MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Your thoughts on trans woman competing i...

Your thoughts on trans woman competing in female sports?


I think it's wrong and unfair.

--Michael D. Clarke

reply

Generally oppose. Some of these trans people are just bomb-throwers, make life easy for the haters. There simply are differential developmental factors that favor males relative to females in strength, endurance, agility. If a man wants to be a woman, be one, but dont' try to show them up athletically. Its obvious to most of us, on either the left or right.

reply

What about trans men competing in mens sports?

It is rare situation that should be addressed on a case by case basis. Maybe some sports should group by ability and not gender. Like swimming. You have a certain qualifying time, you compete in the A group, next times B group, etc.

reply

Let trans men compete against men. Trans women too for that matter. Neither has an advantage.

reply

Apparently transmen are allowed to compete in men's sports, but as they don't seem to be beating biological males for championships, nobody's fussed.

If a transman ever starts winning championships, then the sports regulatory boards are going to have to take very hard looks at what kind of steroid use is allowed in their sport, but that day is yet to come.

reply

I consider it unfair as well.

I have no problem with modern social terms, I’ll call a transgender a woman if she prefers that but biological men are generally larger, faster and stronger than women.

It’s not rocket science nor sexism to state that males tend to outclass women in terms of speed and muscle.

reply

I think they should invent a sport called Rocket Science and then it absolutely would be rocket science.

reply

The equipment would be too expensive!

reply

It was ‘equipment’ that got us into this mess, lol.

reply

😜🤣

reply

I don't disagree with you, and neither does the World Athletics Council, but what about those who are biologically female who have more testosterone than other women? They have an advantage and now have been banned unless they supress the hormones that their bodies produce naturally. Is that fair as well?

I mean you don't have to answer this, because I don't know if there is an answer. How does one decide what is fair?

reply

They have an advantage and now have been banned unless they supress the hormones that their bodies produce naturally. Is that fair as well?

Not fair that they're banned. If they're biologically female, they shouldn't have the alter their bodies to meet a threshold.

reply

I’ve never heard of this hyper testosterone condition in women but if a female athlete is born with it good for her, game on and all fair.

reply

We already have drug testing in most sports for steroids. The limits are quite high, and no one comes close to them naturally.

reply

At the 2020 Olympics there were 6 women who were not allowed to compete. So yeah, they weren't taking steroids, they have hyperandrogenism, which has many causes, but actually affects a large number of women. Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) — the most common cause, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, Cushing disease, androgen-secreting tumors, and certain medications are all causes. So yeah...again, there are women who come close, and exceed those limits naturally.

reply

What does this have to do with unambiguously biological males competing against women though?

reply

Because when the world athletics council banned trans women from competing last month, they also banned females with naturally high testosterone. So I am curious if it's the hormones or the body type which makes one ineligible. These are biological females who are deemed to have the same advantages as trans females. So I want to know that if it's unfair for trans women to compete, is it unfair for these biological women to compete?

reply

Women’s sports aren’t experiencing a sudden, dramatic surge in females with unusual testosterone levels. They’re experiencing a surge in athletes born and reaching adulthood unquestionably male and by mere claim of “identity,” competing and winning in women’s sports involving historic records and financial reward.

reply

Well, from what I understand, the women who I am speaking of are biologically female and have had to undergo a sex check, which I sort of have an issue with as well. I'm not speaking of biological males. I'm speaking of biological females. There are a couple who are intersex, but there are also at least 2 who have been banned, who are only XX.

So I'm asking if a biological female has naturally high testosterone should they be banned as well?

reply

“Intersex” and “transgender” mean entirely different things. You’re talking about a handful of athletes that have rare developmental conditions that result in apparent sex ambiguity. The biological males competing as women aren’t sexually ambiguous at all but merely “identify” as something other than their biological sex.

There is an enlightening website that convinced me about the implications. https://boysvswomen.com/#/. The site pits the records of male high school athletes against those of female Olympians using various track & field and swimming events. The records of the high school boys dominate those of female Olympians. None of the women's finals performances even met the qualifying time to enter the boys' competition.

Making difficult judgment calls on a handful of complex intersex conditions (2 out of 5700 female Olympians in 2020?) takes attention from easy calls on unquestionably male athletes looking to take scholarships, accolades and financial rewards from biological female athletes.

reply

Yeah, I'm very well aware that trans and intersex are different.

I'm saying that at least 2 of the 6 women were not intersex. There are two who I know are intersex, the other two I don't know. I've already said that I'm fine with the ban on trans people participating in these sports. What I'm not sure about is where we have CIS females being told they can't compete. If they are naturally that way, why shouldn't they be able to compete?

Sure, maybe it's only 2-6 women out of 5400, but there were only 3 trans or non binary athletes which is half that number and Quinn who was assigned female at birth, played Women's soccer. The other two, Laurel Hubbard, and Chelsea Wolfe were trans women who competed in weightlifting, and BMX, not track and field.

reply

I'm totally opposed to it.

reply

It's unfair and takes away from women's sports.

Anyone who says otherwise has probably never played any sports in their life and/or thinks cheating is okay.

Create a trans league - problem solved. Problem is, no one would care to watch it, that's why they try to piggy back on established sports.

reply

Women's sports cannot survive an influx of biological male champions, particularly big, burly "women" who don't pass.

Biological women will have to give up on their athletic dreams, and audiences will not be interested in seeing biological men who look like biological men dominate women's college, Olympic, and professional sports. If any beefy guy who's willing to take hormones is allowed to enter women's competitions, the financial support for women's sports will vanish, and that will be that.

reply

Sports are not about gender, they're about sex. Trans women are biological males and therefore can only compete with other males. They should not be allowed to play on a women's team made up of biological females.
I fail to understand why this is so difficult for people to understand. The only conclusion I can come to is that wokeness breaks your brain and prevents you from thinking clearly.

reply

According to the woke mindset, adding a title or prefix automatically changes your biology. Somehow being trans changes your skeletal and muscular systems. 🤷🏻🤷🏻🤷🏻

reply

What you have to understand is that woke logic doesn't work like Aristotelian logic.
In Aristotelian logic P = Not P is a contradiction and is therefore false. In woke logic P = Not P can be true. Why? Because Aristotelian logic is white supremacy and therefore invalid, and thus contradictions are perfectly fine. You are a female even if you are not female.
See? logic.

reply

Also very much against it. I've mentioned before that I'm in "Big Ten country" when it comes to college sports, so I've gotten to watch Iowa and Caitlin Clark quite a bit the past couple of years. I saw the other day that Iowa had to put their season-ticket sales for Women's Basketball on hold because they had gotten roughly 6,700 new requests for season tickets (mostly because of Clark). I really find it interesting (I'm an Ohio State fan, by the way).

Iowa and the Big Ten are really marketing Clark heavily. She's a great basketball player for sure, but she comes across as a very intelligent, grounded, good-hearted person (although she's very competitive, make no mistake about it). But she's a lot of fun to watch. It's going to be very interesting to see how she and Iowa handle this going forward. I'd hate it if this would end up being affected by the "trans situation." There are a lot of great female athletes out there and I enjoy watching them compete.

reply

[deleted]

I’ve mentioned this before, female College hoops is really good.

The girls don’t dunk or showboat, they pass the ball, it’s always a pretty good team oriented strategy and they are impressive athletes.

reply

Fundamental basketball is the draw to women’s basketball. Unfortunately the majority of people find this boring. You have to love basketball to appreciate it.

It’s similar to football, when you get the 2 best defenses in the league, and the game ends 7-3. People can’t appreciate that they just watched 2 great defenses, they think it’s bad football

reply