Trans Weightlifter to be in Olympics

[BuckyBadger 69]

The truth really is stranger than fiction.

10 years ago this would have been an episode on Southpark that everyone would have laughed at and then gone about their business.

But today this is reality.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/new-zealand-weightlifter-laurel-hubbard-to-become-first-openly-transgender-athlete-to-compete-in-olympics-190441558.html

Just wait until we see the first trans wrestler in the Olympics. What a mockery.

How the hell did we get to this point?

[Drew87 349]

2 hours ago, BuckyBadger said:

The truth really is stranger than fiction.

10 years ago this would have been an episode on Southpark that everyone would have laughed at and then gone about their business.

But today this is reality.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/new-zealand-weightlifter-laurel-hubbard-to-become-first-openly-transgender-athlete-to-compete-in-olympics-190441558.html

Just wait until we see the first trans wrestler in the Olympics. What a mockery.

How the hell did we get to this point?

Lack of diversity of opinion at the helm for information technology decisions, that and runaway sensationalism driving advertising revenue.  

Also, picking and chosing when science can be observed and used to make decisions.

[Relentless125 76]

3 hours ago, BuckyBadger said:

The truth really is stranger than fiction.

10 years ago this would have been an episode on Southpark that everyone would have laughed at and then gone about their business.

But today this is reality.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/new-zealand-weightlifter-laurel-hubbard-to-become-first-openly-transgender-athlete-to-compete-in-olympics-190441558.html

Just wait until we see the first trans wrestler in the Olympics. What a mockery.

How the hell did we get to this point?

Less than 2 years ago actually.

 

Related article on an athlete not able to participate OTT due to hormone level.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jun/24/cece-telfer-transgender-runner-fails-clear-testost/

Edited June 25, 2021 by Relentless125
Article link

[Coach_J 2,180]

Issues regarding gender are far from 100% cut-and-dried. Take the case of Caster Semenya, for example, who won gold in Rio but cannot defend her titles because of new testing (which incidentally seems to target the distance she runs specifically).  Some people are born as intersex (the old term was hermaphrodite), so the outdated ideas that you are "what you were born as" or "you're one or the other" are at times very clouded, inaccurate, and scientifically uncertain.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/5/3/18526723/caster-semenya-800-gender-race-intersex-athletes

[gowrestle 689]

1 hour ago, Coach_J said:

Issues regarding gender are far from 100% cut-and-dried. Take the case of Caster Semenya, for example, who won gold in Rio but cannot defend her titles because of new testing (which incidentally seems to target the distance she runs specifically).  Some people are born as intersex (the old term was hermaphrodite), so the outdated ideas that you are "what you were born as" or "you're one or the other" are at times very clouded, inaccurate, and scientifically uncertain.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/5/3/18526723/caster-semenya-800-gender-race-intersex-athletes

Complex indeed. 

[dman115 513]

1 hour ago, Coach_J said:

Issues regarding gender are far from 100% cut-and-dried. Take the case of Caster Semenya, for example, who won gold in Rio but cannot defend her titles because of new testing (which incidentally seems to target the distance she runs specifically).  Some people are born as intersex (the old term was hermaphrodite), so the outdated ideas that you are "what you were born as" or "you're one or the other" are at times very clouded, inaccurate, and scientifically uncertain.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/5/3/18526723/caster-semenya-800-gender-race-intersex-athletes

But aren't you talking about a very very small percentage of the population??  And isn't it pretty well known science around intersex?  Genetics is one of the most studied areas of science and the definition of male and female is pretty specific, genetically speaking.

Just so we are clear, I am in no way against someone who is born a man or women and wants to become the other...that is their right and I respect it and defend it.  But when talking about sports, there has for thousands of years been a clear line between males competing against males and females competing against females in sports...for very good reason.  If those that are transgender or intersex want to have their own league, I support it 100%.

[Coach_J 2,180]

8 minutes ago, dman115 said:

But aren't you talking about a very very small percentage of the population??  And isn't it pretty well known science around intersex?  Genetics is one of the most studied areas of science and the definition of male and female is pretty specific, genetically speaking.

Just so we are clear, I am in no way against someone who is born a man or women and wants to become the other...that is their right and I respect it and defend it.  But when talking about sports, there has for thousands of years been a clear line between males competing against males and females competing against females in sports...for very good reason.  If those that are transgender or intersex want to have their own league, I support it 100%.

I don't think anyone knows conclusively what percentage of the population is affected because the science at this point is not entirely clear and to think it is clear is erroneous.  And genetically speaking, for some individuals the distinction between being male and female is a very narrow one on a very fine line.  As for the "thousands of years" idea, women weren't even allowed to watch the ancient Olympics let alone take part; the same line of thinking was used to keep blacks from competing against whites for long periods of time (leading to phenomenon like a "white heavyweight boxing champion" and a "black heavyweight boxing champion" and the "Negro Leagues" in professional baseball).  Take another famous case, the Polish sprinter Ewa Klobukowska, who won a gold in the female relay but was later disqualified from competing as a female because she had “one chromosome too many."  Although no longer considered a female by the athletic community, she later bore a child--how to explain that one to the "you're one or the other" crowd?  Basically, the danger is thinking we know everything when in reality we don't.  I do think that perhaps having a third division might be useful, but I wouldn't phrase it as "their own league" (basically what blacks were told in the past--sure, go do your own thing but keep it away from "us").    

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/104/2/390/5104458

[Drew87 349]

19 minutes ago, Coach_J said:

(basically what blacks were told in the past--sure, go do your own thing but keep it away from "us"). 

This is a very poor and seriously misguided analogy for many reasons.  

That aside, intellectually, the logical conclusion is to simply let everyone compete under one division, regardless of gender.  Really, societally accepted/acknowledged/recognized gender was simply a convenient way to classify competitors, where the reasons for separation of competitors lies in hormone levels, muscle fiber presence, composition and distribution, bone density etc to name a few.  

Would you propose…testing and participation based on hormone levels (which I lol at, bc, well, olympics) and simply having people compete based on serum levels of particular anabolic/androgenic compounds?

Also, while gender fluidity is absolutely a thing in many cultures and as a part of the human condition at large, what do you say to all the female athletes who want to continue competing in women’s sports? Worth noting I haven’t seen or heard of any stories of a transgender athlete assigned female at birth competing in men’s leagues and anybody making any hullabaloo about it.

Why would that be?

Your analogy aside, inclusion and acceptance of the uniqueness of every individual is very important interpersonally, it does not translate to the realm of athletics in their current form at all.

 

[Coach_J 2,180]

In no specific order:

"...intellectually, the logical conclusion is to simply let everyone compete under one division, regardless of gender."  Nothing logical about that at all, and nowhere near what I suggested.  Male and female divisions, fine, and possibly third division for those for whom the distinction has not been defined or those who have had treatment to modify gender identification.

In no way have I even remotely suggested using hormone levels to determine eligibility. You made that strawman up and that's on you.  It's patently dumb.

The analogy with black athletes is absolutely appropriate.  Pseudo-science and stereotypes were used against them all the time to keep them out of mainstream ("white") athletics (read all the accounts of Jack Johnson and Joe Louis referred to as "gorillas" and "apes" and "jungle killers," reducing them to something non-human, and pseudo science about brain size/weight, etc., was used to support such stupidity).  The same is done now for athletes who defy sciences/testing's ability to clearly delineate gender.  We simply don't understand enough to make 100% clear and accurate claims 100% of the time.  That's a simple fact.

As for "hullabaloo," do some research.  Matt Dawkins converted from female to male and continued competing in track. His case caused plenty of hullabaloo, hate, uniformed commentary, etc.  These cases are becoming more prominent and they're not going away.

 

 

[GoNotQuietly 1,168]

Would you propose…testing and participation based on hormone levels (which I lol at, bc, well, olympics) and simply having people compete based on serum levels of particular anabolic/androgenic compounds?

 

They already do test for hormone levels for trans athletes. I think the IOC requires something like lower than 12 nmol/L for a year and 10 nmol/L while competing.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BuckyBadger 69]

Tests for hormone levels/testosterone are bunk. It leaves out things like bone structure, muscle mass etc which we all know favor biological males. This weight lifter is 43 years old and a medal contender in the weight class. You can’t tell me that because hormone levels are at the accepted level this is now fair.

Plus, what about people that simply have higher/lower levels of testosterone than their gender average as mentioned earlier in the thread? Should we shift competition by grouping based on hormone levels? There is really no scientific basis for using hormones as the equalizer.

It’s simply an attempt by the woke crowd to “scientifically” justify tearing down gender roles. 

We should all be terrified it has gotten this far….that radical politics is now in sports.

Edited June 25, 2021 by BuckyBadger

[Drew87 349]

3 minutes ago, Coach_J said:

In no specific order:

"...intellectually, the logical conclusion is to simply let everyone compete under one division, regardless of gender."  Nothing logical about that at all, and nowhere near what I suggested.  Male and female divisions, fine, and possibly third division for those for whom the distinction has not been defined or those who have had treatment to modify gender identification.

In no way have I even remotely suggested using hormone levels to determine eligibility. You made that strawman up and that's on you.  It's patently dumb.

The analogy with black athletes is absolutely appropriate.  Pseudo-science and stereotypes were used against them all the time to keep them out of mainstream ("white") athletics (read all the accounts of Jack Johnson and Joe Louis referred to as "gorillas" and "apes" and "jungle killers," reducing them to something non-human, and pseudo science about brain size/weight, etc., was used to support such stupidity).  The same is done now for athletes who defy sciences/testing's ability to clearly delineate gender.  We simply don't understand enough to make 100% clear and accurate claims 100% of the time.  That's a simple fact.

As for "hullabaloo," do some research.  Matt Dawkins converted from female to male and continued competing in track. His case caused plenty of hullabaloo, hate, uniformed commentary, etc.  These cases are becoming more prominent and they're not going away.

 

 

I am 100% supportive of everyone living the life they want to, any notion outside that is just unkind and intrusive.  

I see what you are referring to regarding societal norms, those are outdated and unnecessary, and I agree with you on that 100%.  That said, it’s still a bad analogy given the historical significance.  I appreciate the gesture but tread lightly with that analogy.  Generally speaking, in this day and age, drawing analogies between eras and discriminatory practices is a bad look.  

What I posited is called a hypothetical, it’s not a strawman.  You posited that the current system of delineation is broken, and I asked how you would create a new one, with a hypothetical structure.

You have not addressed what is to be done with women’s athletics, which is really the only broad point of contention on the entire topic as various governing bodies have attempted to address it in recent years.  

The largest friction athletically speaking in this topic is restricted athletic divisions which all people cannot compete in.  So what do you do with restricted divisions?

[Drew87 349]

26 minutes ago, GoNotQuietly said:

They already do test for hormone levels for trans athletes. I think the IOC requires something like lower than 12 nmol/L for a year and 10 nmol/L while competing.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did not know that, that almost, i emphasize almost, seems unfair, being rigorously tested in a competition that is largely dirty.   Any trans athlete wanting to compete will have to monitor and maintain their blood levels carefully while most of their competitors are running fat cycles of something or another.

[Coach_J 2,180]

There needs to be a women's division, absolutely, never argued against it, but as it is now often administered it is idiotic.  As mentioned before, case in point Caster Semenya, who won golds in Rio as a woman.  She naturally produces high levels of testosterone; that's just the way the Great Maker created her and nothing she has done has altered that fact about her.  The IAAF has now created what I consider arbitrary tests to eliminate her. Their solution?  Semenya can take drugs that artificially reduce her natural testosterone levels if she wants to compete. It's bull.  Future science will one day pull the blinders off how stupid this is, just as it did for Ewa Klobukoska.  In no way should Klobukoska have been banned, and the "science" that was used at the time has now proven embarrassingly horrid.  This "history" should in no way be forgotten or relegated as being obsolete or dangerous.  We've done some really dumb, unconscionable things in the past and repeating those things albeit it in other forms is inexcusable.  History and consideration of past eras should be a part of guiding our present thinking and be applied to help us avoid continued dumb decision making.

Regarding males who transition to female, an unfair advantage (in accumulated muscle mass, etc.) is created in competitive sports, an unfairness that can be potentially dangerous, particularly in combat sports.  This is why a third category can be created.  We've been down a similar path with Oscar Pistorius, who competed with two prosthetic extensions on his legs.  Now we have an entire para-Olympics to allow the athletic excellence of those who are "different" to shine.  Has nothing to do with "wokeness" (damn, the whole world went to hell when everybody just up and decided to let those uppity women vote and own property) just adapting and growing as the science and objective facts become more clear and our sense of common humanity develops correspondingly.  

[uncle bernard 1,113]

58 minutes ago, BuckyBadger said:

Tests for hormone levels/testosterone are bunk. It leaves out things like bone structure, muscle mass etc which we all know favor biological males. This weight lifter is 43 years old and a medal contender in the weight class. You can’t tell me that because hormone levels are at the accepted level this is now fair.

Plus, what about people that simply have higher/lower levels of testosterone than their gender average as mentioned earlier in the thread? Should we shift competition by grouping based on hormone levels? There is really no scientific basis for using hormones as the equalizer.

It’s simply an attempt by the woke crowd to “scientifically” justify tearing down gender roles. 

We should all be terrified it has gotten this far….that radical politics is now in sports.

Yes, "woke" people are famously obsessed with sports. 

It's a tough issue to tackle, as Coach_J has laid out pretty well, but let's not call this some sort of society destroying conspiracy because you like to feel mad at people you've never met. Take a deep breath. 

[BuckyBadger 69]

47 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Yes, "woke" people are famously obsessed with sports. 

It's a tough issue to tackle, as Coach_J has laid out pretty well, but let's not call this some sort of society destroying conspiracy because you like to feel mad at people you've never met. Take a deep breath. 

If we were talking about something happening in theory, I might agree with you.
 

We are not talking about a conspiracy, there will actually be a biological male competing in the Olympics as a woman. This is the result of a relentless approach by a political minority and the majority afraid to challenge them because they might be canceled.

[AnklePicker 643]

No genders, no gender designations in sports, I’m not sure how anyone who is in favor of Laurel Hubbard competing in the Olympics can argue otherwise. 

[Plasmodium 2,229]

This is going to be a very contention point in the near future.

All of that aside - Caster Semenya's disqualification is outrageous.  Absolutely counter to the spirit of sport, competition and the Olympics. 

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by Plasmodium

[dman115 513]

To relate this topic to the disgusting history of racism and exclusion/segregation is terrible.  The science behind genders is NOT pseudoscience and thus a comparison to the pseudoscience of our history that was used to keep black athletes competing with white people is also very terrible and quite frankly weak.  

One can't be for having separate divisions in sports for men and women, and then turn around and say if there is a trans division that that is equivalent to back when there was segregation.  

Like I said, let everyone participate in the appropriate division.  We are not all born with equal traits, but we should all be given equal chances...in the appropriate division.  That is not racist, homo/transphobic, nothing other than agreeing ALL people unequivocally disserve equal opportunities.

I can't wait till they come out with the old, short, fat, weak, unathletic beer drinking wrestling league...world gold medalist right here!!

[uncle bernard 1,113]

3 hours ago, BuckyBadger said:

If we were talking about something happening in theory, I might agree with you.
 

We are not talking about a conspiracy, there will actually be a biological male competing in the Olympics as a woman. This is the result of a relentless approach by a political minority and the majority afraid to challenge them because they might be canceled.

I don't know where I stand on the issue personally. It's hard to find any writing on it that doesn't come attached to a "society is crumbling" catastrophizing worldview. 

You may not like it, but the idea that this is the result of some grand political wave that's about to destroy society's "gender norms" (whatever those are) is a little silly imo. If you didn't see the articles about this, you'd never know it's happening. It will have zero affect on your life. Keep your views to the issue at hand and not to some collapse of civil society you seem to think this will bring about.

[jp157 481]

How many people here have talked to female athletes about this issue? Because even the most “woke” female athletes I know.. including former DI athletes. Don’t like the hand waving going on being used to dismiss real discussions of the issues involved. 

 

Wherever people stand. For the love of god, don’t be that person pointing out the ONE girl who beats boys some of the time. Or the super athlete like Serena As “proof” of that the gender doesn’t matter. That “argument” is so stupid and ignorant it gives me headaches. 

Besides, it all dances around other thornier realities 

[BuckyBadger 69]

2 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

I don't know where I stand on the issue personally. It's hard to find any writing on it that doesn't come attached to a "society is crumbling" catastrophizing worldview. 

You may not like it, but the idea that this is the result of some grand political wave that's about to destroy society's "gender norms" (whatever those are) is a little silly imo. If you didn't see the articles about this, you'd never know it's happening. It will have zero affect on your life. Keep your views to the issue at hand and not to some collapse of civil society you seem to think this will bring about.

There is so much wrong here.

First of all, you are putting words in my mouth. I never said there was some grand conspiracy to tear down “gender norms”. The people who want to push the argument that gender is a construct are pretty open about it.

I’m also not mad at anyone. I don’t care if someone feels they are the wrong gender. It’s a free country, if you want to change your identity that’s up to you. I have no ill will towards anyone in that position and in fact recognize it must be a terrible sort of inner struggle to go through.

But the whole men in women’s sports thing is beyond ridiculous. The only reason there isn’t push back is because people don’t want to be canceled. Like I said earlier this weightlifter is 43 years old and according to the article is a contender for a medal. Does that not strike you as odd? That someone who wouldn’t even come close to qualifying for the men’s team can just switch genders at an over the hill age of 43 and suddenly be a medal contender. How is that not a mockery of women’s sports? You may not find it concerning but this is a first step. It only gets worse if it goes unchallenged.

The fact is this is political at its core, and if you don’t like to read someone’s views on the issue you probably shouldn’t be on a message board. 

 

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by BuckyBadger

[jp157 481]

Ironically, we have Iliza shlesinger on in back ground while making dinner.

Shes doing her bit on how unfair the strength difference between men and women is. And how 90% of feminist issues wouldn’t be a thing if the overall strength difference wasn’t a thing. 
 

 

[uncle bernard 1,113]

2 hours ago, BuckyBadger said:

There is so much wrong here.

First of all, you are putting words in my mouth. I never said there was some grand conspiracy to tear down “gender norms”. The people who want to push the argument that gender is a construct are pretty open about it.

I’m also not mad at anyone. I don’t care if someone feels they are the wrong gender. It’s a free country, if you want to change your identity that’s up to you. I have no ill will towards anyone in that position and in fact recognize it must be a terrible sort of inner struggle to go through.

But the whole men in women’s sports thing is beyond ridiculous. The only reason there isn’t push back is because people don’t want to be canceled. Like I said earlier this weightlifter is 43 years old and according to the article is a contender for a medal. Does that not strike you as odd? That someone who wouldn’t even come close to qualifying for the men’s team can just switch genders at an over the hill age of 43 and suddenly be a medal contender. How is that not a mockery of women’s sports? You may not find it concerning but this is a first step. It only gets worse if it goes unchallenged.

The fact is this is political at its core, and if you don’t like to read someone’s views on the issue you probably shouldn’t be on a message board. 

 

 

No problem reading your views. I'm disagreeing with part of them, which is the point of message boards.

Who has been cancelled? All I can find when looking this up are op-eds opposing it. Seems like you're in the majority, but are acting like you're in the minority. I probably side with you overall. It looks like the governing bodies are putting some restrictions in place like requiring at least a year of hormone therapy, but that doesn't fully take away the physical advantage. 

I just think you're overstating the politics. I run in left circles, both on and offline, and I've never heard anybody mention this or trans athletes in general. The only time I ever hear about it are from people who are against it. I don't think there's any agenda at play. It's just individual trans athletes who want to both be able to be themselves and continue participating in their sports. And we haven't come up with an answer as to how to handle that yet.

[TripNSweep 745]

Does she meet the criteria to compete in the Olympics? Yes.

End of story.