DrIsotope

Ummm... do you think that when someone decides that their birth gender doesn't match the gender in their head, that their physiology just transforms? Or more disturbingly, do you think that through science or wizardry, McKinnon's physical structure has been changed from male to female? Like... hip angle, bone length, muscle mass. Because that is categorically impossible. My brother-in-law (well, one of them) is female-to-male transgender, and trust me, there's no magic happening. If there were, I can 100% guarantee he would opt to be taller.

Lazyass

He can't change his chromosomes and DNA. Gender is the easiest thing for DNA to identify. What if Lebron James decided he wanted to be a chick and play in the WNBA?

OBoile

Science says otherwise. Perhaps you should consider researching this before commenting?
And if you were to look at her hormone profile (which is largely responsible for the performance related "male" attributes you describe in an earlier post), you'd assume she was female.

The fact is, the leading experts in the field don't know whether she has a significant unfair advantage, yet you feel confident saying she does. Why?

himespau 

I mean, I get that for some it doesn't quite feel fair. She might have female levels of hormones now, but still has the physique she built when a male. It's kind of like if you ban someone for using anabolic steroids for two years, but this come back and start competing again two years later while they still have the muscles they built while on steroids - it just doesn't feel right. One the other hand, she no longer has the hormones in her body and her current hormone levels wouldn't let her compete against men. Her current hormones are (probably - I haven't looked at scans of her body) changing her bone and muscle density to the point where it could be that other XX females with a genetic advantage might have denser bones and muscles than her. At least they might be depending on what hormones she's taking. So where is it fair for her to go? I'm sure most fields don't have enough transgender athletes (who might all be a different stages of transitioning) to have their own separate races. Usain Bolt has more fast twitch muscle fibers than I do, should he be banned from sprinting because he won the genetic lottery (and works hella hard)?

speedevil 

I understand that *you* say otherwise, I'm disagreeing with you. Where is the science that supports your position?

OBoile

Seriously? Are you too lazy to research a topic before you comment on it?
https://www.onlinepsychologydegree.i...ransgenderism/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0524112351.htm
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/scienc...same-1.4145739

This took like 5 minutes to do.

DrIsotope

None of those articles help prove your point. Brain chemistry and physical ability are two completely different things. We're not here to debate sex vs. gender. We're questioning whether or not someone who is physiologically male should be allowed to compete against others who are physiologically female. Paint it whatever color you'd like, but the male anatomy and the female anatomy are different. Men run faster, jump higher, and throw farther. These are facts. If men weren't just biologically more physically capable, every pro sport would be co-ed, wouldn't it?

speedevil 

None of those articles address the physiological issues. They discuss a mindset where the brain sees a different sex than the biological body. This is quite different from a biological difference between the sexes, and does not prove your point. Rather, it frames the issue as a mental (brain) situation, rather than looking at the physiological (body) issues with transgender - which is the difference we are debating here.

How or why a person feels about their body's sex is not relevant in an athletic contest, and is not valid as a basis for males to choose to compete in female competitions. If he cannot compete in a men's competition that's too bad but that's life. I could not compete against men at that level either, again that's the way the genetic ball bounces.

But while competitive events are available for males, there is zero justification for him to compete in female competitive events.

prairiepedaler

Apparently this sporting event has not gone un-noticed in cyberspace:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/10/...-championship/

This sort of "gender as the wind blows" occurence isn't limited to cycling either:

https://people.com/human-interest/ma...e-girls-title/

There are bound to be other examples out there too with more to come.

I decided to identify as Indurain this afternoon to cope dealing with a strong head wind. The wind didn't care and the pack mule still felt as heavy as !@#$.

Rajflyboy

Doge

This is a reflection on the folks that put on the event. Athletes of every sport I know push and go over the limit. The sporting authorities are the ones to determine the rules. That this is allowed is not so far from allowing blades for feet or TUEs or some to have different gears.

Doge

We should race everyone by ability. The ribbon can go to whoever the promoter wants as they buy the ribbons.
You could have an award for fastest period, fastest under 5', fastest over 250# - there are endless categories.

In the end it will be $$ that determine the significance (to all but the racer and friends) of the event.

Doge

If Micheal Phelps decided to lower his hormone profile to the level calculated by leading experts, how do you think he might do in a women's swim meet his age?

The title expert seems pretty loosely given. Experts have said blades for legs don't matter, lack of legs in swimming don't matter, crutches in soccer don't matter and bionic eyes don't matter for shooting. In some cases the athlete has no choice about their condition, and they select a correction not allowed to others (TUE), and in some cases they do have a choice about their condition. In both cases, I doubt experts really know what matters. There are para games because these things do matter. At the world title level - anything but what you are born with and training methods allowed to all taints the win. There was no cheating here, but it is not a clean win anymore than getting a win by the chase pack being stopped by a train, or your arch rival riding off the road*. There should be class in the sport, particularly one were there is not money on the line. This win lacked class. The UCI is to blame. They need to figure this out.

*Most saw the Lance / Ulrich wait. Lance was a class rider riding the same way others did. I don't see that level of class going on here. But - there was no cheating.

Rajflyboy

Doge

Exactly. It would eliminate small fields too. Promoters would make more money, and there would be more races