up as a relatively average-height male and then transitions post-puberty will likely be shorter than most players in the WNBA, so they might as well be allowed to compete, while someone who reached 6'4" of height might be seen as unfairly tall to compete post-transition. I'm not sure where the line would be though.

[Kris]

Good thoughts. I am likewise all in favor of full inclusion in less-competitive situations. Seems like muscle mass does tend to revert more toward cisgender woman levels after some time on hormone replacement therapy. Height does not. Someone who went through puberty as a male will be taller than that same person who went through puberty as a female. That matters for some sports (basketball, volleyball), while it's little to no advantage in some other sports.

At what point does a height advantage become an unfair advantage? That's a fine question. Maybe it depends on the heights involved. Someone who grew up as a relatively average-height male and then transitions post-puberty will likely be shorter than most players in the WNBA, so they might as well be allowed to compete, while someone who reached 6'4" of height might be seen as unfairly tall to compete post-transition. I'm not sure where the line would be though.

Seems like anything is only ever considered an unfair advantage when it’s in women’s sports.

[GuitarStv]

If we truly must classify people into competitive groups, why not just do it by weight class? Or hell, by testosterone level, depending on the sport?

If we did by weight class, there would be few to no female competitors, which I believe would be a very negative outcome.

The problem with classifying by testosterone is that testosterone confers differences during puberty that don't go away immediately after suppressing it.

As you say, it has nothing to do (or should have nothing to do) with people’s genitals. Do away with “men’s” and “women’s” sports entirely, since the classifications are, at bottom, meaningless in sports.

I strongly agree with this.  There should be a different classification than men's and women's.  That's causing a lot of problems.

[Kris]

If we truly must classify people into competitive groups, why not just do it by weight class? Or hell, by testosterone level, depending on the sport?

If we did by weight class, there would be few to no female competitors, which I believe would be a very negative outcome.

The problem with classifying by testosterone is that testosterone confers differences during puberty that don't go away immediately after suppressing it.

As you say, it has nothing to do (or should have nothing to do) with people’s genitals. Do away with “men’s” and “women’s” sports entirely, since the classifications are, at bottom, meaningless in sports.

I strongly agree with this.  There should be a different classification than men's and women's.  That's causing a lot of problems.

No, there would be female competitors. Like in wrestling. You have different weight classes.

Hell, in basketball there could be different height classes. The top level for people 6’5” and up, then the next for 6’ to just under 6’5”, etc.

[shuffler]

- Women like Castor Semenya who are natural women with all the lady bits and identify as women, but are born with significantly higher than normal male growth hormone should be required to chemically reduce these levels in order to compete fairly in women's sport just as any trans woman would.  This was a difficult position for me to accept, as I was previously holding on to the man/woman divide within women's sports rather than realizing that women's sport is largely about hormones and physiological changes from them, not being female.
- In similar vein, should natural born men with abnormally low levels of testosterone be allowed to compete in competitive women's sport?  I'm unclear on this, again - more research is necessary.

This puts the lie to your whole scheme.  You're merely segregating into two arbitrary classes.  You've ignored the case of men who have abnormally high levels of testosterone, and who should have their own super-heavyweight-testosterone weight class (or who should take HRT in order to achieve "normal" male levels).  Nor have you addressed women with super low levels, who arguably ought to "dope" to achieve "normality".

The obvious ultimate conclusion of your plan would be to allow everyone to compete en masse and simply handicap the outcome based on individual (or cumulative team) testosterone level.  Then every event would simply be a question of which team could beat their handicapped point spread (or however else handicapping would be feasible in each sport).

Meh.  I'm not interested in your scheme or the logical extension of it that I've presented.  Nor am I interested in most professional competitive sport, in which the biggest bankrolls buy the best players with no allegiance to the local region.  So boring.

Rather than chemically measuring and altering people in order to produce perfectly spherical athletes for competition, I'd prefer that we culturally shift to emphasizing the value of physical exercise and exertion for everyone.  I used to do randonneuring (long distance cycling), and the results were listed alphabetically by the cyclists name.  Never ordered by finishing time.  It fostered camaraderie among the riders.  It encouraged less experienced and slower cyclists to participate.  More people of more shapes, sizes, and genders rode more miles and had more fun doing it.  I'd rather see more of that in the world.

[GuitarStv]

If we truly must classify people into competitive groups, why not just do it by weight class? Or hell, by testosterone level, depending on the sport?

If we did by weight class, there would be few to no female competitors, which I believe would be a very negative outcome.

The problem with classifying by testosterone is that testosterone confers differences during puberty that don't go away immediately after suppressing it.

As you say, it has nothing to do (or should have nothing to do) with people’s genitals. Do away with “men’s” and “women’s” sports entirely, since the classifications are, at bottom, meaningless in sports.

I strongly agree with this.  There should be a different classification than men's and women's.  That's causing a lot of problems.

No, there would be female competitors. Like in wrestling. You have different weight classes.

I've been involved in wrestling for many years, and classes are often taught mixed.  Women of the same weight as men are at significant disadvantage in the sport.  At high levels of competition there wouldn't be many women wrestling (generously, I'd estimate 50:1 male although it could be much higher).

Good thoughts. I am likewise all in favor of full inclusion in less-competitive situations. Seems like muscle mass does tend to revert more toward cisgender woman levels after some time on hormone replacement therapy. Height does not. Someone who went through puberty as a male will be taller than that same person who went through puberty as a female. That matters for some sports (basketball, volleyball), while it's little to no advantage in some other sports.

At what point does a height advantage become an unfair advantage? That's a fine question. Maybe it depends on the heights involved. Someone who grew up as a relatively average-height male and then transitions post-puberty will likely be shorter than most players in the WNBA, so they might as well be allowed to compete, while someone who reached 6'4" of height might be seen as unfairly tall to compete post-transition. I'm not sure where the line would be though.

Hell, in basketball there could be different height classes. The top level for people 6’5” and up, then the next for 6’ to just under 6’5”, etc.

This is an interesting point and one that I hadn't really considered much.  I think it would be sport dependent.  With certain sports like boxing height is not always an advantage (and in some cases, like gymnastics it can sometimes be a disadvantage), others like basketball or swimming it is much preferred.

We don't currently have any doping to improve height that I'm aware of, so I'm not sure this has been considered much.  Gut instinct makes me suspect that trans women athletes would experience much less pushback in the area of height.

[Kris]

If we truly must classify people into competitive groups, why not just do it by weight class? Or hell, by testosterone level, depending on the sport?

If we did by weight class, there would be few to no female competitors, which I believe would be a very negative outcome.

The problem with classifying by testosterone is that testosterone confers differences during puberty that don't go away immediately after suppressing it.

As you say, it has nothing to do (or should have nothing to do) with people’s genitals. Do away with “men’s” and “women’s” sports entirely, since the classifications are, at bottom, meaningless in sports.

I strongly agree with this.  There should be a different classification than men's and women's.  That's causing a lot of problems.

No, there would be female competitors. Like in wrestling. You have different weight classes.

I've been involved in wrestling for many years, and classes are often taught mixed.  Women of the same weight as men are at significant disadvantage in the sport.  At high levels of competition there wouldn't be many women wrestling (generously, I'd estimate 50:1 male although it could be much higher).

Good thoughts. I am likewise all in favor of full inclusion in less-competitive situations. Seems like muscle mass does tend to revert more toward cisgender woman levels after some time on hormone replacement therapy. Height does not. Someone who went through puberty as a male will be taller than that same person who went through puberty as a female. That matters for some sports (basketball, volleyball), while it's little to no advantage in some other sports.

At what point does a height advantage become an unfair advantage? That's a fine question. Maybe it depends on the heights involved. Someone who grew up as a relatively average-height male and then transitions post-puberty will likely be shorter than most players in the WNBA, so they might as well be allowed to compete, while someone who reached 6'4" of height might be seen as unfairly tall to compete post-transition. I'm not sure where the line would be though.

Hell, in basketball there could be different height classes. The top level for people 6’5” and up, then the next for 6’ to just under 6’5”, etc.

This is an interesting point and one that I hadn't really considered much.  I think it would be sport dependent.  With certain sports like boxing height is not always an advantage (and in some cases, like gymnastics it can sometimes be a disadvantage), others like basketball or swimming it is much preferred.

We don't currently have any doping to improve height that I'm aware of, so I'm not sure this has been considered much.  Gut instinct makes me suspect that trans women athletes would experience much less pushback in the area of height.

So, re wrestling: it’s already happening, then. Let it continue.

Yes, I suppose it would be sport dependent. But that is already true in terms of qualifications. Let’s choose non-gendered ways to segregate. Because the gendered ones don’t work.

[GuitarStv]

- Women like Castor Semenya who are natural women with all the lady bits and identify as women, but are born with significantly higher than normal male growth hormone should be required to chemically reduce these levels in order to compete fairly in women's sport just as any trans woman would.  This was a difficult position for me to accept, as I was previously holding on to the man/woman divide within women's sports rather than realizing that women's sport is largely about hormones and physiological changes from them, not being female.
- In similar vein, should natural born men with abnormally low levels of testosterone be allowed to compete in competitive women's sport?  I'm unclear on this, again - more research is necessary.

This puts the lie to your whole scheme.  You're merely segregating into two arbitrary classes.

Yes, absolutely I am.  We have (broadly speaking) two classes of people with respect to hormones (and hormone related physiological changes).  Historically we have segregated based upon this by relying on sex - which it turns out is not a very good way to do it.  My intent was to keep as close to the segregation that we currently have - this was intended to provide people with lower testosterone/higher estrogen levels a place where competition could take place more fairly.

You've ignored the case of men who have abnormally high levels of testosterone, and who should have their own super-heavyweight-testosterone weight class (or who should take HRT in order to achieve "normal" male levels).  Nor have you addressed women with super low levels, who arguably ought to "dope" to achieve "normality".

I don't think that I have ignored these men or women.  On the testosterone side, anything that's biologically natural goes.  On the estrogen side we are excluding the roughly 50% of humanity who has genetic advantages conferred by their hormone levels.

This is dealing with biology.  There is always going to be a range of outcomes.  There are taller people, stronger people, and people with different chemical make-ups.  If we want there to be a large number of high level 'estrogen' athletes (who are predominantly female), we need to make this allowance.  I both support and think that women's sport (or something similar of a different name) is a good idea for a variety of reasons.  We can discuss them further if you would like.

The obvious ultimate conclusion of your plan would be to allow everyone to compete en masse and simply handicap the outcome based on individual (or cumulative team) testosterone level.  Then every event would simply be a question of which team could beat their handicapped point spread (or however else handicapping would be feasible in each sport).

I believe that the reason your proposal won't work has already been outlined, but I can summarize again.
The effects of testosterone on the body during adolescence impacts physiology in a significant way.  Simply normalizing to a lower testosterone level doesn't change this.  There's no good way to equalize it.  Someone who has high testosterone during adolescence may have low testosterone later on, but still carry benefits from earlier.  And vice versa.

Meh.  I'm not interested in your scheme or the logical extension of it that I've presented.  Nor am I interested in most professional competitive sport, in which the biggest bankrolls buy the best players with no allegiance to the local region.  So boring.

Rather than chemically measuring and altering people in order to produce perfectly spherical athletes for competition, I'd prefer that we culturally shift to emphasizing the value of physical exercise and exertion for everyone.  I used to do randonneuring (long distance cycling), and the results were listed alphabetically by the cyclists name.  Never ordered by finishing time.  It fostered camaraderie among the riders.  It encouraged less experienced and slower cyclists to participate.  More people of more shapes, sizes, and genders rode more miles and had more fun doing it.  I'd rather see more of that in the world.

I respect your opinion and viewpoint on this.

It's important to point out though, that sport and competition are the significant drivers of physical activity in a great many people.  Competitive sport has been a driver to physical improvement for thousands of years.  Non-competitive exercise is great, and certainly something that should be fostered in general . . . but many people are unable to drive themselves to the same physical peaks without competition.  We need to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater here.

My goal is not to chemically measure or alter people, but to allow trans women to compete fairly with natural born women.  Whatever your personal views of competition, this is going to happen - so we should try to do it in a way that is as fair as possible to everyone.

[GuitarStv]

So, re wrestling: it’s already happening, then. Let it continue.

Wrestling classes are often mixed (also true with Judo, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and other grappling classes I've taken), and this is something that I support as being healthy and sensible.  Wrestling competition never is.  Even with weight class separation, the disadvantage to most women is very significant.

Yes, I suppose it would be sport dependent. But that is already true in terms of qualifications. Let’s choose non-gendered ways to segregate. Because the gendered ones don’t work.

I'm fine with doing this.  Historically we have used sex to differentiate between different hormone profiles, as it's easy to ascertain and has been generally accepted as fair except in relatively unusual corner cases (trans women, people with hermaphroditic situations, etc.).  The tricky part is that there isn't an easy way to test hormonal balance, and weight/height segregation doesn't really work because it fails to take that into account.

[Michael in ABQ]

I think South Park captured it pretty well.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig

[Kris]

I think South Park captured it pretty well.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig

Yeah, except that is the biggest straw man...

Your signature line is ironic.

[GuitarStv]

I think South Park captured it pretty well.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig

Yeah, obviously pretty hyperbolic . . . but that's the type of scenario that I think everyone wants to avoid.

I think the current IOC guidelines (athlete must have declared themselves trans for four years and test within 'normal' female testosterone levels for 12 months) are inadequate and have potential to set up situations that will be a little lopsided.

Laurel Hubbard is an interesting transgender case to watch.  She has been taking female hormones since 2012.  At 43 she is also the oldest female weightlifter ever to qualify for the Olympics.

[shuffler]

I'd prefer that we culturally shift to emphasizing the value of physical exercise and exertion for everyone.

It's important to point out though, that sport and competition are the significant drivers of physical activity in a great many people.  Competitive sport has been a driver to physical improvement for thousands of years.  Non-competitive exercise is great, and certainly something that should be fostered in general . . . but many people are unable to drive themselves to the same physical peaks without competition.  We need to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater here.

I recognize that the point I'm making about non-competitive sport isn't the discussion you wanted to have, so I don't intend to derail beyond this response.  I want to suggest that there may not be as much "baby" (i.e. as much value) in the bathwater of competitive sport as you suggest.  I'm not at all concerned if individuals are "unable to drive themselves to the same physical peaks without competition", if it could mean that broadly more people are encouraged to participate in non-competitive athletic endeavor due to its inclusive and encouraging nature, and thereby improve their fitness/health/longevity.  I think it would be a net win.  And it would entirely obviate the question of how to match-make between men/women/trans-folk (so I'm still somewhat on topic).  I realize I'm asking for quite a large cultural shift, but hey, neither you nor I are (trans-)women, or on the governing bodies of international sport, so we're just BS'ing about how we think the world should be, and acceptance of trans-people in competitive sport (or in the world at large) is asking for a significant cultural shift as well, so I figure my wish for cultural emphasis of non-competitive athletics is fair game.

[RetiredAt63]

Just as an reminder, the Olympics already have one sport where everyone competes together.  It doesn't matter how strong you are, if a horse doesn't want to do something even the Hulk can't force it.  Has anyone watched the recent YouTube dressage competition?  What the horses do is amazing.  And the messaging both ways between horse and rider is so subtle that the rider seems to be just sitting there.

For the rest, I have so many conflicting opinions (on the one hand, on the other hand, on the gripping hand) I'm glad no one  needs my opinion.

[GuitarStv]

I'd prefer that we culturally shift to emphasizing the value of physical exercise and exertion for everyone.

It's important to point out though, that sport and competition are the significant drivers of physical activity in a great many people.  Competitive sport has been a driver to physical improvement for thousands of years.  Non-competitive exercise is great, and certainly something that should be fostered in general . . . but many people are unable to drive themselves to the same physical peaks without competition.  We need to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater here.

I recognize that the point I'm making about non-competitive sport isn't the discussion you wanted to have, so I don't intend to derail beyond this response.  I want to suggest that there may not be as much "baby" (i.e. as much value) in the bathwater of competitive sport as you suggest.  I'm not at all concerned if individuals are "unable to drive themselves to the same physical peaks without competition", if it could mean that broadly more people are encouraged to participate in non-competitive athletic endeavor due to its inclusive and encouraging nature, and thereby improve their fitness/health/longevity.  I think it would be a net win.  And it would entirely obviate the question of how to match-make between men/women/trans-folk (so I'm still somewhat on topic).  I realize I'm asking for quite a large cultural shift, but hey, neither you nor I are (trans-)women, or on the governing bodies of international sport, so we're just BS'ing about how we think the world should be, and acceptance of trans-people in competitive sport (or in the world at large) is asking for a significant cultural shift as well, so I figure my wish for cultural emphasis of non-competitive athletics is fair game.

Your point is clear, and I agree with you that non-competitive sports are probably at least as good (or better) for many people.  As far as the baby though, people have different experiences with things, let me share mine.

I've spent a fair amount of time doing solo exercise (long distance cycling, weight lifting, running, etc.) as well as competitive sport.  For me personally, there's no contest - I work harder and get into better shape when there's competition.  That doesn't mean 'win at all costs and fuck everyone else' though . . . healthy competition benefits everyone involved.  Losing is good and essential for skills development!  Competing with people who can beat you is often the best way to learn to improve.  When you compete against someone who isn't at a lower skill level than you, it's an opportunity to relax a bit and try out more creative things.

Competitive sports done properly is also 'broadly inclusive'.  I've spent a lot of time both doing and teaching various competitive martial arts, which were very inclusive of everyone interested and developed healthy almost family like atmospheres.

Just as an reminder, the Olympics already have one sport where everyone competes together.  It doesn't matter how strong you are, if a horse doesn't want to do something even the Hulk can't force it.  Has anyone watched the recent YouTube dressage competition?  What the horses do is amazing.  And the messaging both ways between horse and rider is so subtle that the rider seems to be just sitting there.

Dressage is indeed the height of competitive athletics.  For horses.  :P

[Cool Friend]

I'm glad no one  needs my opinion.

I wish more people had your self-awareness.

[Zamboni]

There is no "level playing field" in sports or anything else competitive, for that matter. Besides obvious things like height, weight, and sex, individuals have huge genetic variation in things like peripheral vision (Wayne Gretzky), "speed of recognition" (a component of reaction time, involves a complex mixture of vision, cognition, and physical agility), balance, lung capacity, conscientiousness, etc. You can arguably train yourself to have better balance, although it's likely better to be born with freakishly good balance in the first place, but can you train your peripheral vision?

I think the IOC is doing the best that they can with it at this time. Men and women are not genetically identical (XX vs. XY chromosomes). Dividing sports that way is the most logical. As others have pointed out, sports competitions are often further divided into classes by another factor deemed important (age, weight, etc.) Trying to boil competitiveness in a sport down to factor like a hormone level is a vast over-simplification.

And, let's be honest here, the factor that overwhelmingly contributes to Olympic success is wealth. Are a few people who grow up poor in poor countries great Olympic champions? Sure. But most of the Olympic accolades go to people who 1. grew up where a huge imbalance of national resources goes to intensively training a few who show early talent, or 2. grew up in relatively wealthy countries, where large numbers of people have time to play silly games and can find resources for the best equipment, coaching, training competition, diet, etc. This is especially true in high skill sports.
So I'll leave you with this classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y9z_8fBF5U

[gooki]

We're talking about making sports fair here

Why do we want to make competitive sport fair?

As a soccer coach I'd personally prefer extra emphasis on mixed gender teams. From my experience we get better results with greater diversity.

As a watcher of sport I'd like to see more and more gender neutral competition. It annoys me to see women's teams be second fiddle to men's teams.

Any Olympic sport that relies on technique and not strength should be gender neutral today. Yes some may favor men but others will favor women or neither. Here's looking at you diving, shooting, ski jump, synchronized swimming... And then experiment making other events gender neutral over time.

I'd also like to see the removal of weight grades at the highest level of sport. Weight grades are fine for training and friendly competition, but when you're competing to find the best of the best they seem pointless to me.

Sorry if I'm veering of topic, I guess the point I'm trying to make is less segregation in sport will make it more inclusive no matter what gender you identify as.

[Linea_Norway]

I recently heard a sport commentator say that the rules for women with natural high testosteron levels only apply to running longer distances. On the 200 meters these superwomen are still allowed to compete. So they are not consequent. The commentor's opinion was that it is not a human right to be a competitive athlete in the olympics.
I find it sad that women with a natural great advantage, like Caster Semenya are not allowed to use their advantage.

A whole other issue is handicapped sporters. Usually a handicap is a disadvantage, but in some running races, having one or two lightweight artificial legs could be an advantage. Let them compete in the normal race? I remember to have seen a male runner with an artificial leg already.

I have seen several transwomen, including one that transed before puberty. She had a very female body. While transwomen who transed later have a very male body. I am not sure there is a fair way to let them join the official competitions, other than excluding every woman who transed after puberty. Bad for them that it is very common to do this transformation after puberty. No good solutions from my side.

Other sports with mixed gender are dog sledge racing (where light body weight could be an advantage) and chess (even though women in addition have a female competition, maybe because you seldom see women in the highest level chess competitions).

[Metalcat]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

[Paper Chaser]

Laurel Hubbard is an interesting transgender case to watch.  She has been taking female hormones since 2012.  At 43 she is also the oldest female weightlifter ever to qualify for the Olympics.

Men tend to have larger, denser bones than women, and they stay denser longer as they age. Bone density is a big benefit to athletics, especially weight lifting. How much does hormone therapy alter that calculus? Even if a trans woman has been undergoing hormone replacement for several years I can see a trans woman competing in weightlifting having advantages for those reasons, especially as they age. (Unless the hormone therapy has reduced bone density and size to a level similar to natural female competitors.)

[RetiredAt63]

I'm glad no one  needs my opinion.

I wish more people had your self-awareness.

The self awareness that I have so many conflicting thoughts about the issue that my opinion would not be of any use?  Fair enough.

Otherwise, your comment seemed a bit snarky - we all express opinions about a number of issues on these forums, and no-one outside of them needs or wants or pays attention to them.  If someone does not want opinions on a topic they don't need to read that thread.  If they are reading a thread they presumably want other peoples' opinions.

Please return to your originally scheduled program.

[CindyBS]

I'm not sure the answer on trans women and sports.

However, what I do not hear in the conversation is what affect this has on trans people in general, many of whom do not play competitive sports.   40% of trans teens/youth attempt suicide, many succeed.  This number goes down dramatically for teens/young adults that are in supportive communities,  It is literally life or death whether or not trans people are accepted. I know a trans teen that recently stepped in front a train to commit suicide.

So, when the supposedly "pro-life" governor of South Dakota made a big deal about passing a law that banned trans high school students from sports even though she could not cite a single case of a trans woman in high school sports in her state - I really wonder how many South Dakotan trans teens got that message they were not accepted reinforced and that pushed them 1 step closer to suicide. 

Same thing with the bathroom issue.  It is supposedly to "protect the children" (which then the government should focus more on catching predatory men, not banning trans rights) but no thought that our trans teens are also children that need protection. 

The sports issue needs careful weighing in.  Not hyperbole and hate from people who find trans people "icky" and are latching on this as a culture war issue where a vulnerable population gets further ostracized. 

(I'm not suggesting anyone is this thread is doing that, just saying it is an issue in these discussions overall).

[FINate]

Stop paying people to play games. Problem solved.

[Cool Friend]

The self awareness that I have so many conflicting thoughts about the issue that my opinion would not be of any use?  Fair enough.

Yes! I wish more people knew that this is okay.

Otherwise, your comment seemed a bit snarky - we all express opinions about a number of issues on these forums, and no-one outside of them needs or wants or pays attention to them.  If someone does not want opinions on a topic they don't need to read that thread.  If they are reading a thread they presumably want other peoples' opinions.

True. Time for me to Log Off!

[GuitarStv]

We're talking about making sports fair here

Why do we want to make competitive sport fair?

As a soccer coach I'd personally prefer extra emphasis on mixed gender teams. From my experience we get better results with greater diversity.

I agree for recreational sport.  Problems happen when this is applied to competitive sports though.  If you take two high level soccer teams, one mixed and one all male, the all male one will win the majority of the time.  I suppose that rules could be enacted to require a certain number of female players for both sides.  Is that what you mean?

As a watcher of sport I'd like to see more and more gender neutral competition. It annoys me to see women's teams be second fiddle to men's teams.

Maybe I'm looking at this from a unique perspective, but many of the sports I enjoy watching are one vs one competition.  I can't see a boxing match between two similar weight similar skill athletes, one male and one female, leading to any conclusion but the woman being knocked out the overwhelming majority of the time.  That wouldn't be very interesting to watch.

Any Olympic sport that relies on technique and not strength should be gender neutral today. Yes some may favor men but others will favor women or neither. Here's looking at you diving, shooting, ski jump, synchronized swimming... And then experiment making other events gender neutral over time.

Yes, I think this is reasonable.  Minor quibble though, both ski jumping and diving have significant strength requirements.  Shooting and synchronized swimming (to the best of my knowledge) do not, so your proposal makes perfect sense there.

I'd also like to see the removal of weight grades at the highest level of sport. Weight grades are fine for training and friendly competition, but when you're competing to find the best of the best they seem pointless to me.

Sorry if I'm veering of topic, I guess the point I'm trying to make is less segregation in sport will make it more inclusive no matter what gender you identify as.

Removing weight classes would make sports significantly less inclusive.

A 100 lb wrestler will never win in fair competition against a 300 lb wrestler of similar skill .  A 100 lb weightlifter will lose 100% of the time against a 300 lb weightlifter.  The same is true for any other sport that I can think of that has weight limits.  So the effect of removing weight limits will be to exclude all light weight competitors from these sports.  This segregation increases inclusivity because it allows a greater range of fair competition, rather than having the big athletes crush everyone else.

[Jenny Wren]

If someone is on HRT and trans, I honestly see no issue with it. Anecdata alert: I'm married to a trans woman, and I am a cis woman. When I had my hormones tested last year in advance of perimenopause, my T levels were higher than hers. She is on both T-blockers and estrogen, for fuck's sake. A trans woman is not the stupid South Park reference above. If you are getting your information on trans women from a fucking edge lord cartoon, then fuck right off. Fat distribution changes, ability to build and retain muscle lowers, body hair growth slows or stops, and breasts often bud. A lot of those male "advantages" disappear with hormone therapy, no surgery even required.

The only problem I could foresee is someone wanting to compete pre-HRT. I personally have not seen this in any of the trans athletes that have come forward, but to be fair my interest in watching other people play sports is less than zero. Could someone BS this and say they were trans when they are not? Sure. But I'm guessing less than 0.000001% would even attempt that, in part because of the stigma attached. 

[GuitarStv]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

By this comment, I'm guessing that you're not a fan of sport in general.  The most exciting boxingg and wrestling matches I've seen have been very closely matched competitors performing to their physical limits.  When sport becomes lopsided and unfair, it's less fun to watch . . . who wants to go to game after game where team A wins 86-0 every time?  Blech.

The same is true when competing.  If I get completely routed/smashed wrestling with someone, or if I crush someone else utterly - both scenarios suck.  Close matches with lots of give/take are excellent for learning and refining technique.

Without fairness, all the good aspects of sport are rendered null and void and only the most negative traits are emphasized.

[Metalcat]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

By this comment, I'm guessing that you're not a fan of sport in general.  The most exciting boxingg and wrestling matches I've seen have been very closely matched competitors performing to their physical limits.  When sport becomes lopsided and unfair, it's less fun to watch . . . who wants to go to game after game where team A wins 86-0 every time?  Blech.

The same is true when competing.  If I get completely routed/smashed wrestling with someone, or if I crush someone else utterly - both scenarios suck.  Close matches with lots of give/take are excellent for learning and refining technique.

Without fairness, all the good aspects of sport are rendered null and void and only the most negative traits are emphasized.

By this comment, I'm guessing that you think that sports aren't rife with well documented unfair practices?

[GuitarStv]

If someone is on HRT and trans, I honestly see no issue with it. Anecdata alert: I'm married to a trans woman, and I am a cis woman. When I had my hormones tested last year in advance of perimenopause, my T levels were higher than hers. She is on both T-blockers and estrogen, for fuck's sake. A trans woman is not the stupid South Park reference above. If you are getting your information on trans women from a fucking edge lord cartoon, then fuck right off. Fat distribution changes, ability to build and retain muscle lowers, body hair growth slows or stops, and breasts often bud. A lot of those male "advantages" disappear with hormone therapy, no surgery even required.

The only problem I could foresee is someone wanting to compete pre-HRT. I personally have not seen this in any of the trans athletes that have come forward, but to be fair my interest in watching other people play sports is less than zero. Could someone BS this and say they were trans when they are not? Sure. But I'm guessing less than 0.000001% would even attempt that, in part because of the stigma attached.

I agree with you that people pretending to be trans for fun seems to be a wholly made up problem in competition, and it largely seems to be a tactic used by transphobic people to push for exclusion.  However, I'd encourage you to read the studies of post HRT trans women, which describe the physical advantages still available after multiple years.  It seems that normalizing testosterone levels alone is not sufficient.  There are legitimate questions still about exactly when it is fair for trans women who underwent male puberty before transitioning to compete against natural born women.

[GuitarStv]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

By this comment, I'm guessing that you're not a fan of sport in general.  The most exciting boxingg and wrestling matches I've seen have been very closely matched competitors performing to their physical limits.  When sport becomes lopsided and unfair, it's less fun to watch . . . who wants to go to game after game where team A wins 86-0 every time?  Blech.

The same is true when competing.  If I get completely routed/smashed wrestling with someone, or if I crush someone else utterly - both scenarios suck.  Close matches with lots of give/take are excellent for learning and refining technique.

Without fairness, all the good aspects of sport are rendered null and void and only the most negative traits are emphasized.

By this comment, I'm guessing that you think that sports aren't rife with well documented unfair practices?

Which unfair practices are you referring to?

[Metalcat]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

By this comment, I'm guessing that you're not a fan of sport in general.  The most exciting boxingg and wrestling matches I've seen have been very closely matched competitors performing to their physical limits.  When sport becomes lopsided and unfair, it's less fun to watch . . . who wants to go to game after game where team A wins 86-0 every time?  Blech.

The same is true when competing.  If I get completely routed/smashed wrestling with someone, or if I crush someone else utterly - both scenarios suck.  Close matches with lots of give/take are excellent for learning and refining technique.

Without fairness, all the good aspects of sport are rendered null and void and only the most negative traits are emphasized.

By this comment, I'm guessing that you think that sports aren't rife with well documented unfair practices?

Which unfair practices are you referring to?

It's pretty researchable, with countless articles, books, and documentaries. I thought it was just common knowledge that professional sport was rife with unfairness. But I guess not.

[GuitarStv]

There is no "level playing field" in sports or anything else competitive, for that matter. Besides obvious things like height, weight, and sex, individuals have huge genetic variation in things like peripheral vision (Wayne Gretzky), "speed of recognition" (a component of reaction time, involves a complex mixture of vision, cognition, and physical agility), balance, lung capacity, conscientiousness, etc. You can arguably train yourself to have better balance, although it's likely better to be born with freakishly good balance in the first place, but can you train your peripheral vision?

I think the IOC is doing the best that they can with it at this time. Men and women are not genetically identical (XX vs. XY chromosomes). Dividing sports that way is the most logical. As others have pointed out, sports competitions are often further divided into classes by another factor deemed important (age, weight, etc.) Trying to boil competitiveness in a sport down to factor like a hormone level is a vast over-simplification.

And, let's be honest here, the factor that overwhelmingly contributes to Olympic success is wealth. Are a few people who grow up poor in poor countries great Olympic champions? Sure. But most of the Olympic accolades go to people who 1. grew up where a huge imbalance of national resources goes to intensively training a few who show early talent, or 2. grew up in relatively wealthy countries, where large numbers of people have time to play silly games and can find resources for the best equipment, coaching, training competition, diet, etc. This is especially true in high skill sports.
So I'll leave you with this classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y9z_8fBF5U

I don't think that there is an intent to create a truly level playing field.  As you mention, there's always going to be a fair amount of variability in size and shape of people.  The goal of sport segregation is to improve inclusivity.  We have boxing weight classes so that people who aren't hulking 200+lb boxers have a chance at winning.  This improves inclusivity.  We have sex separation because going through male puberty and having testosterone in your body conveys advantages.

The goal of changing from sex differentiation to hormone differentiation is to increase inclusivity for trans women, without reducing it for natural women.

My issue with the current IOC regulation is that they seem to be out of line with the research on physiology and trans women, and allow competition while advantage still exists.  My concern is that this will negatively impact inclusivity for natural born women, because people tend to lose interest in playing sports they know are rigged against them.

Money and Olympic sports certainly can go hand in hand.  More money = more opportunity = better training.  That is a problem from a fairness point of view.  I believe that this is a different discussion though.

[GuitarStv]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

By this comment, I'm guessing that you're not a fan of sport in general.  The most exciting boxingg and wrestling matches I've seen have been very closely matched competitors performing to their physical limits.  When sport becomes lopsided and unfair, it's less fun to watch . . . who wants to go to game after game where team A wins 86-0 every time?  Blech.

The same is true when competing.  If I get completely routed/smashed wrestling with someone, or if I crush someone else utterly - both scenarios suck.  Close matches with lots of give/take are excellent for learning and refining technique.

Without fairness, all the good aspects of sport are rendered null and void and only the most negative traits are emphasized.

By this comment, I'm guessing that you think that sports aren't rife with well documented unfair practices?

Which unfair practices are you referring to?

It's pretty researchable, with countless articles, books, and documentaries. I thought it was just common knowledge that professional sport was rife with unfairness. But I guess not.

Could you provide some of these countless articles, books, and documentaries in summary or link so that I'm able to know exactly what you're referring to as 'unfair practices'?

[Metalcat]

Fairness in sports?

Wait...what???

By this comment, I'm guessing that you're not a fan of sport in general.  The most exciting boxingg and wrestling matches I've seen have been very closely matched competitors performing to their physical limits.  When sport becomes lopsided and unfair, it's less fun to watch . . . who wants to go to game after game where team A wins 86-0 every time?  Blech.

The same is true when competing.  If I get completely routed/smashed wrestling with someone, or if I crush someone else utterly - both scenarios suck.  Close matches with lots of give/take are excellent for learning and refining technique.

Without fairness, all the good aspects of sport are rendered null and void and only the most negative traits are emphasized.

By this comment, I'm guessing that you think that sports aren't rife with well documented unfair practices?

Which unfair practices are you referring to?

It's pretty researchable, with countless articles, books, and documentaries. I thought it was just common knowledge that professional sport was rife with unfairness. But I guess not.

Could you provide some of these countless articles, books, and documentaries in summary or link so that I'm able to know exactly what you're referring to as 'unfair practices'?

I really don't feel like googling this or debating with you, so forget I said anything.

[Jenny Wren]

Your initial post specifically quoted hormonal differences as the reason. HRT pretty much negates those benefits within two years. I guess that's technically "multiple years," so you are not necessarily wrong: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-women-retain-athletic-edge-after-year-hormone-therapy-study-n1252764

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.full?ijkey=yjlCzZVZFRDZzHz&keytype=ref

[GuitarStv]

Your initial post specifically quoted hormonal differences as the reason. HRT pretty much negates those benefits within two years. I guess that's technically "multiple years," so you are not necessarily wrong: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-women-retain-athletic-edge-after-year-hormone-therapy-study-n1252764

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.full?ijkey=yjlCzZVZFRDZzHz&keytype=ref

Hormones in the blood are significantly reduced soon after starting HRT, but physiological changes from the hormones (especially from puberty) seem to be longer lasting.

The article you linked from the BMJ indicates that there still exists a performance advantage after two year - total number of push-ups is the same, but a 15% disparity exists in speed they're done at.  That's a clear difference in power, right?  Or am I reading something wrong?  Other studies show increased muscle mass even three years after HRT.  I haven't been able to find studies longer than that.

[MilesTeg]

It's a new political wedge issue being developed over something that really just doesn't matter one bit. It's sports. Sports are great for entertainment and (for those participating) health, but who "wins" doesn't really matter.

[Linea_Norway]

Your initial post specifically quoted hormonal differences as the reason. HRT pretty much negates those benefits within two years. I guess that's technically "multiple years," so you are not necessarily wrong: https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/trans-women-retain-athletic-edge-after-year-hormone-therapy-study-n1252764

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.full?ijkey=yjlCzZVZFRDZzHz&keytype=ref

I think that that the physical "advantage" a transwoman still could have after years of HRT would exist of greater muscle masse and body height. Maybe stronger bones, wider shoulders. Do you have any observation of this?

[Metalcat]

It's a new political wedge issue being developed over something that really just doesn't matter one bit. It's sports. Sports are great for entertainment and (for those participating) health, but who "wins" doesn't really matter.

Professional sports are actually fucking terrible for a lot of althete's health. Pushing your body constantly to its very limits often has dire consequences.

[Zamboni]

It's a new political wedge issue being developed over something that really just doesn't matter one bit. It's sports. Sports are great for entertainment and (for those participating) health, but who "wins" doesn't really matter.

Professional sports are actually fucking terrible for a lot of althete's health. Pushing your body constantly to its very limits often has dire consequences.

True. And not just pro sports . . . a lot of the Olympic sports have lasting implications. For example, it's very common for child gymnasts to have a certain spine bone fracture. Their bodies are just not developed enough to withstand the impact and motion forces of the sport.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens with the weight lifter. She had New Zealand national weightlifting records in the men's category prior to transitioning in her mid-30's. Maybe the answer is to have an "Open" category that anyone can join? I don't know. I want to be inclusive, and there are many women's sports that I enjoy watching more than their male equivalents either because women have unique talents in that sport or because there are rules changes that make the women's sport interesting. In volleyball, for example, the women's net is about 8 inches lower to account for women, on average, being shorter and not being able to jump as high. I think women's volleyball is much better to watch than men's volleyball, where the points are too short and it's often much more about power than skill.

I think most women are fine competing with trans-women who transitioned prior to puberty. But after puberty there are many lasting and relevant physical differences even with HRT. And there are chromosomal differences, beyond just the hormone differences, so we likely don't understand the role of all of the other physical factors that come from a chromosomal difference. I'm not transphobic at all, and I appreciate that the IOC is trying to allow people who fall outside of gender binary norms a way to participate, even though a lot of other IOC rules are just plain silly.

[GuitarStv]

I'm not sure the answer on trans women and sports.

However, what I do not hear in the conversation is what affect this has on trans people in general, many of whom do not play competitive sports.   40% of trans teens/youth attempt suicide, many succeed.  This number goes down dramatically for teens/young adults that are in supportive communities,  It is literally life or death whether or not trans people are accepted. I know a trans teen that recently stepped in front a train to commit suicide.

So, when the supposedly "pro-life" governor of South Dakota made a big deal about passing a law that banned trans high school students from sports even though she could not cite a single case of a trans woman in high school sports in her state - I really wonder how many South Dakotan trans teens got that message they were not accepted reinforced and that pushed them 1 step closer to suicide. 

Same thing with the bathroom issue.  It is supposedly to "protect the children" (which then the government should focus more on catching predatory men, not banning trans rights) but no thought that our trans teens are also children that need protection. 

The sports issue needs careful weighing in.  Not hyperbole and hate from people who find trans people "icky" and are latching on this as a culture war issue where a vulnerable population gets further ostracized. 

(I'm not suggesting anyone is this thread is doing that, just saying it is an issue in these discussions overall).

I hear you on the culture war thing.  There are too many crazy things being said on both sides of this debate . . . on the one hand there are people pretending that lines of men are forming to pretend to be trans to dominate women's sport while simultaneously trying to ban any trans athlete from participating.  On the other side you have people pretending that there's no physiological difference between men and women, or saying things like testosterone isn't a performance enhancing drug.  These extremes both need to be rejected.  Trans women in sport is more nuanced than a simple yea or nay.

My hope is that clearly defining reasonable rules for sports regarding trans participation (based upon evidence rather than emotion) helps to diffuse the lies on both sides, and ultimately will make trans participation easier and more inclusive.

[MilesTeg]

It's a new political wedge issue being developed over something that really just doesn't matter one bit. It's sports. Sports are great for entertainment and (for those participating) health, but who "wins" doesn't really matter.

Professional sports are actually fucking terrible for a lot of althete's health. Pushing your body constantly to its very limits often has dire consequences.

I didn't say professional sports. Trans issues are not just an issue at that level.

[Metalcat]

It's a new political wedge issue being developed over something that really just doesn't matter one bit. It's sports. Sports are great for entertainment and (for those participating) health, but who "wins" doesn't really matter.

Professional sports are actually fucking terrible for a lot of althete's health. Pushing your body constantly to its very limits often has dire consequences.

I didn't say professional sports. Trans issues are not just an issue at that level.

True, my use of the word "professional" was sloppy.

[scottish]

What would happen if we left men's and women's categories the way they are now, and created two new transgender categories for trans athletes?

[Metalcat]

What would happen if we left men's and women's categories the way they are now, and created two new transgender categories for trans athletes?

So that all trans athletes have to be outed and isolated from CIS athletes?

Also, trans is not a monolithic experience or advantage. So lumping all trans athletes together doesn't even biologically make much sense.

[WhiteTrashCash]

Watching sports is stupid so nobody should care about them anyway. Go play some sports and get some exercise and stop watching other people get lots of money from endorsements and stuff for playing children’s games.

[GuitarStv]

What would happen if we left men's and women's categories the way they are now, and created two new transgender categories for trans athletes?

So that all trans athletes have to be outed and isolated from CIS athletes?

Also, trans is not a monolithic experience or advantage. So lumping all trans athletes together doesn't even biologically make much sense.

I agree.

A policy of 'separate but equal' for trans people in sports really seems like the wrong path to take.  Off the top of my head, three things immediately jump out:
- At best, you're talking about a few percentage points of people in a given population . . . so the actual competition in trans sports would be severely restricted most places to the point of non-existent.  This has the likely effect of simply shutting down trans sport altogether.
- It's already difficult finding viewership for women's sports.  I'd have to imagine that trans specific sport would be even lower than that.  Reducing money tends to mean reduced opportunity for training, less available equipment, less funding for instruction.
- It's an exclusive way to single out the trans people as different, rather than trying to inclusively bring everyone together.  I believe that this would have the impact of inflaming rather than reducing tensions with transphobic people.