Jump to content
  • Welcome to the TransPulse Forums!

    We offer a safe, inclusive community for transgender and gender non-conforming folks, as well as their loved ones, to find support and information.  Join today!

Lia Thomas & Trans Sports Debate


Guest

Recommended Posts

On 2/18/2022 at 10:27 AM, Guest said:

. ..What if in someone else's mind, simply suggesting equal treatment is "pushing too hard"? ...If that's the proverbial bullet, what would the proverbial knife be as an alternative to suggesting equal treatment??? 😖

 

Suggesting a subtle change of perspective. For instance, in the course of conversation it may be possible to determine something that will strike a chord with the other person, and evoke their sense of empathy - a putting yourself in the other person's shoes type of realization. 

 

It seems to me that most people do not spend much time seeking to know themselves better. So, when they encounter someone who has, they may react with fear (of the unknown). If someone is fearful, and you confront them, they are likely to recoil or attack. What people do not realize is that not having to deeply investigate your gender (or sexuality) is a privilege. It's my hope that with skilled education, more people will gain this perspective. 

 

Link to comment

In my opinion, opposition to Lia Thomas is less about fairness and more about protecting the benefits of Title IX for women's' sports. I am far more concerned about the children that are being impacted by these silly competition bans for children than I am for this one case.

 

Is fairness in competition a legitimate concern, I absolutely believe that it is a valid issue. I'll reiterate that there has been very little research done on the topic of transgender athletic performance in general; let alone of in the presence of HRT. We really don't know if there is a significant performance advantage. In lieu of that, I would expect performance levels to drop while on hrt. I have yet to see a comparison of her swim times while competing as a male and this year, which may give a clue.

 

In this case particular case, the NCAA abdicated responsibility and left to the various governing bodies of the sports in the US. I believe this was a positive result. The sports are much better equipped than the NCAA to create and monitor rules. The NCAA cares a bout money period. USA swimming does have a policy for transgender athletes. I believe it does have a limit on testosterone levels and a need to be under those levels for a set period. I think it was 3 years. The policy requires testing for the athlete. I don't know that cis-women are held to the same testosterone standard. Lia would not have qualified under that policy for the NCAA championships. USA Swimming chose to allow her to compete. I can empathize with the athlete who was moved  out an award position by Lia's participation, however, she was allowed to compete and performed at a high level.

 

I think is reasonable to expect a person who gone through puberty on a male hormones to have some strength and size advantages than a person who has not. I don't believe we can quantify that at the current time. I also don't think we can project what the difference would be for any given individual depending on the hormone set for puberty. I don't accept the argument that LIA can never compete fairly because she went through 'male' puberty because that is a perpetual advantage.

 

I agree that there is bigotry driving this. However, I think the need is to advocate for research to answer some these human performance questions. Transgender people should be able to compete in the sports of there choice. The real question is whether they are able to fairly compete for championships and records, at the moment we just don't know the answers.

 

Please let the children play!

 

 

Link to comment

As some of you have mentioned above, the lines between "male" and "female" attributes are incredibly blurry. It is practically impossible to pick one trait to say "men are like this and women are like that, and therefore anyone like this should not be allowed to compete against other women". If you base it on height, there's bound to be a cis woman that is taller than the cutoff. If it's muscle mass, there's definitely cis girls out there that have more of it than most trans women. And we've seen hormone levels used to discriminate against cis athletes too, just look at what happened to Caster Semenya. 

 

So many of these arguments for why trans women should not be allowed to compete in women's sports uphold sexist, racist ideals of womanhood. They persecute any woman that does not fit into this incredibly limited mold.

 

Often times, these arguments for why trans women should not be allowed to compete come from a concern for fairness. "Women should not be forced to compete against men, it's just not fair, they have no way of winning" Well why not? These arguments against trans athletes minimize the athletic prowess of women. Rather than breaking down gender stereotypes that women are just naturally inferior to men, so many transphobes double down on this idea in an attempt to uphold their bigotry. 

 

I forget the name of the book, but I once read a very persuasive argument for the desegregation of sports on the basis of sex. Rather than grasping at straws to find ways to exclude trans people from sports, we should be working to create opportunities for athletes to compete with others of the same skill level. Think of how wrestling has different weight classes. If there's is a way to allow athletes regardless of gender to compete against others of similar skill (or body types if that's truly a concern), we should be working to find that. An approach like this would also help combat the pay inequality between professional athletes in men's and women's leagues as well, but that's another conversation altogether. 

 

Of course, I'm no athlete, so I'm sure there's more nuance to this argument than what I've given it. However, as a feminist and someone who cares about gender equality, I balk at anyone trying to define what separates a man from a woman. Radical as it may sound, if we really want a world where trans people can be accepted, arbitrary segregation based on sex or gender is not really something that we should be advocating for at all. 

 

Link to comment
  • Forum Moderator

I would have to say that I am in favor of universal sports.  Girls already participate in wrestling successfully.  There are girls (not many) playing American football.  If you ever watch girls playing elite level softball you have to realize they are perfectly capable of playing baseball.  They don’t because the teams won’t allow them, not because the can’t.  They have had baseball players try to hit a fast pitch ball and they can’t.  It because the fast pitch comes across the plate at over 100mph.

 

Given the opportunity girls trans or cis, could all be competitive.  But something I feel strongly about is kids should be allowed to get the medical care they need, especially puberty blockers.  Then women sports would have transgender girls then no one could complain because they wouldn’t have an advantage.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Such a controversial conversation.  I am mtf and a basketball coach at a high level. I am torn on what is right or what should be the rules involved. I do believe all should have opportunity to compete. There is some advantage, especially short term but that advantage definately diminishes over time the longer a person is on hormones.  I think is a mtf has bottom surgery then 100% should eligible immediately. If they haven't had surgery then the question arises how long on hormones is mandated to allow that athlete to compete. Complicated and I am not a doctor so won't take a stab at that one. I just want all to have opportunity regardless of gender and identity. Thanks! Marka

 

Link to comment

Physiologically, there are average differences between an individual who was AMAB, and a someone who was AFAB. There is a greater muscle mass in most AMABs. The thoracic cavity is usually larger. The lung capacity is increased. This allows for increased endurance. Where things split is in the issue of which puberty you go through. There is no reason at all why AMAB who transition at the time of puberty to be female to be barred from competing on the girls team. The differences are negligible other than not having a uterus or ovaries. 

 

What makes the Lia Thomas issue unique is that you have someone who very likely would have been very competitive even if they had transitioned at the age of puberty as she is tall, and lean. She had the advantage that she had been competing for at least 10 years as a male, and then had the combined effect of testosterone with her previously developed musculature and endurance. It is very tough call to sit her down and explain this to her, and get her to realize this prior to competing. 

 

Right, wrong, or indifferent, her wins increased a level of anti-trans sentiment in every sector for us who do not have visions of suddenly competing in women's sports. Then again, watching many of the female golfers, I believe most of them could clean our clocks on any course.

 

Now we are combatting a tidal wave of anti-trans sentiment lead by the propaganda machine at Fox News and a number of ill-informed news pundits, politicians, and influencers who have no idea about anything related to being transgender, other than they do not like it. There was already a number of anti-trans sentiment drummed up in the last few years. I just looked at one of my insurance policies last night. The one company(United Health Care) as of 4/1/22) has pared back their coverage to only cover the gender affirmation surgery. They consider any other procedures on your face, breasts, or body, cosmetic. It harkens back to the days about 30 years ago when everything was considered cosmetic. These idiots think we must be playing dress-up. I am fortunate that I have another insurer that covers the other procedures. I am dropping the UHC policy as soon as I can. They make me sick with their attitude.

 

I am not sure what the answers are. Other than the anti-trans groups that I have already mentioned, I have had tremendous support from colleagues, my employers, students, and friends. I had one small group on my mother's side of the family that likes to wear their MAGA hats and attitudes on their sleeve. Given their acceptance, they may as well be the Taliban to me.

 

There was recently a really good article in the Golf Digest called The Wrong Tees about a young transgender male name Luc who wanted to play high school golf, but is being barred by the anti-trans laws in Tennessee. It was a great article that talked about the very thing a I have stated above. Luc does not have any physical advantages, however, he is an excellent golfer because he practices all the time. Barring him from playing sickens me. Lia Thomas may have won some trophies, but at what cost to the transgender children who are growing up? 

 

Sadder yet, is that in the mid-term elections, we are likely to see a tsunami of anti-trans legislation that will likely overrun any vetoes. I am scared about the future. I cannot go back to who I was. Unfortunately, we do not have enough people listening nationally right now that can tilt this thing around. Look at what DeSantis is doing to Disney after they came out against the "Do not say gay law". DeSantis and his henchmen are going to make an example out of Disney without any regard to the consequences. The only thing missing is the secret police wearing armbands. Look at Abbott in Texas, who declared that providing your child with transgender care was child abuse. Where does this insane stuff end? 

 

Sincerely

Katie

 

Link to comment
  • Admin

The minute the symbols for money or money valued items such as scholarships or commercial "sports" entertainment contracts pop up we get every beer can popping, arm chair jockey or wanna-be athlete parents screaming about unfair competition. If their money is involved, if you win, it is great, if you lose, the game was rigged unfairly against you.  In places where the money is not the goal, even remotely, we have a much better chance of the activity benefiting the person and all their team mates for social reasons. 

 

I have lived down the street from a Little League (Plague) Baseball Field and have seen and heard parents berating their children primarily for being growing kids who shamed the parents by being a gracious non-winner.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Who's Online   6 Members, 0 Anonymous, 151 Guests (See full list)

    • MaeBe
    • Ivy
    • VickySGV
    • Abigail Genevieve
    • Carolyn Marie
    • RaineOnYourParade
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      80.7k
    • Total Posts
      768.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      12,029
    • Most Online
      8,356

    Selkimur
    Newest Member
    Selkimur
    Joined
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Anyatimenow
      Anyatimenow
      (23 years old)
    2. Aria00
      Aria00
    3. Ava B.
      Ava B.
      (24 years old)
    4. Claire Heshi
      Claire Heshi
    5. CrystalMatthews0426
      CrystalMatthews0426
      (41 years old)
  • Posts

    • Abigail Genevieve
      I was thinking in particular of BLM, who years ago had a 'What We Believe' section that sounded like they were at war with the nuclear family.   I tried to find it. Nope.  Of interest https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/aug/28/ask-politifact-does-black-lives-matter-aim-destroy/   My time is limited and I will try to answer as I can.
    • Ivy
      Well, I suppose it is possible that they don't actually plan on doing what they say.  I'm not too sure I want to take that chance.  But I kinda expect to find out.  Yet, perhaps you're right and it's all just talk.  And anyway, my state GOP is giving me enough to worry about anyway. I remember a time when being "woke" just meant you were paying attention.  Now it means you are the antichrist. I just don't want the government "protecting" me from my personal "delusions."
    • MaeBe
      1.  I think there are some legitimate concern.   2. Thoroughly discussing this will consume many threads.   3. I disagree partially with @MaeBe but there is partial agreement.   4. The context includes what is happening in society that the authors are observing.  It is not an isolated document.   The observation is through a certain lens, because people do things differently doesn't mean they're doing it wrong. Honestly, a lot of the conservative rhetoric is morphing desires of people to be treated with respect and social equity to be tantamount to the absolution of the family, heterosexuality, etc. Also, being quiet and trying to blend in doesn't change anything. Show me a social change that benefits a minority or marginalized group that didn't need to be loud.   5. Trump, if elected, is as likely to spend his energies going after political opponents as he is to implementing something like this.   Trump will appoint people to do this, like Roger Severino (who was appointed before, who has a record of anti-LGBTQ+ actions), he need not do anything beyond this. His people are ready to push this agenda forward. While the conservative right rails about bureaucracy, they intend to weaponize it. There is no question. They don't want to simplify government, they simply want to fire everyone and bring in conservative "warriors" (their rhetoric). Does America survive 4 year cycles of purge/cronyism?   6. I reject critical theory, which is based on Marxism.  Marxism has never worked and never will.  Critical theory has problems which would need time to go into, which I do not have.   OK, but this seems like every other time CRT comes up with conservatives...completely out of the blue. I think it's reference is mostly just to spark outrage from the base. Definitely food thought for a different thread, though.   7. There are groups who have declared war on the nuclear family as problematically patriarchal, and a lot of other terms. They are easy to find on the internet.  This document is reacting to that (see #4 above).   What is the war on the nuclear family? I searched online and couldn't find much other than reasons why people aren't getting married as much or having kids (that wasn't a propaganda from Heritage or opinions pieces from the right that paint with really broad strokes). Easy things to see: the upward mobility and agency of women, the massive cost of rearing children, general negative attitudes about the future, male insecurity, etc. None of this equates to a war on the nuclear family, but I guess if you look at it as "men should be breadwinners and women must get married for financial support and extend the male family line (and to promote "National Greatness") I could see the decline of marriage as a sign of the collapse of a titled system and, if I was a beneficiary of that system or believe that to NOT be tilted, be aggrieved.   8.  Much of this would have to be legislated, and this is a policy documented.  Implementation would  be most likely different, but that does not mean criticism is unwarranted.   "It might be different if you just give it a chance", unlike all the other legislation that's out there targeting LGBTQ+ from the right, these are going to be different? First it will be trans rights, then it will be gay marriage, and then what? Women's suffrage?   I get it, we may have different compasses, but it's not hard to see that there's no place for queer people in the conservative worldview. There seems to be a consistent insistence that "America was and is no longer Great", as if the 1950s were the pinnacle of society, completely ignoring how great America still is and can continue to be--without having to regress society to the low standards of its patriarchal yesteryears.    
    • awkward-yet-sweet
      Cadillac parts are pretty expensive, so repairing them costs more.  But they don't seem to break down more than other makes.  Lots of Lincoln models use Ford cars as a base, so you can get parts that aren't much more expensive.    My family has had good luck with "Panther platform" cars.  Ford Crown Victoria, Mercury Marquis, Lincoln Towncar or Continental.  4.6 V8 and 5.0 V8.  Reasonable fuel economy, and fairly durable.  Our county sheriff's office was running Chargers and SUV's for a while, but has gone back to older Crown Victorias for ease of maintenance.  GF rebuilds them here.  But they are getting more scarce, since the newest ones were made in 2011.    1992-1997 years were different than the later years.  1998-2001 they did some changes, and apparently the best years are 2003 to 2011.  Check Craigslist, and also government auctions.  GF has gotten a lot of them at auction, and they can be had in rough-but-running shape for around $1,000.  Ones in great shape can be found in the $5,000+ range.  Good for 200,000 miles without significant rebuilding.  Go through engine and transmission and electrical systems, and they go half a million.    Some Chrysler models are OK.  The 300 mostly has the same engines as the Charger and Challenger, so parts availability is pretty good.  But they tend to get timing issues.  The older Chrysler Sebring convertibles were pretty reliable, sometimes going 200,000 miles without tons of problems, although after that they were pretty much worn out. 
    • Abigail Genevieve
      I think I have read everything the Southern Baptists have to say on transgender, and it helped convince me they are dead wrong on these issues.  They can be nice people.  I would never join an SBC church.
    • Abigail Genevieve
      You come across as a thoughtful, sweet, interesting and pleasant person.    There are parts of this country, and more so the world, where evangelicals experience a great deal of finger wagging.
    • awkward-yet-sweet
      It has been an interesting experience being in a marriage in a Christian faith community, yet being intersex/trans.  I stay pretty quiet, and most have kind of accepted that I'm just the strange, harmless exception.  "Oh, that's just Jen.  Jen is...different."  I define success as being a person most folks just overlook. 
    • awkward-yet-sweet
      Well, I live in an area with a lot of Southern Baptists, Evangelicals, etc...  We've experienced our share of finger-wagging, as the "standard interpretation" of Scripture in the USA is that the Bible only approves of "one man, one woman" marriage.  My faith community is mostly accepted here, but that has taken time and effort.  It can be tough at times to continue to engage with culture and the broader population, and avoid the temptation to huddle up behind walls like a cult.    Tolerance only goes so far.  At one point, my husband was asked to run for sheriff.  He declined, partly because an elected official with four wives would have a REALLY tough time.  (Of course, making way less than his current salary wasn't an option either). 
    • Abigail Genevieve
      My bone structure is far more female than male.  I can't throw like a guy, which has been observed by guys numerous times, and moving like a woman is more natural.  It just is.  I'm not going out of my way to act in a fem. way, as you say, but I am letting go of some of the 'I am not going to move like that because I am a guy' stuff I have defensively developed.  The other breaks through anyway - there were numerous looks from people at work when I would use gestures that are forbidden to men, or say something spontaneously no guy would ever say.   At one point, maybe a year or more ago, I said it was unfair for people to think they were dealing with a man when they were actually dealing with a woman.    Girl here.  'What is a woman' is a topic for another day.
    • Willow
      Mom, I’m home!  What’s for lunch?   Leftover pizza .   ok.    Not exactly our conversation but there is truth in the answer.     @KymmieLsorry you are sick. Feel better soon.   Girl mode, boy mode no mode, not us. Nothing functional for either of us.   anyone here have or had a 10 year old (plus or minus) Caddy, Lincoln or Chrysler?  How was it?  Lots of repairs?  Comfortable seats? Anything positive or negative about it?  I need to replace my 2004 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer, it’s eating $100 dollar bills and needs a couple of thousand dollars worth of work and that doesn’t even fix the check engine code.  Obviously, it isn’t worth putting that kind of money into a 20 year old car with a 174 thousand miles.   Willow
    • Ashley0616
      Oversized pink shirt, pink and black sports bra
    • Abigail Genevieve
      I think you mean the worst possible interpretation of 2025 situation.  Keep in mind that there are those who will distort and downright lie about anything coming from conservatives - I have seen it time and time again.  It's one of the reasons I want to read the thing slowly and carefully.  They want you to be very, very afraid. 
    • Abigail Genevieve
      Here is where the expectation is that the stereotypical evangelical comes in finger wagging, disapproving and condemning.    Not gonna do that.   You have to work these things out.  Transgender issues put a whole different spin on everything and God understands what we are going through. I have enough trouble over here.  :)
    • Ivy
      You do you. You seem to be in a safe place if we end up with a 2025 situation.  But a lot of us are not.
    • awkward-yet-sweet
      Well, my marriage is different.  I'm actually part of a multi-partner marriage.  Like you see in the Book of Genesis.  My husband has four wives...and me.  I was kind of an accident, as our community sets the "reasonable maximum" at four wives, but that's a long story.  Plural marriage is approved in my faith community, with the exception of spiritual leaders, as described in 1 Timothy 3.  We believe that anything that isn't specifically prohibited is permitted.    The purpose of marriage is for people to work together, demonstrate the love of God, and to have children.  My faith believes in exponential reproduction - big families with lots of kids, both as a blessing and with the intention of using the size of our population for political ends.  Being intersex/trans and unable to bear children, I wouldn't have been a good candidate to be somebody's only spouse (the majority of our community tends toward traditional couple marriage).  Since my husband has other partners, I don't have to worry about the childbearing aspect, and I help out with raising our family's kids.  I'm a "bonus parent."    I'm not 100% open about my intersex/trans nature, although my community's leaders are aware of me.  Being transgender isn't condemned, but it is seen as a health problem derived from an imperfect, fallen world and an environment polluted with chemicals.  Since I'm married, I have a safe place to be, and I can live how I need to live.    I firmly believe the advice given in 1 Corinthians 7.  We don't totally own our bodies.  God gets a say, as I believe He created us to be male or female, not something outside the binary.  I don't think that transition without discussion with partners is OK....again, we don't totally own ourselves.  When I started to figure myself out, that was actually the main thing on my mind - will my partners accept me?  How will my position in the family change?  Since my partners don't really have a problem with the mild version of transition that I wanted to do, it has all been good. 
  • Upcoming Events

Contact TransPulse

TransPulse can be contacted in the following ways:

Email: Click Here.

To report an error on this page.

Legal

Your use of this site is subject to the following rules and policies, whether you have read them or not.

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
DMCA Policy
Community Rules

Hosting

Upstream hosting for TransPulse provided by QnEZ.

Sponsorship

Special consideration for TransPulse is kindly provided by The Breast Form Store.
×
×
  • Create New...