I don’t like Cait Jenner’s politics much, but there are few people better situated to weigh in on this issue than her.
Olympic champion Caitlyn Jenner says trans UPenn swimmer Lia Thomas should NOT compete against biological women ahead of NCAA's board meeting to review its rules Thursday
Unhappily, opportunity to participate is far from the topic of this thread. It is about choosing who one participates with. If the swim meet at the head of this thread was 'unfair' what is the criteria for fairness? There were requirements for participation published in advance and Lia Thomas met them. Would it have been 'unfair' if Lia had finished 4th? This is discussed because winning, not participation, is everything in sports.
snailgate
Come on BP, I thin it's beyond dispute that, at the elite level (and probably a bit below it, men will beat women in most (perhaps all, I am not certain) sports contests. This is why we have women's and men's sports divisions. Unless we want to do away with women's sports where women can fairly compete, we cannot have transexual women compete against cis gendered women. This is not a matter of "fairness" or "unfairness", it is a matter of whether women will be able to compete or not at all.
FWIW, I do think we will have to come to terms of how to deal with trans athletes and not deprive cis gendered women of their chance to compete, and the discussion should begin now; but I do not think we should jettison women's sports and the opportunities they present.
Considerably below it. Offhand, I suspect a men's D-I college team would wipe the floor with any WNBA team.
Thank you Jaraxle. " it is a matter of whether women will be able to compete or not at all." Any one is able to compete with any one. I am able to compete with Michael Phelps at the local Y swimming pool if he would bother to show up. The complaint here is that all those cis-females WERE ABLE to compete with her/she Thomas. There are thousands (millions?) who work hard to qualify for marathons with never a hope of even finishing in the first 100. My son-in-law has been working for at least five years to qualify for the Iron Man in Hawaii. He has never won anything. Many in my extended family can talk for hours comparing the individual members and their performance as a team with the Philly Eagles and the KC Chiefs.
yet, they publicly demean my SIL for training so hard with never a chance of winning.
It is not hard to build a factual argument that all the things Phelps did to prepare to compete at that elite level drove him crazy, or that his emotional illness enabled him to do it. I knew Jenner when her/she was still in college. Bruce was weird then. Sports fans would prefer to say he was dedicated.
And many of you posting here claim it is just about participating.
Jarl--Most Division 1 teams play at a pretty high level, although there may be some that do not. But I tend to agree (although I concede I do not follow basketball). the point is that, at a high level, innate ability will govern success far more than working hard or teamwork or coaching.
BP--there is a big difference between competing at an elite level and training to do one's best. Both give their own rewards, and your SIL is enjoying those.
As for the complaint, it is that Thomas' genetic makeup s a male gives her an unfair advantage, which can make any competition pointless. I recall a time when the Russians and East Germans were accused of using men in women's sports such as weight lifting. I do think having women's sport divisions is worth it. If you prefer only men (or trans women) compete, you may well get your wish in the future.
Thank you Jaraxle. " it is a matter of whether women will be able to compete or not at all." Any one is able to compete with any one. I am able to compete with Michael Phelps at the local Y swimming pool if he would bother to show up. The complaint here is that all those cis-females WERE ABLE to compete with her/she Thomas. There are thousands (millions?) who work hard to qualify for marathons with never a hope of even finishing in the first 100. My son-in-law has been working for at least five years to qualify for the Iron Man in Hawaii. He has never won anything. Many in my extended family can talk for hours comparing the individual members and their performance as a team with the Philly Eagles and the KC Chiefs.
yet, they publicly demean my SIL for training so hard with never a chance of winning.
It is not hard to build a factual argument that all the things Phelps did to prepare to compete at that elite level drove him crazy, or that his emotional illness enabled him to do it. I knew Jenner when her/she was still in college. Bruce was weird then. Sports fans would prefer to say he was dedicated.
And many of you posting here claim it is just about participating.
snailgate
There are millions of recreational athletes who enter competitions, but only a relative handful of elites, or professionals. Yes, it’s mostly about participating, challenging oneself, feeling the endorphins from exercise, staying healthy, etc. I spend 3-4 days a week in the pool, I have a coach (who used to coach Div 1 swimmers), and I will never compete (except with myself), not even at the Masters level. I do it because I love it, and because it makes me feel amazing. And I’m a pretty competitive person.
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké
I have no objection to separate men and women divisions. But I resent arguments that some individuals use the current rules for an 'unfair advantage.'
If it is unfair, change the rules. But don't complain that the individual is wrong to use those existing rules to their own advantage.
I note that 'fair' is still undefined. "A level playing field" is somehow considered necessary to be fair, yet I have heard no argument that 'hometown advantage' is unfair. or that it does not exist. Baseball fans rejoice about the idiosyncrasies of their local diamond and the big leagues prepare the pitchers' mound for local advantage from game to game. That is considered part of the glorious tradition of America's favorite pass time.
Big RR you agree competing without a chance of winning is pointless. Many athletic coaches and fans agree. That is the orthodox understanding of the American religion of Sport.
Guin, I think you know what it means for me to compete in 10 mile bicycle time trials.
Big RR you agree competing without a chance of winning is pointless.
No, I never said that; what I do believe is that making all the sacrifices to train and perform at an elite level without a chance or success, let alone to even being selected for the team, is pointless. As I said, there are different benefits from training and competition at this level and training on a personal basis like your SIL does. Both are worthwhile IMHO, but they are very different.
Additionally, I never said that Thomas' competing as a woman is per se unfair; what I did say is that the rules are quite unfair to permit this sort of competition, and have advocated that they should be changed if we want to keep women's sports viable. Sure, there are other advantages that a team or individual may enjoy, but they are, IMHO, nowhere near as dispositive to the outcome as having a trans athlete compete as a woman. I guess you disagree, but that's my opinion, and I hope the NCAA takes this up and takes it seriously.
Guess I disagree, RR, because I believe 'woman' and 'man' are social, cultural constructs. "Sports" culture desires to treat each as a separate category, with no overlap. Remember a Venn diagram exercise? I use these words to refer to categories in the Venn diagram with lots of overlap.
Jarl--Most Division 1 teams play at a pretty high level, although there may be some that do not. But I tend to agree (although I concede I do not follow basketball). the point is that, at a high level, innate ability will govern success far more than working hard or teamwork or coaching.
BP--there is a big difference between competing at an elite level and training to do one's best. Both give their own rewards, and your SIL is enjoying those.
As for the complaint, it is that Thomas' genetic makeup s a male gives her an unfair advantage, which can make any competition pointless. I recall a time when the Russians and East Germans were accused of using men in women's sports such as weight lifting. I do think having women's sport divisions is worth it. If you prefer only men (or trans women) compete, you may well get your wish in the future.
I don't know if they used men...but they definitely pumped the women full of drugs and hormones.
Guess I disagree, RR, because I believe 'woman' and 'man' are social, cultural constructs. "Sports" culture desires to treat each as a separate category, with no overlap. Remember a Venn diagram exercise? I use these words to refer to categories in the Venn diagram with lots of overlap.
snailgate
Well, if that's the case, I guess there's nothing left to discuss.
Man and woman might be social constructs, but male and female most definitely are not social constructs - they are biological karyotypes as determined by dna/genetics.
The Six Most Common Karyotypes
The six biological karyotype sexes that do not result in death to the fetus are:
X – Roughly 1 in 2,000 to 1 in 5,000 people (Turner’s )
XX – Most common form of female
XXY – Roughly 1 in 500 to 1 in 1,000 people (Klinefelter)
XY – Most common form of male
XYY – Roughly 1 out of 1,000 people
XXXY – Roughly 1 in 18,000 to 1 in 50,000 births
Please note, BSG, that you posit SIX categories, not two. It could well be that sport oversight bodies could group them into two different overall categories. Or exclude one or more completely. I have read some who argue that your last group the XXXY, have an unfair advantage in competition with XY. In terms of behavior, Kinsey way back in his book on sexual behavior of the human male described two extremes--exclusively with other males, or exclusively with females. And a complete spectrum in between, including animals and inanimate objects and more than one simultaneous partner, either or both male and female.
Do you seriously think I cannot read or count to ten?
You are all over the place with your unsound arguments. Biological sex as determined by dna/genetics and expressed as karyotypes is something altogether apart from gender identity or sexual behavior; you are trying to mash it all up and that’s just not sound science- neither hard science nor social science.
Are you by chance an engineer?
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan
Not an engineer, but I once stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. Yes my argument is all over the place. That is the problem--very slight general agreement of terms. A group of very influential politicians think the most important data point is what it says on the birth certificate. Others, which you BSG cite, consider the important thing is that karyotype, which is the least observable and verifiable for most circumstances . I apologize for getting that 'super male' group wrong, it is the XYY.
The controversy about the Women Olympians from Eastern Europe and the USSR way back when was mostly a discussion of chemicals, not genetics.
Now we are on the speculative edge of molecular biology and engineering which will permit custom changing of the most basic genetics before and after the individual is born.
For the purposes of this argument, it is irrelevant what sexual behavior or orientation an individual engages in, or what gender expression they identify with.
Whether they are biologically male or biologically female is what is relevant - to whether they have an advantage of endurance and speed in sport competition based on the development of their bodies through the process of puberty.
If Michael Phelps woke up tomorrow and announced he was really Michaela, it would never ever be fair for him to compete in a pool against biologically born females after a year of testosterone suppression. Or two years, or three, or two dozen. He would always have a bigger heart, bigger lungs, bigger hands, longer arms and legs, a denser and stronger skeleton and larger muscle mass. Testosterone blockers would never change any of that. Top and bottom surgery and a legal name change would never change any of that.
As Michael Phelps and Caitlyn Jenner have both said, why is Lia Thomas doing this? It isn’t helping the cause of trans people. It isn’t endearing her teammates to her - they won’t speak out publicly except anonymously and those who have spoken anonymously are very unhappy with her being on the team. So she must know she is not actually wanted there, all the acceptance she is being shown - or most of it - by teammates is a sham, they are afraid of being hounded and cancelled so they can’t speak their minds.
I support trans people in all other regards, but I can’t help but wonder if these few trans women upsetting amateur sport by demanding places on women’s teams with their biologically male bodies aren’t really just misogynists in another guise. In the annals of human history wherein mostly men oppress women, all types of manifestations have occurred. Or maybe Lia is just your typical run of the mill narcissist.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan
The controversy about the Women Olympians from Eastern Europe and the USSR way back when was mostly a discussion of chemicals, not genetics.
A little of both; indeed, my recollection is that the IOC introduced gender testing protocols on because of accusations of the eastern block using men in women's divisions. It was pretty crude at the time.
