OT "I'm Dealing With A Few Transgender Issues"

[PtldPlatypus]

I am aware of the concerns of cis women. But there are outliers in sports and other fields. Brittney Griner gave her high school team a huge advantage. Should she have been banned? She's taller than most men. Was it unfair? Yes, actually.

No, actually. Not unfair at all. Advantages are not unfairness, as long as the same rules and criteria apply to everyone.

No one has found a man who wakes up one morning and says I think I will become a woman and win a gold medal. People who their whole lives have been demonized and rejected. Abused, thrown out of their homes, assaulted. Are they doing all this just to win a game?

School boards and state legislatures devote sessions to banning trans people from sports, criminalizing health care, saying their existence harms children and making it a crime to simply use a restroom.

All that to win a race?

Of course not, and the implication by some that that is the intention is silly. However, just because someone's gender identity isn't fraudulent doesn't justify that person competing in a division that exists specifically to accommodate the undeniable physical difference been those AMAB and AFAB.

And the solution is to segregate trans people as unfit to mingle with "real" people?

No. The solution is to have anyone--cis or trans--who was either born a boy or identifies a boy compete in one division, and protect athletic opportunities for cis-girls by allowing them to compete only against people with the same basic physiology, as was always intended by Title IX.

 

[crandc]

No. The solution is to have anyone--cis or trans--who was either born a boy or identifies a boy compete in one division, and protect athletic opportunities for cis-girls by allowing them to compete only against people with the same basic physiology, as was always intended by Title IX.

Which amounts to a de facto ban on trans people in sports.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Which amounts to a de facto ban on trans people in sports.

Only if you believe that trans-girls are inherently physically inferior to their cis AMAB counterparts. That seems like a very prejudiced position.

It amounts to trans people participating in sports at the level their ability permits, as meritocracy dictates. If they're good enough, they will participate. The trans-girl from @kjironman1's post would still have been the second-fastest 200m runner at her school competing in the open division.

To clarify--my position would be that trans-boys who have not undergone any hormonal transition treatments should still be able to compete in the AFAB division if they so desire; it would only be those who have begun taking testosterone (such as the Texas state champion trans wrestler from 2018) who would be restricted to the open division (as he in fact wanted).

This solution is clear, consistent, and the most physiological fair way to protect girls sports and give everyone the opportunity to compete.

 

[crandc]

I'm sorry but a bit confused. Seems earlier you said only compete as gender assigned at birth but now it seems you favor separate league for trans people?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I'm sorry but a bit confused. Seems earlier you said only compete as gender assigned at birth but now it seems you favor separate league for trans people?

I don't know where you're getting that. I've been very clear on two and only two divisions.

• Girls (AFAB) division: AFAB, no transition hormones.
• Open division: AMAB, AFAB-transitioning. Inclusive of anyone and everyone not eligible to compete in the girls division

I have never suggested a separate league for trans people.

 

[Chris Craig]

Agreed. The restroom complaints are insane. I actually do like the solution of just making more individual restrooms anyway. I like the privacy.

I also agree that most politicians only care about most of these issues to rile up their base.

I don't want anybody targeted, but I don't know if there is any agreeable way to allow people who have transitioned from biological male to compete against women without making women's sports less enjoyable for all.

But absolutely, everyone should be allowed to compete if they have the ability. And every child should be able to play youth sports for sure. Regardless of ability.

But there obviously needs to be a line between the women's divisions and men's. I simply can't think of a more fair one. And I've tried. We've discussed it in this thread and I found that my proposal at the time was far more invasive than current physicals, and as such would not be appropriate. So I've adjusted my position with that in mind. I'm open to adjusting my position again.

I'd love to hear of alternate proposals that could maybe be more appealing. And that's not a challenge to anyone in here. Just an honest invitation to anyone who may have a better idea.

I'm interested in the discussion because I've coached girls for nearly a decade and have 3 daughters who are athletes. I've had many discussions with concerned parents, coaches, and players. I'd love to have an agreeable solution to talk to them about.

Trans people are going to be targeted. There is no amenable avenue here. Trans girls identify as girls. They want to compete against other girls akin to their identity. I'm not sure there is as much push back against trans boys because there is not a perceived advantage.

Parents of cis girl athletes and others in support of them don't want trans girls competing against them because of disadvantage.

The two solutions we hear are trans girls compete against boys because they were born male or to create a different "open" division for trans athletes. Either way this demeans the identity of trans athletes or segregates them. Can we really expect trans athletes to be open to that?

 

[Chris Craig]

Only if you believe that trans-girls are inherently physically inferior to their cis AMAB counterparts. That seems like a very prejudiced position.

It amounts to trans people participating in sports at the level their ability permits, as meritocracy dictates. If they're good enough, they will participate. The trans-girl from @kjironman1's post would still have been the second-fastest 200m runner at her school competing in the open division.

To clarify--my position would be that trans-boys who have not undergone any hormonal transition treatments should still be able to compete in the AFAB division if they so desire; it would only be those who have begun taking testosterone (such as the Texas state champion trans wrestler from 2018) who would be restricted to the open division (as he in fact wanted).

This solution is clear, consistent, and the most physiological fair way to protect girls sports and give everyone the opportunity to compete.

It's not about them being inferior to cis males. I don't believe that is what she is getting at. It's that they identify as females and want to compete with those they are akin to according to that identification. Segregating them or denying their identity would be in affect a de facto ban.

A trans boy would not want to compete in a girls division. They identify as male.

I get wanting to protect athletic opportunities for cis girls. I also get that Trans girls have more at stake than medals or scholarships. They have their identities at stake. What a complex situation.

 

[Chris Craig]

I don't know where you're getting that. I've been very clear on two and only two divisions.

• Girls (AFAB) division: AFAB, no transition hormones.
• Open division: AMAB, AFAB-transitioning. Inclusive of anyone and everyone not eligible to compete in the girls division

I have never suggested a separate league for trans people.

Rather a different division? Or just having trans gendered athletes compete in the men's division. You suggest that those born women can still compete against women as long as they have not undergone transition hormones. Though you have no problem with cis boys competing against men, even having undergone transition hormones because they probably won't win anyway? What if they start winning? Beating cis men? How does that play out?

 

[Phatguysrule]

Trans people are going to be targeted. There is no amenable avenue here. Trans girls identify as girls. They want to compete against other girls akin to their identity. I'm not sure there is as much push back against trans boys because there is not a perceived advantage.

Parents of cis girl athletes and others in support of them don't want trans girls competing against them because of disadvantage.

The two solutions we hear are trans girls compete against boys because they were born male or to create a different "open" division for trans athletes. Either way this demeans the identity of trans athletes or segregates them. Can we really expect trans athletes to be open to that?

So what is the process you would recommend to more accurately delineate between the women's division and the men's (open) division?

Making a 3rd division isn't an option, IMO. That's just a cruel way to target trans athletes.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I don't know where you're getting that. I've been very clear on two and only two divisions.

• Girls (AFAB) division: AFAB, no transition hormones.
• Open division: AMAB, AFAB-transitioning. Inclusive of anyone and everyone not eligible to compete in the girls division

I have never suggested a separate league for trans people.

I would even say the open division should be open to those who are eligible to compete in the women's division. If say, Brittney Griner wants to compete at a higher level, why not allow it? She doesn't have an unfair competitive advantage.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Rather a different division? Or just having trans gendered athletes compete in the men's division. You suggest that those born women can still compete against women as long as they have not undergone transition hormones. Though you have no problem with cis boys competing against men, even having undergone transition hormones because they probably won't win anyway? What if they start winning? Beating cis men? How does that play out?

If they are winning at the highest level without violating the rules then good for them.

 

[Chris Craig]

So what is the process you would recommend to more accurately delineate between the women's division and the men's (open) division?

Making a 3rd division isn't an option, IMO. That's just a cruel way to target trans athletes.

I am saying I don't think there is an amenable process. One side is not going to get their way, and that side will be the trans community.

I thought that's what Platy was saying make a 3rd open division? Oh, so just a women's division and everybody else competes with the guys in a "open" division? Is that not cruel to trans athletes. Does that not deny their identity?

There is no way to make everyone happy here.

 

[Chris Craig]

If they are winning at the highest level without violating the rules then good for them.

You don't think if trans boys start beating cis boys there won't be any effect?

 

[Phatguysrule]

Which amounts to a de facto ban on trans people in sports.

There are many different levels for competitors in the boys (open) division.

There are plenty of places to play. Maybe some or most can't make a living doing it. But most people can't make a living as a pro athlete. That's just life.

 

[oldfisherman]

A boy that goes through puberty, with full normal testosterone levels, has a huge advantage in sports over females.

Full growth testosterone levels make the boy taller, have larger lungs and muscles, and a larger frame size.

Once full grown, taking down testosterone levels doesn't matter, even for over a year. The transgender female still has the blatant sport advantages of a male.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

You don't think if trans boys start beating cis boys there won't be any effect?

If the trans boys are beating the cis boys without having hormone levels that are elevated above a cis-male biological standard, then yes some cis-boys (and advocates) will complain, but their complaints will not be justified in my mind.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You don't think if trans boys start beating cis boys there won't be any effect?

I wouldn't have any sympathy for anybody who had a problem, as long as everyone was following the rules.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I am saying I don't think there is an amenable process. One side is not going to get their way, and that side will be the trans community.

I thought that's what Platy was saying make a 3rd open division? Oh, so just a women's division and everybody else competes with the guys in a "open" division? Is that not cruel to trans athletes. Does that not deny their identity?

There is no way to make everyone happy here.

You're right, there's no way to make everyone happy. That is not my goal. My goal is to be fair and reasonable.

And no, I don't believe that this is cruel to trans athletes or denying their identity. The undeniable, biological fact is that physiology has a greater impact on athletic competition than identity does. The reason for Title IX's existence has nothing to do with gender identity expression; its implementation was based on the factual differences in physiology between those AMAB and AFAB. If we want to be true to the intent of that law, we need to protect athletic opportunities for cisgender girls.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I would even say the open division should be open to those who are eligible to compete in the women's division. If say, Brittney Griner wants to compete at a higher level, why not allow it? She doesn't have an unfair competitive advantage.

I agree with that as well. However, I would also posit that from a Title IX perspective, the exceedingly rare instance of cisgender females participating in the open division would need to not reduce the availability of athletic participation opportunities for boys and trans-girls.

 

[Hoopguru]

Athletics at many levels have different leagues, to accommodate fairness. 6A versus 4A, rec leagues for kids versus classic/top leagues for kids. Triple A vers MLB. They are available to level a playing field with regards to fairness. There should be leagues available for trans athletes. However, since the percentage is probably low they may not be able to field teams.

 

[Chris Craig]

You're right, there's no way to make everyone happy. That is not my goal. My goal is to be fair and reasonable.

And no, I don't believe that this is cruel to trans athletes or denying their identity. The undeniable, biological fact is that physiology has a greater impact on athletic competition than identity does. The reason for Title IX's existence has nothing to do with gender identity expression; its implementation was based on the factual differences in physiology between those AMAB and AFAB. If we want to be true to the intent of that law, we need to protect athletic opportunities for cisgender girls.

I get that. But, in a way it's not fair to the transgendered athletes because in their view it denies their identities, even if in your view it does not.

I get you are trying to be fair and reasonable. I get cis female athletes are feeling disadvantaged and their parents feel they are disadvantaged. I'm not disputing that view. I'm not arguing the law. I'm just looking at it from both sides.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Athletics at many levels have different leagues, to accommodate fairness. 6A versus 4A, rec leagues for kids versus classic/top leagues for kids. Triple A vers MLB. They are available to level a playing field with regards to fairness. There should be leagues available for trans athletes. However, since the percentage is probably low they may not be able to field teams.

I don't think a league for just trans people is necessary. If somebody isn't competitive enough to play in the top open division they should be able to play at 4A or JV, or AAA or AA, or whatever level best matches their ability.

If people aren't competitive enough to play at any of those levels then they have to join the rest of us in the stands or play rec.

That's what most people do. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Hoopguru]

I don't think a league for just trans people is necessary. If somebody isn't competitive enough to play in the top open division they should be able to play at 4A or JV, or AAA or AA, or whatever level best matches their ability.

If people aren't competitive enough to play at any of those levels then they have to join the rest of us in the stands or play rec.

That's what most people do. There is nothing wrong with that.

What would be your recommendation?

 

[crandc]

I don't know where you're getting that. I've been very clear on two and only two divisions.

• Girls (AFAB) division: AFAB, no transition hormones.
• Open division: AMAB, AFAB-transitioning. Inclusive of anyone and everyone not eligible to compete in the girls division

I have never suggested a separate league for trans people.

I don't agree with you but thank you for clarifying.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[Phatguysrule]

What would be your recommendation?

I'm with @PtldPlatypus. Assessment at birth seems the most fair, most accurate, and least invasive line for the most people.

I don't see any drawbacks for anybody beyond what most people who like to play sports have to deal with.

If I were talented enough to play basketball for a living I wouldn't be at my current job.

 

[Hoopguru]

I'm with @PtldPlatypus. Assessment at birth seems the most fair, most accurate, and least invasive line for the most people.

I don't see any drawbacks for anybody beyond what most people who like to play sports have to deal with.

If I were talented enough to play basketball for a living I wouldn't be at my current job.

So a transitioning AMAB would have to sign up and compete in a boys/mens team/league?

 

[Phatguysrule]

So a transitioning AMAB would have to sign up and compete in a boys/means team/league?

Yes.

 

[Hoopguru]

Yes.

Correct me if I'm wrong but OSAA doesn't use that criteria?

 

[Phatguysrule]

Correct me if I'm wrong but OSAA doesn't use that criteria?

I'm not aware of the exact OSAA criteria. I know I've seen girls play up into the boys divisions. Wrestling, football, etc. so it doesn't seem like much of a stretch.