• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Deleted member 32679

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
2,787
Mod Edit:
Official Staff Communication
There is a study by Joanna Harper on transgender athletes' performance versus cisgender athletes' performance that was published in the Journal of Sporting Cultures and Identities in 2015. This was the first-ever-study of transgender athletes, according to the Washington Post. The study showed that as testosterone levels approach female norms, trans women experience a decrease in muscle mass, bone density and other physical characteristics.

Furthermore, the IOC has already set the standard for guidelines on transgender athletes:
In 2015, IOC invited Harper to attend its Consensus Meeting on Sex Reassignment and Hyperandrogenism held in Lausanne, Switzerland. After 3 days, the panel of scientists and physicians converged on revised rules for transgender competitors, including at least 1 year of hormone replacement therapy for female competitors, rather than the 2 years previously required. That change was a nod to Harper's personal transition experience and to research published in 2004 in the European Journal of Endocrinology showing that the testosterone levels—and therefore performance—of 19 transgender women stabilized after 12 months of hormone therapy. The revised IOC policy also lifted the requirement for sex reassignment surgery. That decision was a long time coming, Harper says. "What your genitals are doesn't make a difference."

You can read the full study for yourself here. (Warning: this does open a PDF document!)

You can also read the story about Joanna Harper and the research involved in Science Magazine.

There is also additional studies to collaborate the original study. As mentioned in this article in Cosmos Magazine:
...a Dutch study in the European Journal of Endocrinology, which found that within a year after gender-reassignment surgery, trans women had testosterone and haemoglobin levels no higher than their female-born compatriots. That's important because high testosterone is associated with masculine levels of muscle mass and strength, while high haemoglobin is associated with greater aerobic capacity and therefore speed.

You can read the full study for yourself here. (Warning: this does open a PDF document!)

Another study, called Sport and Transgender People: A Systematic Review of the Literature Relating to Sport Participation and Competitive Sport Policies, that was published in 2017 came to the same exact conclusion as these two others:

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.

You can read the full study for yourself here.

Based on the established criteria by the International Olympics Committee, their panel of expert scientists and physicians, and the study by Joanna Harper, and the collaborating studies, Resetera policy is that anyone concern posting about genetic advantages by transgender women in competitive sports or claiming transgender women have genetic advantages will be treated as transphobia and/or spreading misinformation on a sensitive issue and moderated appropriately. We have no interest in allowing ignorance to thrive in these threads, nor do we wish to place an undue burden on our transgender community to educate people in threads like these. This policy will be enforced from this post onward and in any future threads or posts on this subject.

If you have questions on this modpost or policy, please contact one of our mod captains (B-Dubs, Mist, Hecht) directly. Thanks.

https://www.outsports.com/2019/2/1/...aeknE3jlUaXpEMzGbKEOCY1ulgkdHLC24nkfkyYBr5Ago

"USA Powerlifting has banned all transgender women from competing as women, even as a trans powerlifter in Minnesota recently won a state championship with another association, setting a state record."

"JayCee Cooper, a trans woman, had applied last year to compete in a recent USA Powerlifting event in Minnesota. In December her application was denied."

"Male-to-female transgenders are not allowed to compete as females in our static strength sports as it is a direct competitive advantage," wrote USAPL Therapeutic Use Exemptions Committee Chair Kristopher Hunt in an email to Cooper."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
I'm very pro trans rights, but I can understand this when it comes to competitive sports. Especially one like competitive weight lifting. If this were allowed, natural born women wouldn't be competitive in their own segment.
 
Last edited:

Platy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,636
Brazil
Hunt followed up with Cooper in January with this explanation:

"Transgender male to female individuals having gone through male puberty confer an unfair competitive advantage over non-transgender females due to increased bone density and muscle mass from pubertal exposure to testosterone."

The "bone density" red herring has been thrown out there for years, at least since MMA fighter Fallon Fox appeared on the scene. The bone density of black women is, on average, significantly higher than that of white women. In fact, some studies have shown the bone strength of black women to be higher than that of white men.

Yet we don't see any great rush to divide lifting categories by race, proving this bone-density argument to be nothing but a canard designed to specifically target trans athletes.

This article is good
 

Monkey D.

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
2,352
Wasnt there a trans ufc fighter fighting a woman beating her up real bad? Or the trans woman hockey(basketball?) Team bossing the female team?
 
Last edited:

Vesper

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,672
User banned (1 week): tranmsphobia
This is just common sense to me. I'm all for people being who they want to be but in this sort of competition there's a very clear unfair advantage. This is the right call.
 

Deleted member 23212

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
11,225
I'm very pro trans rights, but I can understand this when it comes to competitive sports. Especially one light competitive weight lifting. If this were allowed, natural born women wouldn't be competitive in their own segment.
Most cis women wouldn't be competitive anyway as size is also genetic, so this is unnecessary. It's not like men are going to be like "hey, I want to win a powerlifting contest, so I'm going to turn into a woman to win!" That is just an irrational belief.
 

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
Most cis women wouldn't be competitive anyway as size is also genetic, so this is unnecessary. It's not like men are going to be like "hey, I want to win a powerlifting contest, so I'm going to turn into a woman to win!" That is just an irrational belief.
That is not an irrational belief at all. People will do all kinds of shady shit to "win".
 

AztecComplex

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,371
This is just common sense to me. I'm all for people being who they want to be but in this sort of competition there's a very clear unfair advantage. This is the right call.
This. I know it a complicated topic and one I don't have a definitive answer for but for competitive weight lifting of all things? I think this is the right call, sadly.
 

SweetNicole

The Old Guard
Member
Oct 24, 2017
6,542
I'm very pro trans rights, but I can understand this when it comes to competitive sports. Especially one light competitive weight lifting.
This is just common sense to me. I'm all for people being who they want to be but in this sort of competition there's a very clear unfair advantage. This is the right call.

Except there's no significant studies to show that there is any competitive advantage that transgender athletes have over cisgender ones.

The article itself even goes into detail:
The "bone density" red herring has been thrown out there for years, at least since MMA fighter Fallon Fox appeared on the scene. The bone density of black women is, on average, significantly higher than that of white women. In fact, some studies have shown the bone strength of black women to be higher than that of white men.

Yet we don't see any great rush to divide lifting categories by race, proving this bone-density argument to be nothing but a canard designed to specifically target trans athletes.

This also ignores the large history of genetic advantages present and persistent throughout the Olympics and other competitive events.

https://www.britannica.com/story/olympics-the-genetics-of-success
Variations on Elite Performance
Examples of genes containing variations associated with athletic ability are ADRA2A (alpha-2A adrenergic receptor), ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme), NOS3 (nitric oxide synthase 3), and ACTN3 (alpha-actinin-3). Of these, the ACE gene has received the most attention. This gene produces an enzyme that regulates blood pressure, and two different forms of the ACE gene, known as the D allele and the I allele, have been identified in elite athletes.

Olympic-caliber distance runners typically possess the I allele, which reduces circulating levels and activity of ACE. Those reductions are associated with increased relaxation of blood vessels. The gene also uses an indirect mechanism, namely the activation of other genes, to influence glucose uptake by skeletal muscle and to optimize oxygen utilization and energy production.

In contrast, elite swimmers and sprinters typically have the D allele, which is believed to result in increased muscle power via ACE's ability to induce cell growth. In general these athletes rely more heavily on power than endurance athletes. Although it is not known for certain, the D allele appears to facilitate increased growth of the types of muscle fibers that power athletes rely on for explosive speed.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/ju...s-gene-doping-coming-to-the-olympics-20120718
There are numerous genetic factors known to confer advantages in athletic contests, from mutations that increase the oxygen carrying capacity of blood to gene variants that confer an incredible increase in endurance, and these mutations appear to be especially common in Olympic athletes. In other words, we may want an egalitarian Olympic games, but it probably isn't in the cards.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-a-plentiful-supply-of-oxygen-to-1458723.html
But one Olympic cross-country skiing gold medallist has a special physical advantage: scientists have found an inherited mutation in his genetic make- up that increases his blood's capacity to carry oxygen and enhances his ability in endurance sports.
https://fitnessgenes.com/blog/finnish-skier-eero-mantyranta-and-his-favourable-genetics/
Mäntyranta got his extra red blood cells because of a mutation in the gene that produces the receptor for the hormone erythropoietin (epo). The kidneys normally churn out epo when oxygen levels in the body's tissues drop, as they do at high altitude, where the air is thin. Epo commands the body to manufacture new red cells, which raises the blood's capacity to carry oxygen. Once oxygen regains its normal level in the blood, the epo receptor should shut down epo production. But Mäntyranta's mutation turned off this crucial feedback, so his body kept making more red cells.

If the concern is that there should be "fair" competitions, then any form of genetic advantage should be banned across the board. Genetic advantage includes things like your size and height, in addition to things like special genes which help give your body more oxygen, etc. Right now, they want to solely target transgender women and men on the basis of some inherit advantage (an advantage which is not backed up by science). Let's call this for what it is plain and simple: transphobia.
 

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
This is just common sense to me. I'm all for people being who they want to be but in this sort of competition there's a very clear unfair advantage. This is the right call.
Exactly. I don't see anything anti-trans about this.
 

Platy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,636
Brazil
I don't think comparing race to folks being trans is a good comparison when it comes to saying one is allowed so the other should be.

I also don't think someone who thinks like that can call themselves "very pro trans rights" but it is ok

If you care about bone density creating an unfair advantage, you ban everyone with a huge bone density advantage. And by the link on the article it means black women have more bone density than this trans woman in question BEFORE she transitioned.

Remembering that lack of testosterone also calls osteoporosis in cis men and trans women have insanely low testosterone levels.

I'm very pro trans rights, but I can understand this when it comes to competitive sports. Especially one light competitive weight lifting. If this were allowed, natural born women wouldn't be competitive in their own segment.

Besides the fact that trans people are not that simple (like trans people who transitioned before puberty does not have any bone change), you can't call yourself "very pro trans rights" if you create a huge difference between trans women and cis women. I understand creating rules for trans people (like the "2 years with testosterone and estrogen levels within women's standards") but outright banning makes zero sense, specially in how pro sports are FILLED with people who are outside of the basic starndard of what constitutes a regular human.

Natural Born Cis women will be comepetitive. It is just one woman who won a competititon. EVery women's competititon has a woman winning it. And some even make records. They aren't banned because of that and it makes no sense to ban an entire group of women because of that.
 

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
User Banned (2 Weeks): Transphobia
Name people in sports who transitioned in order to compete in women's divisions.
Whether there is a history of it or not doesn't really change the issue. In a weight lifting contest, someone who is genetically/physically a man is going to have a massive advantage over a woman.
 

SteveMeister

Member
Oct 31, 2017
1,819
Just get rid of gender divisions altogether and base lifting divisions on competitor weight and height.
 

meowdi gras

Member
Feb 24, 2018
12,611
I'm very pro trans rights, but I can understand this when it comes to competitive sports. Especially one like competitive weight lifting. If this were allowed, natural born women wouldn't be competitive in their own segment.
Very first reply. Well, at least there was no suspense as to when the usual regurgitated bullshit about this topic would be posted.
 

DrewFu

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt-account
Banned
Apr 19, 2018
10,360
I also don't think someone who thinks like that can call themselves "very pro trans rights" but it is ok

If you care about bone density creating an unfair advantage, you ban everyone with a huge bone density advantage. And by the link on the article it means black women have more bone density than this trans woman in question BEFORE she transitioned.

Remembering that lack of testosterone also calls osteoporosis in cis men and trans women have insanely low testosterone levels.



Besides the fact that trans people are not that simple (like trans people who transitioned before puberty does not have any bone change), you can't call yourself "very pro trans rights" if you create a huge difference between trans women and cis women. I understand creating rules for trans people (like the "2 years with testosterone and estrogen levels within women's standards") but outright banning makes zero sense, specially in how pro sports are FILLED with people who are outside of the basic starndard of what constitutes a regular human.

Natural Born Cis women will be comepetitive. It is just one woman who won a competititon. EVery women's competititon has a woman winning it. And some even make records. They aren't banned because of that and it makes no sense to ban an entire group of women because of that.
To each their own. I can see where the issue comes from in this case. If you think that makes me anti-trans, then I honestly don't care.
 

Deleted member 23212

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
11,225
Whether there is a history of it or not doesn't really change the issue. In a weight lifting contest, someone who is genetically/physically a man is going to have a massive advantage over a woman.
So, then you're trying to curtail trans rights because of a "what if" scenario. And as I said, some women are going to have massive advantages over other women anyway from their genes.
 

Platy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,636
Brazil
There has never been a trans athlete in the UFC

There was. Fallon Fox is her name.
Her card is not that good. If she had an unfair advantage than Ronda Rousey who has a much better card with MUCH more fights also has an unfair advantage =P


To each their own. I can see where the issue comes from in this case. If you think that makes me anti-trans, then I honestly don't care.

It is not just having the lack of knowledge to know that there isn't an advantage, speically when compared to olympic lifters. It is stuff like saying "physically a man" to a trans woman who transitioned. You are literally going "trans woman = man" in your head and that is the opposite of someone who is an ally.

Whether there is a history of it or not doesn't really change the issue. In a weight lifting contest, someone who is genetically/physically a man is going to have a massive advantage over a woman.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,956
No I don't, but bathrooms aren't a competitive sporting event.

But some people will go to any lengths to violate a woman. Just as we should just be safe and ban trans women from competitive sports because we may have people who abuse the rule otherwise, shouldn't we do the same for bathrooms? I'm not exactly seeing the difference between the two points.
 

17 Seconds

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
3,589
User Banned (1 Week): Transphobia; inflammatory discussion
people who have a problem with this decision are either out of touch with reality or dont know what they're fighting for. and yes, I've read the arguments that say decisions like thos are unfair. they are unconvincing and usually delivered in a completely toxic way.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,956
people who have a problem with this decision are either out of touch with reality or dont know what they're fighting for. and yes, I've read the arguments that say decisions like thos are unfair. they are unconvincing and usually delivered in a completely toxic way.

Can you elaborate upon why you think that trans women should not be allowed to compete in women's divisions?
 

Kaloskatoa

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
352
I also don't think someone who thinks like that can call themselves "very pro trans rights" but it is ok

If you care about bone density creating an unfair advantage, you ban everyone with a huge bone density advantage. And by the link on the article it means black women have more bone density than this trans woman in question BEFORE she transitioned.

Remembering that lack of testosterone also calls osteoporosis in cis men and trans women have insanely low testosterone levels.



Besides the fact that trans people are not that simple (like trans people who transitioned before puberty does not have any bone change), you can't call yourself "very pro trans rights" if you create a huge difference between trans women and cis women. I understand creating rules for trans people (like the "2 years with testosterone and estrogen levels within women's standards") but outright banning makes zero sense, specially in how pro sports are FILLED with people who are outside of the basic starndard of what constitutes a regular human.

Natural Born Cis women will be comepetitive. It is just one woman who won a competititon. EVery women's competititon has a woman winning it. And some even make records. They aren't banned because of that and it makes no sense to ban an entire group of women because of that.

a solution would be to create competition categories based on bone density and weight?

Like heavy weights in fighting sports?

I dont understand too much about weight lifting, asking a legit question.
 

17 Seconds

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
3,589
But some people will go to any lengths to violate a woman. Just as we should just be safe and ban trans women from competitive sports because we may have people who abuse the rule otherwise, shouldn't we do the same for bathrooms? I'm not exactly seeing the difference between the two points.

what in the world
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,956
Oct 27, 2017
12,282
My gut reaction here is that this is a choice made before any actual study is done to determine if there's actual advantages. From my understanding of the trans process would tell me some of the perceived advantages wouldn't actually be there - but I genuinely don't know. And I doubt they do either. So instead of trying to find out for the better of everyone...they just do nothing and ban then outright. Seems shitty.
 

Deleted member 19003

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,809
Hmm. I think it's probably fair to ban those that have already gone through male puberty and transitioned later. But transgender women that started as pre-teens (and never went thru male puberty growth) are probably much more in line and could compete fairly. Not sure how that could be measured though.
 

Icemonk191

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,814
people who have a problem with this decision are either out of touch with reality or dont know what they're fighting for. and yes, I've read the arguments that say decisions like thos are unfair. they are unconvincing and usually delivered in a completely toxic way.

Please explain how THIS

Except there's no significant studies to show that there is any competitive advantage that transgender athletes have over cisgender ones.

The article itself even goes into detail:


This also ignores the large history of genetic advantages present and persistent throughout the Olympics and other competitive events.

https://www.britannica.com/story/olympics-the-genetics-of-success

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/ju...s-gene-doping-coming-to-the-olympics-20120718

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-a-plentiful-supply-of-oxygen-to-1458723.html

https://fitnessgenes.com/blog/finnish-skier-eero-mantyranta-and-his-favourable-genetics/


If the concern is that there should be "fair" competitions, then any form of genetic advantage should be banned across the board. Genetic advantage includes things like your size and height, in addition to things like special genes which help give your body more oxygen, etc. Right now, they want to solely target transgender women and men on the basis of some inherit advantage (an advantage which is not backed up by science). Let's call this for what it is plain and simple: transphobia.

Is "unconvincing".
 

Platy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,636
Brazil
a solution would be to create competition categories based on bone density and weight?

Like heavy weights in fighting sports?

I dont understand too much about weight lifting, asking a legit question.

The solution would be just to accept that some people are born genetically better.
Or else you open a door for "white people categories" to be created in olympic long distance races and we all know where this can lead.
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 32679

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
2,787
people who have a problem with this decision are either out of touch with reality or dont know what they're fighting for. and yes, I've read the arguments that say decisions like thos are unfair. they are unconvincing and usually delivered in a completely toxic way.
Have you read the article or studies? I think that would help change your perspective.
 

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,316
people who have a problem with this decision are either out of touch with reality or dont know what they're fighting for. and yes, I've read the arguments that say decisions like thos are unfair. they are unconvincing and usually delivered in a completely toxic way.

Whereas this post is completely constructive and non toxic