cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/40174373
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a pioneer for LGBTQ+ rights who decades ago upset leaders in his own party when he defied state law and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples, suggested Democrats were in the wrong in allowing transgender athletes to participate in female college and youth sports.
Regardless of where he is right on the transgender question (though to me this feels like it’s more a cheap shot against trans people), this is yet more evidence that Newsom is a cynical opportunist who is only interested in grabbing power and influence. He’s trying to position himself for a run at the Democrat nomination for 2028. He doesn’t give a shit about people or issues, only votes and power.
And somehow he’s managing to make himself disliked by both sides
He’s the liberal DeSantis.
Fuck you Gavin.
This is an issue that exposes some of the more dogmatic people in the movement.
It is as if there is a list of positions that you’re required to believe and if you disagree with any one of them you’re labeled a heretic (transphobic, in this case).
Sports and the fairness of competition is a complex issue even when you’re just talking about cisgender competitors:
Can a person use performance enhancing drugs to train and then get clean enough to test positive for a competition? It seems unfair, to me, for the other competitors if this is the case.
It isn’t an unfair statement to say that the physical performance of cisgender men is higher than that of cisgender women. This is why we have separate competitions for men and women.
The issue isn’t as simple as a choice between “Transgender people should be free, without question, to compete in any competition” or “Transgender people should not be allowed to compete as their gender”
Framing it in such a black and white manner is harmful behavior, no matter which position you take.
We need to understand how people’s bodies are affected and what advantages of disadvantages are obtained and then base the rule changes on objective data and not appeals to emotion or ideological bullying.
Do not make excuses for this nonsense being spouted by Gavin Newscom. You have no right to discriminate against trans women, intersex women and femme non-binary people.
Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition (e.g. cross-sex hormones, gender-confirming surgery) and, therefore, competitive sport policies that place restrictions on transgender people need to be considered and potentially revised.
In this paper, we examine the scientific, legal, and ethical foundations for inclusion of transgender women athletes in competitive sport, drawing on IOC principles and relevant Court of Arbitration for Sport decisions. We argue that the inclusion of trans athletes in competition commensurate with their legal gender is the most consistent position with these principles of fair and equitable sport. Biological restrictions, such as endogenous testosterone limits, are not consistent with IOC and CAS principles. We explore the implications for recognizing that endogenous testosterone values are a ‘natural physical trait’ and that excluding legally recognized women for high endogenous testosterone values constitutes discrimination on the basis of a natural physical trait. We suggest that the justificatory burden for such prima facie discrimination is unlikely to be met. Thus, in place of a limit on endogenous testosterone for women (whether cisgender, transgender, or intersex), we argue that ‘legally recognized gender’ is most fully in line with IOC and CAS principles.
I’m really tired of repeating myself. People keep telling me that the topic of including trans and/or intersex women in women’s sport is “complicated.” But it’s not. It’s very simple. Are trans women really women, full stop, or not? If you think “Yes,” then there’s no debate: trans and intersex women, as women, belong in women’s sport. If you think “No,” then there’s absolutely nothing I can say that will change your mind. You didn’t arrive at that belief through reasoning, and you won’t get out of it that way either. It’s a little like arguing with a flat-Earther: if you are convinced that the Earth is flat, then you’ll find any reason, no matter how irrational, to hold on to that belief in the face of overwhelming evidence.
But this is what I find myself repeating over and over: to those who already think that trans and intersex women…
Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition (e.g. cross-sex hormones, gender-confirming surgery) and, therefore, competitive sport policies that place restrictions on transgender people need to be considered and potentially revised.
This is side-stepping my point completely.
I said:
It isn’t an unfair statement to say that the physical performance of cisgender men is higher than that of cisgender women. This is why we have separate competitions for men and women.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_athletics
It is a fact that there are gender differences in the outcomes in competitions.
To what extent that these change when a person transitions is unknown and should be studied. It is simply dogma to believe that the moment a person has a prescription for HRT they no longer have an advantage.
Even among cisgender athletes there are genetic conditions and medications that disqualify them from competition. It is simply dogma to believe that the medication and treatments that transgender people receive have no effect on performance (and also, somehow, have the immediate effect of removing the advantage that cis men have over cis women).
It’s very simple. Are trans women really women, full stop, or not? If you think “Yes,” then there’s no debate: trans and intersex women, as women, belong in women’s sport. If you think “No,” then there’s absolutely nothing I can say that will change your mind.
Yes, this a wonderful example of dogmatic reasoning "If you believe this, then you have to believe this or else you’re
a hereticunreasonable and akin to a flat-earther. It isn’t reasoning based on objective facts, nor does their conclusion logically follow.As an example, I believe that cis men are men and also that cis men who use PEDs should not compete. It would be just as silly for someone arguing on the side of PED use to say that ‘You either believe that men should be able to compete in sports, or you don’t and there is no reasoning with you’. It’s nonsense, it isn’t reasoning it’s intellectual bullying.
I absolutely support trans rights, that doesn’t mean that I will allow another person to simply dictate my opinions. If a person unable to have a conversation and simply tries to dictate the things that I must believe then that person is wrong regardless of what other beliefs that they have which I agree.
To what extent that these change when a person transitions is unknown
You just replied to a post with several studies about exactly that.
On top of that, you are ignoring the balance of justice and ethics here. Unless there is significant evidence that having undergone male puberty prior to transition (this already doesn’t describe all trans women athletes) gives a significant advantage, fairness dictates that trans women should be included in women’s sports. The harm done isn’t justifiable by a “maybe.”
Unless there is significant evidence that having undergone male puberty prior to transition (this already doesn’t describe all trans women athletes) gives a significant advantage, fairness dictates that trans women should be included in women’s sports.
There is significant evidence that people who have undergone male puberty have an advantage. You can see this in the list of Olympic world records.
The question that has to be answered, and encoded into the rules of competitive sports, is: what causes this advantage to erased by transitioning, how can we verify that this is happening to an individual and what rules should exist to cover these cases in order to ensure fairness.
I don’t get why this is controversial.
For example:
If HRT is responsible for lowering testosterone which removes the advantage, then how long does it take to become effective? Should a woman who started taking HRT yesterday be able to compete in women’s sports, or should they have to wait for some period of time?
If someone stops taking HRT, does the advantage return? If so, how soon and to what extent? How can we verify that an individual isn’t stopping HRT or abusing their medication to obtain an advantage?
All competitions have rules to ensure fairness and that includes things like understanding how medical treatments or genetics affect performance and rules. There are many medications and treatments that athletes simply cannot use while competing for the sake of competitive fairness, this should apply to all athletes and all medication or treatments.
Can you at least attempt to skim the studies linked to you before replying from the same place of ignorance? I had a similar opinion to you when this issue was first brought to my attention; unlike you, I put in effort to educate myself.
Please, read them and others like them. Literally, most of your gotcha questions you asked are already answered in the studies. We have a good amount of objective data on this topic.
I don’t get why this is controversial
Because of people like you :)
There is significant evidence that people who have undergone male puberty have an advantage
No, you linking the Wikipedia page for Olympic records isn’t evidence of that, because we aren’t talking about cis men. We’re talking about trans women who have medically transitioned. You are not prepared to have a conversation about this if you are grouping these groups together, because medically they are not the same.
I don’t get why this is controversial.
Because it’s an insanely restrictive policy for no reason against an incredibly tiny minority that had already been allowed to compete at the Olympic level for over a decade before a trans athlete ever won a medal, and it was a nonbinary athlete who hadn’t transitioned and played on a team sport of their assigned gender. If this is as huge an issue as people want to pretend we would have seen the elimination of cis women in sports by now.
If HRT is responsible for lowering testosterone which removes the advantage, then how long does it take to become effective?
RTFA.
Elbers et al. expanded on this research by exploring the effects of oestrogen supplements and androgen deprivation on fat distribution and thigh muscle mass (by using magnetic resonance imaging) in 20 transgender female individuals. They found that 12 months after cross-sex hormone treatment, transgender female individuals had a more feminine pattern of adiposity and their thigh muscles had decreased.
Should a woman who started taking HRT yesterday be able to compete in women’s sports
You are inventing a scenario in your head to pearl clutch about, because this doesn’t happen outside of co-ed sports or elementary school sports with kids who haven’t undergone puberty. Anyone who tells you it does is lying.
How can we verify that an individual isn’t stopping HRT or abusing their medication to obtain an advantage?
Trans athletes already get blood tested for their hormone levels.
Seriously, all these “reasonable points” you think you have were addressed decades ago by sports governing bodies, and trans people had been quietly living their lives the whole time. You just didn’t notice it because Republicans were focusing on gay people then. Don’t fall for the bullshit.
What I think is this is not a government issue. Whatever regulations are the ones that have rules against performance enhancing drugs in competitive sport are the only ones that should have any authority on this issue.
fucking cunt.
Why don’t they just have female, male and mixed sports?
Yea he’s going no where in his presidential run
