The International Cricket Council has become the latest sports body to ban transgender players from the elite women’s game if they have gone through male puberty.

The ICC said it had taken the decision, following an extensive scientific review and nine-month consultation, to “protect the integrity of the international women’s game and the safety of players”.

It joins rugby union, swimming, cycling, athletics and rugby league, who have all gone down a similar path in recent years after citing concerns over fairness or safety.

  • GreenM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just make it third category.

    • female sports won’t get affected
    • fairness will increase
    • fans can watch their own "cup of coffee "
    • possible pretenders will no longer be motivated by easy winning
      • GreenM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        What is the alternative though that won’t ruin female’s sports that was built as part or followup of female’s emancipation ?

        • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          The one where trans women play in the women’s league and trans men in the men’s. If it causes any sort on unfairness we would have seen it by now.

            • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              Where? All the hyped up news stories have been titles like “trans woman destroys women in insert sport here” but if you look into it they took 600th or something and beat maybe 10 women.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That is what tons of folks fights against. But i agree it makes sense. However, is taking testosteron considered doping for females or is it OK? if it’s OK, why other “chems” are not allowed?

            • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The testosterone for trans men is just to get to the levels that average cis men have, I’m pretty sure they test for excess testosterone. Some medication is allowed for sick athletes that is considered doping for anyone who isn’t sick, like the therapy for increasing blood oxygen levels which is a common form of doping but is a valid treatment for some illnesses.

              • GreenM@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Medication for sick people seems kinda different thing to me than being healthy and chumming chems to gain muscles.

                So testosterone for female( born) athletes should be allowed until they reach avg male(born) level? Is that really a thing we want to introduce into sports ? Will steroids also count as getting to avg male upper muscle mass ? Where is the line? Won’t that make female athletes either obsolete or force them to chems chumming which then can cause them health issues given that most of them propably don’t plan to transition and might want start families etc?

                • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  For trans men they get like an injection of testosterone, they aren’t getting it to play sports, it’s medication for dysphoria. I haven’t said anyone else other than trans men should be taking it and definitely nothing about steroids.

                  • GreenM@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The point i wanted to send across is that it gives athlete an advantage. So people will be incentivized to get it. And also those who do not get it will be at disadvantage. So if one form of chems advantage is allowed why others are not? Isn’t that exactly the source of the issue here, fairness?

        • shrugal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Imo we should get rid of the distinction by gender and just use weight classes, or whatever attributes are appropriate for a given sport.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Avg Joe can weight about or even less than avg Jane but he still outperforms her in physical activities. It’s gonna be quite hard. But i can see it working as one of the many params in complex evaluation formula which never will be finished in sense every year someone will come up with exceptions and new paralela.

            • shrugal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That’s true for grouping by gender as well, probably even more so. Genetic lottery means some will always be better at a given sport than others of the same gender putting in the same effort. But it’s so engrained in our thinking that we don’t even perceive it as a problem, instead we tell those with physical disadvantage that they were just not made for a certain sport.

              So we are far from competing with perfect here, and being able to pick other attributes to group by should enable us create much more evenly matched groups. I mean, right now we just use one deciding factor for everything and call it a day. And that’s before we get into the whole gender discussion.

              Regarding the actual formulas, I think we just need to find good tradeoffs between fairness and practicality. Of course even a perfectly fair system will fail if it doesn’t work in practice, but I think we can do much better than just using gender in pretty much all cases.

          • Gabu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’ve just killed all of women’s sports by relegating them to the bottom tiers, congratulations.

        • sunbytes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some sports do it based on what kind of puberty you went through.

          As a significant number of the physical advantages come through going through male puberty.

          That could be a good start.

    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is just a complete non solution to the problem and effectively just ends up with trans people being banned from sports altogether.

      “Trans” sports teams/leagues (whatever that means) can’t really exist at the amateur local level anywhere but the biggest citiess due to there being not a lot of trans people, and even less trans people who want to play sports.

      The struggle to even get enough trans guys or trans girls to form a team for football or whatever would be a challenge in and of itself, and then this team would pretty much have to fly across the country (or possibly to a different country altogether) to even play a match.

      This is not a reasonable solution for anyone but the people who want to ban trans people from sports.

      The second issue is that this is just fear mongering and not an actual issue to be solved but that’s being argued all over this thread already.

        • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Trans people should be allowed in the sports of their gender provided they’ve been on HRT consistently for some time

          The length can be argued but 2-3 years seem to be enough.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            However those sport associations claim they had researches done and conclusions were that it is not fair due to difference in physical abilities and it brings health risk for female athletes.

          • Pasta4u@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            2-3 years doesn’t change lung size or bone density. There is a lot of stuff that doesn’t change once it’s developed.

            Just make a separate league

      • セリャスト
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s already the case, most sports allow for women to play in men’s leagues… But they don’t. And trans women would suffer the same way cis women would in men dominated categories (or would they? Depends on the sport I guess, nobody would complain about trans women in F1 Academy I bet)

        • pHr34kY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Identity is irrelevant. The separation exists so that women get fair competition.

          Women as in someone who was born as, and always has been, biologically female.

          Open means everyone, unrestricted.

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I see so in other words keep it stricly male and female category and let female to enter male category by choice.
            Then we are where se are with people lobbing for change.

      • GreenM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure i follow. So you basically suggest to keep male and female categories but rename them? Or do you suggest to devide female category to stronger and weaker ?

          • GreenM@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well that;s how we got male and female categories. But now we got in between who are apparently weaker than males but can often easily top females. Obvious decision would be to go for certain win.
            There are obviously people who misuse it unjustly to get to the top. Where is the line to become weaker? Would you lower rewards for weaker category to motivate folks to move to stronger one, wouldn’t that make females left at the tail all the time ?