• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Antisocial, societal issues thread

McTallshort said:
Transwomen should not be competing in women's sport.
Click to expand...
I'm of the opinion sports scientists should be the ones doing the research and presenting the evidence to governing bodies. Which to be fair to most governing bodies is what they've been doing with a few knee jerks here and there.

Everyone else should be keeping thier noses out. Including ex sports stars.
 
Leonormous Boozer said:
Bought weed while in Cali but wouldn't here (anymore - young, dumb, impulsive etc…), don't believe there's anything wrong with casual drug use but funding gangs is a line for me.
Click to expand...
Same with cigarettes. People pay to harm their own health. I'm not even talking about drugs (weed etc etc, doesn't matter)

Leonormous Boozer said:
don't believe there's anything wrong with casual drug use
Click to expand...
There is. There's a notion "entry drug" (I'm not sure I translated it correctly in English, but I think you understood what I mean). Noone starts with hard drugs at the beginning, everyone comes to it starting with weed or smoking cigarettes. So it's better to avoid it, mate. And you wrote correctly about "funding gangs" btw
 
ncurd said:
.

Everyone else should be keeping thier noses out. Including ex sports stars.
Click to expand...
If you have been part of sport, sacrificed for that sport and helped it grow you absolutely have a right to hold an opinion and voice it.
 
Yes but...
If your opinion is entirely uninformed, you shouldn't be using your position within or from the sport, to try to influence policy.

Equally, having had a few injections in my life doesn't mean that I should shout off about vaccination roll-outs etc etc.
Even a high-profile victim of crime should not be trying to influence a jury trying a different crime.

Policy should be an informed decision made by informed people; not ignoramuses with a megaphone.

Having an opinion - absolutely. Expressing it... I'd urge caution due to the megaphone their status within the sport allows.
 
Even though he really shouldn't be mentioned we go back to the Oscar Pistorious case about whether he should be able to complete with able bodied athletes or not. The blades gave him an advantage it terms of energy expended per stride was less than a standard athlete. As such he was banned for a short time to his appeal as the original tribunal didn't take into account the disadvantages from his disability.

This isn't to say trans people should compere with women just it's complex and needs to go through proper process and research. But having opinion having not seen the research and understanding and being against trans people competing is being transphobic. Its the difference between having an informed opinion against it to having an uninformed.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but Trans woman started completing in womens sports before any research was done or published in sports like swimming, Rugby, athletics and certain combat sports. Questioning this isn't being Transphobic, it's quite legitimate to ask these questions particularly when it involves woman's safety and the overall protection of womens sport.
 
Is the fact that elite male performance exceeds elite female performance not a reasonable starting point to say we shouldn't allow trans women to compete at that level based on fairness. Then the studies should be looking at whether the advantage is removed through transition.

If you're looking at it from an inclusivity perspective (inclusivity over fairness) then absolutely everyone should have an opinion because it's not being decided based on a scientific understanding of the physiological advantages. Don't agree with calling someone disagreeing with trans women taking part in women's sports transphobic anymore than I would calling someone mysogynistic for wanting to allow them to compete.
 
McTallshort said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but Trans woman started completing in womens sports before any research was done or published in sports like swimming, Rugby, athletics and certain combat sports.
Click to expand...
Well, yes - by definition.
There were trans athletes before there was any research on benefits or hindrances to trans athletes. It's kinda hard to do it the other way around.

McTallshort said:
Questioning this isn't being Transphobic, it's quite legitimate to ask these questions particularly when it involves woman's safety and the overall protection of womens sport.
Click to expand...
Not per se, no. However it IS used as a dog whistle (not accusing anyone here).
The awkward question is how, once the dog whistle is known and identified, does one raise the question without looking like you agree with the whistlers? I'll be honest, I've no idea here.

One thing I will say though, is raising a question is different from implying or outright stating an answer. This goes double or triple for a stated answer that comes without any context (eg. "I've come to the following conclusion having spent X years coaching sportswomen, of whom Y were transwomen, and in my (n=Y) experience, then conclusion Z" or "IMO X, and here's a wiki page on the subject, and here's a pubmed article on the subject, and here's a respectable and respectful blog on the subject by an acknowledged expert")
 
Last edited:
stus768 said:
Is the fact that elite male performance exceeds elite female performance not a reasonable starting point to say we shouldn't allow trans women to compete at that level based on fairness. Then the studies should be looking at whether the advantage is removed through transition.
Click to expand...
To my understanding - not particularly.
Such an approach would be to mistake trans women for "bloke in a dress" with no understanding of what it takes, physically and mentally, to transition; or things like puberty blockers and age of transition.
To my understanding.
I am NOT an expert here.
stus768 said:
If you're looking at it from an inclusivity perspective (inclusivity over fairness) then absolutely everyone should have an opinion because it's not being decided based on a scientific understanding of the physiological advantages.
Click to expand...
If discussed with that nuance, then it would seem fair - or at least, everyone who wants to have an opinion on the inclusivity basis should be allowed to have and fully express it with whatever megaphones life has handed them. But that only really applies if they're deliberate and explicitly NOT discussing "fairness".
stus768 said:
Don't agree with calling someone disagreeing with trans women taking part in women's sports transphobic anymore than I would calling someone mysogynistic for wanting to allow them to compete.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It would require more than the repeating of a dog whistle.

To clarify, I personally, am absolutely not suggesting that anyone here is transphobic, in part or in full. I would need more information (not to mention, a far better memory of who says what than I possess) to come to that conclusion. IF I did ever come to that conclusion, I would then be very wary of expressing it.


ETA: Sorry for the double post - I thought I'd done this as an edit to the above; but apparently, I screwed up.
 
Leonormous Boozer said:
snip
Click to expand...

pretty much spot on. You have to have a balance between "no ethical consumption in capitalism" and "I won't consume anything that is bad". One is lazy and one will drive you insane.

on the trans women in sport debate. It appears that many sportswomen are scared to talk bout the subject. I remember 6 years ago the tide seemed to be that women's sport needed to be inclusive and there was no reason to not let transwomen compete. Now after transwomen have competed in some sport things have shifted the other direction. There's been a period of time where we can actually review the data on the performance effects of going through male puberty (which actually support the idea of longer bans for those who are caught doping if you hate fun). I empathize with the transwomen in this as it does suck. It makes a shitty situation worse but that's just how life is sometimes. Going through male puberty appears to be an irreversible advantage and rules will be crafted to ensure fair competition.
 
McTallshort said:
Transwomen should not be competing in women's sport.
Click to expand...
The main one being Caster Semenya. I don't agree s/he should be forced to take medication to reduce her testosterone but then s/he was too fast to race in her favourite event of the 800m alongside other women at an unfair advantage, but not fast enough to race against elite men.

Caster Semenya thread
 
Last edited:
What @Which Tyler said the issue is a group of people see trans women as a man in a dress. What isn't taken into account is transisitioning definitely puts them at a disadvantage to men.

The issue definitely seams to male puberty and the advantages it entails and that is where sports are looking at most.

Sadly on the other side of the coin due to research (which absolutely is key) its less likely people will given puberty blockers. As its being proving it isn't helping in developmental years.

The question should be more along how do we allow trans women to compete in elite sport and yet rightly protect women's sport.
Bada-Bing! said:
The main one being Caster Semenya. I don't agree s/he should be forced to take medication to reduce her testosterone but then s/he was too fast to race in her favourite event of the 800m alongside other women at an unfair advantage, but not fast enough to race against elite men.

Caster Semenya thread
Click to expand...
But she's likely intersex rather than trans. Very diffrent discussion.
 
ncurd said:
But she's likely intersex rather than trans. Very diffrent discussion.
Click to expand...
Yes.
Although Semenya was assigned female at birth,[18]she has the intersex condition 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency, which only affects genetic males.[10][11][19] Individuals with this condition have XY chromosomes and normal male internal structures that are not fully masculinised during the embryo's development, resulting in external genitalia that appear ambiguous or female at birth.[19][20] from wiki.

Why is it a different discussion?
 
One is a mostly physiological condition the other is a mostly mental that is treated through physiological means.

They should not be treated as the same.
 
TBF they are both in the realm of the trans/intersex issue in sport. Semantics really. Neither one has a choice of what they are or want to be but don't fit into the categories of male or female Without causing outrage that the characteristics they have naturally or induced give them a competitive advantage.
 
Which Tyler said:
To my understanding - not particularly.
Such an approach would be to mistake trans women for "bloke in a dress" with no understanding of what it takes, physically and mentally, to transition; or things like puberty blockers and age of transition.
To my understanding.
I am NOT an expert here.
Click to expand...
While I agree that some people have the incorrect opinion that trans women are blokes in dresses and I agree that transitioning does have a significant impact the point is it's the impact of the transition on the advantage that needs to be understood. If you're starting from a position of men have an advantage over women then if you're prioritising fairness trans women should be excluded until the impact of transitioning on the advantage is understood. It would then still come down to a discussion of whether any retained advantage is fair or if a sport wants to prioritise inclusivity. A lot of sports are now taking the position that they want to prioritise fairness.
 

Similar threads

Bada-Bing!
The Biking thread
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
5K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!
The Ukraine War thread
27 28 29
Replies
564
Views
24K
McTallshort
McTallshort
Bada-Bing!
The technology thread
42 43 44
Replies
861
Views
43K
ncurd
N
N
A Political Thread pt. 2
870 871 872
Replies
17K
Views
661K
McTallshort
McTallshort
Bada-Bing!
The Merry Xmas and New year thread
2 3
Replies
48
Views
8K
Bada-Bing!
Bada-Bing!

Latest posts

Top