Trans-genders should compete as separate categories

Author: fauxlaw

Posts

Total: 47
Topic's author
#1
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
That claim may sound critical, but a cis-gender male who thinks female is, still biologically male. Thinking does not change bone structure, muscle mass, or natural endurance, and taking hormones for the differential effect does not make a complete change. Therefore a trans-to-female is overly male in these factors over females, making "her" abilities advantageous over cis-females, on balance. There is a significant push for trans-to-females who currently compete as cis-females. I looked, but could not find any data on trans-to-males competing with cis-males; a research failure I find curious.

Nevertheless, why don't trans simply compete among themselves, just as the traditional separation of male/female sports? I've seen a graphic representation of trans, adding a third spike on a circle, which, curiously, makes use of the traditional male/female patterns, but combined. Why not originate a completely different symbolic representations?  Either this fairly distinguishes trans as separate genders, or it doesn't.
#2
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,159
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
Sounds good to me
#3
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@fauxlaw
"The notion of transgender girls having an unfair advantage comes from the idea that testosterone causes physical changes such as an increase in muscle mass. But transgender girls are not the only girls with high testosterone levels. An estimated 10 percent of women have polycystic ovarian syndrome, which results in elevated testosterone levels. They are not banned from female sports. Transgender girls on puberty blockers, on the other hand, have negligible testosterone levels. Yet these state bills would force them to play with the boys. Plus, the athletic advantage conferred by testosterone is equivocal. As Katrina Karkazis, a senior visiting fellow and expert on testosterone and bioethics at Yale University explains, “Studies of testosterone levels in athletes do not show any clear, consistent relationship between testosterone and athletic performance. Sometimes testosterone is associated with better performance, but other studies show weak links or no links. And yet others show testosterone is associated with worse performance.” The bills’ premises lack scientific validity." 

#4
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@fauxlaw
It also assumes that there are enough transgender individuals to make entire sports teams in each school district. 
#5
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@Theweakeredge
I as a fairly average male am about on par with the female world records in powerlifting for my weight class. Think about that. Men and women should not be playing sports together. 
#6
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Actually, mixed teams tag rugby is good fun and a great social game. 
#7
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
Mixed teams naked mud wrestling is also fun.

In my dreams.
#8
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
May I be horny till the day I die, zed.

But pay for it. 
Topic's author
#9
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
How many sports are competitions of single individuals, or pairs? 
#10
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
About one in every 58 people are born intersex- with some biological traits of both genders.  That's at least three times as prevalent as transgendered people or about as commonplace as being born with red hair. 

Traditionally, these folks have been allowed to participate in sports without any sort of gender test but it seems likely that any test designed to catch and exclude trans athletes (as is being implemented at the Olympics this summer) has a good chance of revealing  this more commonplace characteristic to a large population of young men and women who otherwise might have lived their whole lives unaware of their sexual differentness.  What do you do with the asymptomatic men who discover on gameday that they have female chromosomal patterns?  The incident rate will likely far outnumber transgendered athletes but on what legal or scientific basis can we enforce athletic apartheid for trans folks without also excluding this much larger group?

Generally speaking, I oppose any gender apartheid in schools because the stated justification for athletics in schools is the promotion of exercise and good sportsmanship- which is better done by inclusionary practices irrespective of unfair advantages and healthier for everybody all round.  Large and wealthy schools enjoy considerable advantages over smaller and poorer schools and beyond some statewide  divisions we nevertheless allow those advantages to prevail in athletics.

Private athletic enterprises can and should set their own standards without state interference.  Likewise, international sports have their own independent governing bodies that can make their own calls.  However, since I am confident that the prevalence of trans and intersex athletes in any sport is insufficient to sustain popular competition at any level, the inevitable net effect of any public policy implementation in alignment with fauxlaw's suggestion will be a sad athletic apartheid unworthy of any sincerely democratic populace.  Better to live with the rare unfair advantage then to give in to our fears of the different and new.
#11
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@fauxlaw
Caster Semenya is a perfect example of trans-incongruity.

A woman competing in a man's body.....Or a man competing in a woman's body..

The woman looks like a guy to me.

You tell me.
#12
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@badger
Um... some sports go by weightclass, which is much more accurate in every regard. The problem is the system itself, but regardless I already linked the source. Either engage it or don't. 
#13
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Um... regardless on if you compete as an individual, there are required to be teams for competitions to exist. 
Topic's author
#14
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
Wiki. Such a valuable source. Well, your source's source for that 1:58 ratio is the U.N., not exactly what I would call unbiased science. Your valid number of physically sexual ambiguity is https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5866176/, which places that ratio at 1:2000 to 1:4500. Come on, let's deal with science instead of agenda.
#15
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I agree to this topic 100% but don't want to dig too deep as it seems to trigger The Weaker Edge and I'm sure it triggers other trans people out there who may later come and read this. I agree to this topic entirely and find it a great solution (the only fair one).
#16
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
RMM

You're a laugh, we're literally debating transgender people. The fact that you can't present a single argument just tells me you haven't changed. 
#17
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Theweakeredge
I can and have, I just haven't presented rebuttals yet. This is one aspect of that debate, not all of it.
#18
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
--> @oromagi
Wiki. Such a valuable source. Well, your source's source for that 1:58 ratio is the U.N., not exactly what I would call unbiased science.
In fact, my source is Fausto-Sterling's landmark "Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality"

Your valid number of physically sexual ambiguity is https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5866176/, which places that ratio at 1:2000 to 1:4500.
That number defines INTERSEX exclusively by phenotype: " internal and external genital structures"  but that population is not the population for which I'm concerned since most people with physically discernible organs of both sexes are likely aware of the challenges athletic apartheid by gender represents.  I am including (for obvious reasons) folks with conditions such as

  • Klinefelter’s syndrome
  • Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome
  • Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (& Late-Onset Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia)
  • Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies (& other non-XX and non-XY aneuploldie)
  • Vaginal Agenesis
That is, people who might very well not suspect that  they are not entirely male or female and no doctor would diagnose as intersex except after genetic testing, which testing seems to be the inevitable trial used for establishing genders for the purpose of gender separation (as the Olympics do).  These people are far more commonplace than the phenotypal hermaphoditism to which you refer and would likely never be aware of their condition except for having to prove their gender genetically for the state's satisfaction and classification.   Where does the state draw the line?  Are we heading for a world where a successful gymnast is told she has XY chromosomes and must compete with the men?  Or a quarterback is told that his XX chromosomes disqualify him from the game of football?

Come on, let's deal with science instead of agenda.
My assumption is that the difficulties of gender differences keep most trans folks well away from most forms of physical demonstration.  I am aware of a only a very few recent and highly anecdotal cases but I don't see any science that confirms any advantage consistent enough to justify your suggested apartheid or the 35 state bills now enforcing discrimination well ahead of that science.

Please be sure to make clear whether your plan applies to public policy in schools (where who wins is not a consideration next to the benefits of inclusive participation  and the promotion of exercise for everybody) or private enterprise (where you'll be injecting state prejudices into business policies where no state interference is wanted or warranted).

My agenda is the extension of the American franchise to all, especially for the protection of the oppressed minorities- the outsiders and the underdogs who are traditionally kicked to the curb and offered separate but "equal" accommodation .   What is your agenda?

Topic's author
#19
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
I understand specifically what my source was, and the reason why the ratios are so much smaller than yours. Yours includes those who think their gender. People can think whatever they like, and with or without the American franchise, the thinking ought to include sports competition with like-thinking people


#20
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
Well, chromosomes are genetic information found in most living cells and not thoughts at all.

with or without the American franchise, the thinking ought to include sports competition with like-thinking people
so would you endorse whites only sports leagues for like-thinking white supremacists?
Topic's author
#21
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
No, because race, as a biological variance, is virtually non-existent; a social construct. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/
#22
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
-> @oromagi
No, because race, as a biological variance, is virtually non-existent; a social construct. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/
Since you accept Scientific American as a legitimate source regarding scientific backing, let's be sure to note Scientific American's recent editorial condemning your suggestion:


Recently, some have even harkened back to eras of “separate but equal,” suggesting that transgender athletes should be forced into their own leagues. In addition to all the reasons why this is unnecessary that I’ve already explained, it is also unjust. As we’ve learned from women’s sports leagues, separate is not equal. Female athletes consistently have to deal with fewer accolades, less press coverage and lower pay. A transgender sports league would undoubtedly be plagued with the same issues.

Beyond the trauma of sex-verification exams, these bills would cause further emotional damage to transgender youth. While we haven’t seen an epidemic of transgender girls dominating sports leagues, we have seen high rates of anxiety, depression and suicide attempts. Research highlights that a major driver of these mental health problems is rejection of someone’s gender identity. Forcing trans youth to play on sports teams that don’t match their identity will worsen these disparities.
Will you argue that Scientific American is not following the science?

(P.S.- Just noticed  that Weakeredge already cited this article in POST#3.  So I guess you were already on the hook to answer this question.)

Topic's author
#23
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
I will argue that your S-A source provided in your #22 makes the claim that "There is no scientific case for excluding them" [Article: Trans Girls Belong on Sports Teams"], but, curiously, no linkage in the article provides any scientific case for including trans girls. Shouldn't there be, if the article writer makes the claim? Sorry, but the section header of your article tells all: "Policy/Ethics." Since when is either considered as science? Both are parties to politics, but not science. 

Your article says, 

Female athletes consistently have to deal with fewer accolades, less press coverage and lower pay.
as you have cited. However, the problem extends beyond sports to a general discrimination of females that is the bane of worldwide concerns in business, politics, education, and just about everything else without a science supporting the discrimination.
#24
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
I will argue that your S-A source provided in your #22
theweakeredge provided it first in POST#3

makes the claim that "There is no scientific case for excluding them" [Article: Trans Girls Belong on Sports Teams"], but, curiously, no linkage in the article provides any scientific case for including trans girls.  Shouldn't there be, if the article writer makes the claim?
The article is interviewing the scientist herself and asking her to summarize, which strikes me as superior to citations.

"As Katrina Karkazis, a senior visiting fellow and expert on testosterone and bioethics at Yale University explains, “Studies of testosterone levels in athletes do not show any clear, consistent relationship between testosterone and athletic performance. Sometimes testosterone is associated with better performance, but other studies show weak links or no links. And yet others show testosterone is associated with worse performance.”   The bills’ premises lack scientific validity."

Nevertheless, here's that linkage about which you claim curiosity yet fail to google:
Shouldn't there be, if the article writer makes the claim?
No,of course not.   Not every claim of 'no evidence supporting public policy' must also show 'some evidence disproving public policy.'  Sometimes, the scientific question is too new and insufficient data has been gathered for conclusion.  That does not change the validity of Scientific American's claim: The bills premises lack scientific validity.  I ask again whether you are trusting Scientific American as a source generally or only when the articles confirm your bias?

Sorry, but the section header of your article tells all: "Policy/Ethics." Since when is either considered as science?
Since Galileo Galilee, at least. 

  • Galileo included public policy recommendations regarding the funding of his research on cannonball trajectories in his  Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze. 
    • Let's remember that you are the one insisting on science governing public polcy (on which point we agree):
      •  Come on, let's deal with science instead of agenda.
      • Now you suggest policy is not science?
  • Galileo's scientific method remains the ethical framework distinguishing good science from bad science.
    • As Nature Magazine puts it:
      • Ethics is an integral part of science. Like science, it requires us to be consistent and empirically justified in our interpretations of the actions of scientists. The ethics of science and science itself share the goal of comprehending in human terms scientists' actions in manipulating the physical world.
      • Are you suggesting that we implement a public policy re-introducing segregation to athletics (whether public or private you refuse to say), but then set ethical considerations aside as "un-science"?
However, the problem extends beyond sports to a general discrimination of females that is the bane of worldwide concerns in business, politics, education, and just about everything else
discrimination of females?  Do you mean
  • discrimination against females
  • or
  • discrimination by females?
without a science supporting the discrimination.
I'd argue there's plenty of science supporting  discrimination against females (as well as by, I'm sure- either way that's wrong).

Topic's author
#25
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
I'll have more later, but for now, while your cited S-A source is a medical doctor, and has a masters in child psychology, he cites statistical data, even doing a stat study of his own, but Dr. Jack Turban is no statistician, and hasn't the slightest clue of the necessities of that science. His methods are elementary, his results are faulty as a result, and he  does not offer [nor do his sources offer] a hint at the raw data collected and by what questions it was obtained. Until that raw data reporting is done, everything he says is suspect, because statistics demands that such detail be offered for legitimate peer review; not for the medical science he claims, but for the statistical accuracy of the claims based on those statistics. For example, one study of a survey he uses as support indicates a margin of error whose range is larger than his alleged supporting data will qualify the data as accurate. Turban does not even realize the inaccuracy of the data as a result, because you don't ask a medical doctor to conduct a statistical study. Pure and simple hogwash is the result. Unfortunately, statistics is much more than stringing questions and analyzing the answers.

Oh, another study he cites, [actually, at least two of them] do not have a statistically valid sample size of respondents to legitimize the study results - another classic error made by non-statisticians assuming they know how statistical studies are conducted. Again, hogwash results. Being a non-statistician yourself, I don't wonder you believe the results, just because a "scientist" reports it. Not a scientist in the right field. I certainly would not go to Dr. Jack to ask him if it is legal for me to practice medicine, based on the alleged statistics that that say I should be able to do so with the appropriate knowledge. Certification? What's that?
#26
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,596
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@fauxlaw
Dr. Turban graduated from Harvard University magna cum laude with a B.A. in neurobiology. He earned his MD and MHS degrees from Yale School of Medicine, where he was an HHMI medical research fellow and graduated with highest honors with an award winning thesis entitled, “Evolving Treatment Paradigms for Transgender Youth.” He completed his adult psychiatry training at MGH/McLean (Harvard Medical School).
He is currently a child and adolescent psychiatry fellow at Stanford University School of Medicine. He has several active research projects through The Fenway Institute and The McLean Institute for Technology in Psychiatry. He is a member of the media committee of The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry and the communications council of The American Psychiatric Association.
#27
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
--> @oromagi
I'll have more later, but for now, ....What's that?
All of which is non-sequitur dodge.

You are the one proposing the segregation of unpopular minorities and given the history of human suffering that has consistently accompanied such apartheid, you hold the burden of science here.  You must show that such segregation is likely to increase the public welfare.  My position (and Scientific American's) is that you have failed to provide any scientific evidence to support such increase, so we wonder why Republicans (who once were skeptical about the capacity of big government to improve social problems) move simultaneously in 35 states to test and classify and segregate  small groups of people to satisfy a popular but ignorant prejudice with no scientific backing at all. 

The burden is yours to provide statistics.  When a scientist says that there's not enough stats to support any conclusion it is not enough for you to say that scientist is wrong, you must demonstrate a statistically valid sample size and show that your stats prove that segregation will work in this case in spite of such policy's long history as a tool of oppression.

You still haven't said what you plan to do with the cisgender women with too much testosterone or the cisgender men with XX chromosomes.  On what scientific basis do you exclude the trans folks without bringing down state-sponsored chaos on the heads of this much larger segment of athletes?

Back in POST#18 I asked:

I am aware of a only a very few recent and highly anecdotal cases but I don't see any science that confirms any advantage consistent enough to justify your suggested apartheid or the 35 state bills now enforcing discrimination well ahead of that science.
You say that's wrong, that there are plenty of stats but you still haven't quoted any stats supporting your case.

Please be sure to make clear whether your plan applies to public policy in schools (where who wins is not a consideration next to the benefits of inclusive participation  and the promotion of exercise for everybody) or private enterprise (where you'll be injecting state prejudices into business policies where no state interference is wanted or warranted).
You have dodged this question several times now.  On to which public or private institutions do you intend for Big Govt. to apply this segregation?

My agenda is the extension of the American franchise to all, especially for the protection of the oppressed minorities- the outsiders and the underdogs who are traditionally kicked to the curb and offered separate but "equal" accommodation .   What is your agenda?
You say you are on the side of science and not political agenda but you refuse to show any science supporting your case and keep your agenda closeted although I suppose most readers have already discerned it.

Please try to be more forthright in your future replies.

Topic's author
#28
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@FLRW
I agree, Dr. Turban has excellent medical credentials. What he lacks are credentials in statistical data gathering and analysis. Since his medical decisions, in this case, are based upon flawed statistics, he needs to find other justification for his opinions. He is using stat analyses that violate the most basic of standards of statistical science. Being a credentialed expert in this field, I recognize these flaws immediately when given the opportunity to see the data behind the analyses. You don't just organize a series of questions [and of particular important is to avoid bias in the questions - but who would know that if they do not understand statistical science?] and select a haphazard sample size of respondents, which is usually too small for statistical accuracy [but who would know that if they do not understand statistical science?], and you don 't play with margins of error haphazardly [but who would know that if they do not understand statistical science?].
Topic's author
#29
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@oromagi
All of which is non-sequitur dodge.
What makes statistical analysis, which Dr. Turban attempts to do, suddenly non-sequitur? Because you can't do it, either? Not your expertise? Sorry, that's on you and Dr. Turban.

You are the one proposing the segregation of unpopular minorities
When have I called transgenders unpopular? You just did, but I've never said it. 

you must demonstrate a statistically valid sample size and show that your stats prove that segregation will work in this case in spite of such policy's long history as a tool of oppression.
That is a claim right out of bitterness because you do not share my opinion. I've merely offered an opinion; I'm not saying I have science behind it. Why must I mount a statistical study in a field in which I have no particular interest or expertise? I'm not a medical doctor, and you're not qualified to certify me as such.  Since Dr. Turban is interested in an agenda, it is his responsibility to secure a competent statistical expertise - hire it himself, and not use someone else's flawed studies. I have no stake in the game.

You say you are on the side of science and not political agenda
I've said I'm on the side of statistical science, and I'll call out flaws when I see them in that science. That's all.
#30
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@fauxlaw
I'm not saying I have science behind it
At last, you admit it.


/thread