• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

should male to female transgendered athletes be allowed to compete in women's sports

Should Male to female transgendered athletes be able to compete as women

  • Total voters
    75
Until they have fully transitioned (including HRT), I would say no. For now, give them their own league or have them compete in their biological gender.
 
Not sure if anyone watches the Olympics or remembers that a young gymnast was stripped of her medal because of cold meds.
Romanian Teenager Stripped of Gold - Los Angeles Times
This is perhaps not a valid comparison, but it just popped in my head. Unfair advantages are frowned upon. Right?
 
Lovebug said:
Not sure if anyone watches the Olympics or remembers that a young gymnast was stripped of her medal because of cold meds.
Romanian Teenager Stripped of Gold - Los Angeles Times
This is perhaps not a valid comparison, but it just popped in my head. Unfair advantages are frowned upon. Right?
Click to expand...

an American swimmer who thought he had a TUE, was stripped of a medal or medals for asthma medication. I coach a young lady who is a Juvenile Diabetic. She represented the USA in a world championship. Insulin is considered a "masking agent". She has a pump. The paperwork we had to do to get her a TUE was amazing.
 
BrotherFease said:
My answer is "other", because the polling question is poorly structured/worded, with all due respect to the OP.

For starters, there's no such thing as "transgendered". Transgender means their biological sex and gender identity are opposite of each other. There's no "ed" necessary.

The OP mentions nothing about their present hormone estrogen levels, or whether or not they had bottom surgery, or if they transitioned before/during puberty.

My belief here is that High School sports should be open to everybody. As long as their estrogen levels are at biological female levels, they should be permitted to join the girls team. High School sports are not really about winning. They are about education and participation. It's about developing friendships, and learning about hard work, discipline, and being a team player. A greater sin is depriving people of that education simply because they have a neurological condition.

For college, I think the current NCAA rules are fine and have experienced pretty much zero problems. They require the trans female to be on estrogen for at least 2 years straight, and their estrogen level must be at a certain level to play. I have no problem if they tighten or loosen the currently restrictions. It's up to them.

Without asking about the female's current hormone levels, the poll question makes less sense to me.

My answer is YES, they should be permitted to play on female teams as long as they get doctor approval and have taken hormones for a given time period.

The problem here is when we start banning transgender females from sports (which is a very small sample btw), then we will eventually start to go down a slippery slope. Does this mean Caster Semenya can't play in the female leagues? She was born with a vagina, but has XY chromosomes and produces high level of testosterone. Does this mean a 6'7 female basketball can't play basketball because she's too tall? Back when Jackie Robinson played baseball, many people didn't want him to play because he was black and black people were seen to have a genetic advantage in sports.

My other problem here is we only pick on the transgender females which are actually good, and train extremely hard. The ones which are not, get ignored.
Click to expand...

Hormone levels do not change body size. You make it sound like it's cut and dry and all about hormonal level. It most certainly is not.

As to high school sports not being about winning, WTF???????

The lessons learned in high school sport revolve around competition, winning and loseing.

Then you criticize the wording of the OP?

Good grief.
 
They should not be allowed to compete in any sport where a higher VO2 max is an advantage. Men on average have a higher heart and lung capacity than women on average. That is true even after a transgendered woman has completed her transition and has had her testosterone levels suppressed long term.
 
TurtleDude said:
Or only in some events where strength or size does not'
matter

Transgender Cyclist Rachel McKinnon Keeps Smashing Women's Records

Female to male trans don't tend to win and are thus a non-issue
Click to expand...

No, there is in unfair advantage. Look at the case of Andraya Yearwood that finish first in Connecticut girls track championship or transgender wrestler that won two straight Texas girls high school title or Cece Telferm who was mediocre when running with the men’s team but won the US women’s college title in the 400m hurdles.
They should not be allowed to compete if physical they are stronger than the women they are competing against. Biological they are men.
 
Outlook said:
No, there is in unfair advantage. Look at the case of Andraya Yearwood that finish first in Connecticut girls track championship or transgender wrestler that won two straight Texas girls high school title or Cece Telferm who was mediocre when running with the men’s team but won the US women’s college title in the 400m hurdles.
They should not be allowed to compete if physical they are stronger than the women they are competing against. Biological they are men.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
noonereal said:
Hormone levels do not change body size. You make it sound like it's cut and dry and all about hormonal level. It most certainly is not.
Click to expand...

Estrogen levels deceases body mass. That's a fact. Will taking estrogen turn a 6'0 person into a 5'6 person? No. But their muscles will decrease in size and change their body structure.

As to high school sports not being about winning, WTF???????
Click to expand...

Please re-read what I said. You mangled my point. H.S sports are more than about winning. There's an educational and social level, which is more relevant than winning or losing.
 
Irredentist said:
Broad generalizations like this seldom present an accurate or fair view of the issue. Each human body is fundamentally different, so whatever advantages transgender competitors may or may not have need to be judged on a case by case basis, not with sweeping generalizations which ultimately amount to little more than discrimination.
Click to expand...
But that raises possibilities of prejudice, discrimination or favoritism.
 
Some transgenders are more equal than other transgenders, it would seem.
 
Consider this to ponder: This scientist is racing to discover how gender transitions alter athletic performance—including her own | Science | AAAS

Many people believe transgender women such as Harper have athletic advantages over non-transgender women—sometimes called cisgender women—because of their previous exposure to male levels of testosterone. But Harper, a medical physicist at a large medical center in Portland, Oregon, has been challenging that assumption with data. In 2015, she published the first study of transgender athletes' performances, finding that transgender women who received treatment to lower their testosterone levels did no better in a variety of races against female peers than they had previously done against male runners
Click to expand...
 
TurtleDude said:
Female to male trans don't tend to win and are thus a non-issue
Click to expand...

Quick questions for you:

1. Are you okay with trans men competing with biological men? In other words, you disagree with Texas forcing Mack Beggs to compete with the girls, right?

2. Should people like Caster Semenya have to compete on the men's team? Just so you know. She was born with a vagina, but has XY chromosomes and produces high levels of testosterone.

3. Should tall women be permitted to play basketball? I'll give you an example. There's a player on the Rice Basketball team named Nancy Mulkey. She's 6'9. Should she be allowed to participate in ladies basketball?
 
BrotherFease said:
Quick questions for you:

1. Are you okay with trans men competing with biological men? In other words, you disagree with Texas forcing Mack Beggs to compete with the girls, right?

2. Should people like Caster Semenya have to compete on the men's team? Just so you know. She was born with a vagina, but has XY chromosomes and produces high levels of testosterone.

3. Should tall women be permitted to play basketball? I'll give you an example. There's a player on the Rice Basketball team named Nancy Mulkey. She's 6'9. Should she be allowed to participate in ladies basketball?
Click to expand...


1) yes-no unfair advantage

2) I haven't quite arrived at a decision on this because I don't know all the facts. An athlete coached was XX but had a high level of testosterone, She broke fitness records at the USAF Academy and won major martial arts and archery events. She had to carry proof of her testosterone level was not artificial. Looking at her, you would never suspect it though

3) absolutely.
 
Irredentist said:
Broad generalizations like this seldom present an accurate or fair view of the issue. Each human body is fundamentally different, so whatever advantages transgender competitors may or may not have need to be judged on a case by case basis, not with sweeping generalizations which ultimately amount to little more than discrimination.
Click to expand...

Just no.
 
They should absolutely let them compete...even if they just claim to be women. Idiot leftists started this ****ed up insanity and they are going to have to be the ones to have to finally come their senses and end it. Until they do, well...'ladies' take the field.

Of course...the other alternative is to truly level the playing field and just eliminate 'womens' sports altogether since we are all equal.
 
TurtleDude said:
2) I haven't quite arrived at a decision on this because I don't know all the facts. An athlete coached was XX but had a high level of testosterone, She broke fitness records at the USAF Academy and won major martial arts and archery events. She had to carry proof of her testosterone level was not artificial. Looking at her, you would never suspect it though

3) absolutely.
Click to expand...

2. Which facts are you unaware of? I just told you. A woman born with a vagina, but produces high level testosterone and has XY chromosomes. What more do you need? Should she be permitted to compete with the other ladies? Come on now. You're making the argument that people who originally produced high levels of testosterone shouldn't be permitted to play with other women.

3. Why? Being 6'9 means she has a competitive advantage. That's unfair to the other basketball players. Isn't your argument all about fairness?
 
TurtleDude said:
Or only in some events where strength or size does not'
matter

Transgender Cyclist Rachel McKinnon Keeps Smashing Women's Records

Female to male trans don't tend to win and are thus a non-issue
Click to expand...

I vote other because i simply don't know . . . .

Many sports have various leagues and governing bodies and they get to make the rules . . they are free to do so

Sports leagues/governing bodies that are tied to academics should be left up to medical science . . .not me or any other meaningless person . .

I understand some of the arguments and some of them OF COURSE would be supported by medical science but if medical science doesnt support them then I dont view them as valid.

Examples

1.) A girl worked for me, she started her transition very young pre/early teens. Theres know way to tell alice was born a boy visually and if medical science can determine that alice has the same avg hormone levels and testosterone levels, body mass, muscle mass etc etc (whatever else matters to medical science) then i see no reason to deny her the ability to compete . . again based on medical science .. .if she couldn't meet those standards and was WAY off of them then yes i ouwl understand not allowing her to compete, again . . .based on medical science

2.) a man is a world class athlete, he is a MMA fighter. At the age of 25, after a decade of training and weightlifting etc he starts his trainstion and surgery. 6-12 months later she wants to compete in womans MMA . . yeah this i dont support. AGain based on my guess that also medical science would NOT support it either. BUT MMA is its own thing and they are free to do what they want. and if for the record medcial science would deem her to be ok to fight say somethign like 2-3 years after transition .. again im back on board . . based on medical science . .
 
BrotherFease said:
2. Which facts are you unaware of? I just told you. A woman born with a vagina, but produces high level testosterone and has XY chromosomes. What more do you need? Should she be permitted to compete with the other ladies? Come on now. You're making the argument that people who originally produced high levels of testosterone shouldn't be permitted to play with other women.

3. Why? Being 6'9 means she has a competitive advantage. That's unfair to the other basketball players. Isn't your argument all about fairness?
Click to expand...

winning athletes have competitive advantages. Usain Bolt is faster than anyone.

as someone who was actively competitive in several sports, I understand that, but I don't support unfair advantages.
 
AGENT J said:
I vote other because i simply don't know . . . .

Many sports have various leagues and governing bodies and they get to make the rules . . they are free to do so

Sports leagues/governing bodies that are tied to academics should be left up to medical science . . .not me or any other meaningless person . .

I understand some of the arguments and some of them OF COURSE would be supported by medical science but if medical science doesnt support them then I dont view them as valid.

Examples

1.) A girl worked for me, she started her transition very young pre/early teens. Theres know way to tell alice was born a boy visually and if medical science can determine that alice has the same avg hormone levels and testosterone levels, body mass, muscle mass etc etc (whatever else matters to medical science) then i see no reason to deny her the ability to compete . . again based on medical science .. .if she couldn't meet those standards and was WAY off of them then yes i ouwl understand not allowing her to compete, again . . .based on medical science

2.) a man is a world class athlete, he is a MMA fighter. At the age of 25, after a decade of training and weightlifting etc he starts his trainstion and surgery. 6-12 months later she wants to compete in womans MMA . . yeah this i dont support. AGain based on my guess that also medical science would NOT support it either. BUT MMA is its own thing and they are free to do what they want. and if for the record medcial science would deem her to be ok to fight say somethign like 2-3 years after transition .. again im back on board . . based on medical science . .
Click to expand...

Medical science would suggest that there is a clear advantage. Whether or not it gets suppressed and twisted for political reasons is the real question.
 
AGENT J said:
I vote other because i simply don't know . . . .

Many sports have various leagues and governing bodies and they get to make the rules . . they are free to do so

Sports leagues/governing bodies that are tied to academics should be left up to medical science . . .not me or any other meaningless person . . .
Click to expand...

Joanna Harper has done research on the subject matter. She published her work in 2015, and came to the conclusion, based on a limited study, that there's no meaningful difference between a biological woman and a transitioned woman, when it comes to running. Basically the exposure to 2 years worth of estrogen decreased their muscle mass and made them go slower.

I am willing to compromise here. But then again, why are we worrying about less than .7% of the population. Most transgender folks are not playing sports. The religious right is making too much of a big deal. I really don't mind the 2 year worth of estrogen and have to meet certain benchmarks. If we were to compromise, we could say ineligible, unless they transitioned before 16.

Knowing a couple of trans folks over the years, they have told me that the sooner people transition, the better it is for their long-term mental health and makes them more passable. The longer the body is exposed to testosterone, the less passable they get.
 
ajn678 said:
Medical science would suggest that there is a clear advantage. Whether or not it gets suppressed and twisted for political reasons is the real question.
Click to expand...

Which medical science? I use Joanna Harper's research.
 
molten_dragon said:
This is one of those topics that doesn't have any easy answers. Honestly I'm not sure it has an answer at all. For some reason the discussion always focuses on transwomen and where they should compete, but I think that's masking some of the potential issues.

If you make a rule that everyone must compete with the gender they were born as, then you have transmen at a competitive advantage, and transwomen at a competitive disadvantage. If you make a rule that everyone can compete as the gender they identify as, you have the opposite, transmen at a disadvantage and transwomen at an advantage. It's the same problem either way, just with the genders swapped.

If you rule that only biological women get to compete with women and everyone else must compete as men, then any trans competitors would be at a major disadvantage.

If you rule that transwomen have to compete with men and transmen can't compete at all because they're taking performance enhancing drugs you're discriminating against them.

And if you rule that trans people should compete in their own grouping with other trans people, then in a lot of cases you're barring them from competing at all because there just wouldn't be enough trans people around to support a competition of only trans people.

I see a ton of people suggesting that transwomen shouldn't compete with biological women because they're at an advantage, which I tend to agree with, but I've yet to hear any solutions that don't come with lots of problems of their own.
Click to expand...

A transman doesn't have an advantage over a woman so long as the transman isn't taking male hormones. If they do start taking them then they would be disqualified due to taking performance-enhancing drugs. I'd be OK with them participating in men's sports but they'd be at a disadvantage to biological males but that is for them to deal with. Conversely, you couldn't let someone who is a biological male (transwoman) compete in women's sports. They'd have an advantage.

It's really a one-way street on this.
 
TurtleDude said:
Or only in some events where strength or size does not'
matter

Transgender Cyclist Rachel McKinnon Keeps Smashing Women's Records

Female to male trans don't tend to win and are thus a non-issue
Click to expand...

No...a transwoman (biological male) should only be able to compete in either male sports or in an entirely separate league.

Conversely, a transman could stay in the biological female sport because they'd be taking what amounts to performance enhancement drugs. They should also only be able to compete in men's league or in an entirely separate league as well.

It has to be a one way street if it's going to be fair.
 
TurtleDude said:
winning athletes have competitive advantages. Usain Bolt is faster than anyone.

as someone who was actively competitive in several sports, I understand that, but I don't support unfair advantages.
Click to expand...

How is it an unfair advantage though? Joanna Harper's research said there's no difference. The transgender female no longer produces testosterone. They were on blockers and their estrogen level is on par with genetic females. When they reach the two year mark, their body loses massive amounts of muscle and their body re-shapes itself. Perhaps the Connecticut track number is just good, like Bolt.

Not all transgenders are built the same. Being transgender doesn't give someone an automatic advantage. There are so few transgenders playing sports. We only seem to pick on the ones which are actually good. As I mentioned before, many people didn't want to include Jackie Robinson in major league baseball, because they felt his genetic nature would be a competitive advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom