Current Events > So conservatives were losing their shit over Trans athletes in the Olympics...

(+) Yeah! (+)

how have they been doing so far?

---

We'll find out one way or another once she competes.

---

need to make testosterone tracking mandatory for transgender athletes across all sports at all levels

---

Stewman_Magoo posted...

We'll find out one way or another once she competes.

When is that?

---

Aug 1st and 2nd are the highest weight lifting for women so I assume this weekend we'll find out.

---

Laurel Hubbard hasnt lifted yet. Womens 85+kg lift Monday.

---

scorpion41 posted...

Laurel Hubbard hasnt lifted yet. Womens 85+kg lift Monday.

but other Trans athletes have played...why are you just focused on weight lifting?

---

VipaGTS posted...

but other Trans athletes have played...why are you just focused on weight lifting?

Probably the best sport to see of there is a blatant advantage or not

Most other sports have various dexterous skills involved. Weight lifting is mostly strength based (with form and technique also being important?

Even if they all perform subpar or average and don't win, it won't necessarily mean there is no advantage. But the more metrics the better.

---

WizardPowers posted...

Probably the best sport to see of there is a blatant advantage or not

Most other sports have various dexterous skills involved. Weight lifting is mostly strength based (with form and technique also being important?

So...you're saying that majorly there is no advantage, then...

---

VipaGTS posted...

So...you're saying that majorly there is no advantage, then...

Not at all

---

Wait didn't they give out the gold for weightlifting already? Because the Phillippines won their first gold ever with it, I thought(though the government sure didn't help).

---

Ban people from faking being trans to get an advantage and you're fine. There isn't nearly enough of an advantage otherwise to be concerning, and measuring testosterone levels just brings up its own stupid problems.

---

I'd consider myself conservative and I am rooting for her to win a gold.

WizardPowers posted...

Not at all

that's basically what you said. if we have to wait for weightlifting to REALLY see, that means the other events don't give you much info...in other words, there hasn't been an obvious advantage like people claimed there would be.

---

newhorrorguy posted...

Ban people from faking being trans to get an advantage and you're fine.

Who is actually doing this tho?

---

TheRadiant posted...

Who is actually doing this tho?

Nobody, like most conservatroll subjects lol

---

VipaGTS posted...

that's basically what you said. if we have to wait for weightlifting to REALLY see, that means the other events don't give you much info...in other words, there hasn't been an obvious advantage like people claimed there would be.

I said that it would probably be the easiest to see. You can see it in any sport I imagine but like I said, there are so few trans athletes (especially good athletes) that it'll take time for the metrics to come in.

---

This is a bad take

---

"metrics"...if the competition needs a full on analysis and breakdown instead of just...watching the event then any competitive advantage is being overblown and not a big issue lol

---

If she does poorly, they'll just accuse her of taking a dive.

---

VipaGTS posted...

but other Trans athletes have played...why are you just focused on weight lifting?

That guy is literally a/ex competing powerlifter, lol. I think it's fair to say that he can have an interest in olympic lifting.

Like I get that conservatives get this wrong and have all kinds of fucked up things to say on the topic but painting this as a "this only matters if she wins" or "you only care about women's sport because she's trans" is...all the wrong takes also.

---

pinky0926 posted...

That guy is literally a/ex competing powerlifter, lol. I think it's fair to say that he can have an interest in olympic lifting.

Like I get that conservatives get this wrong and have all kinds of fucked up things to say on the topic but painting this as a "this only matters if she wins" or "you only care about women's sport because she's trans" is...all the wrong takes also.

neither of those are my takes.

---

The logic of "If a transgender doesn't win every event they ever have then there's no advantage and no issue" is pretty disingenuous, I don't like how TC and other users are implying that.

It's like their entire understanding of the issue is Futurama and South Park

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

The logic of "If a transgender doesn't win every event they ever have then there's no advantage and no issue" is pretty disingenuous, I don't like how TC and other users are implying that.

im not implying that at all.

---

VipaGTS posted...

"metrics"...if the competition needs a full on analysis and breakdown instead of just...watching the event then any competitive advantage is being overblown and not a big issue lol

That sounds like an incredibly stupid argument

But I don't think you made this topic for a good faith discussion anyways

---

VipaGTS posted...

neither of those are my takes.

Well you're sort of implying that if she doesn't do well in the competition then that's the topic done and dusted and there's nothing more to debate, and I think that would be a bad take. if I've got that wrong then what is your take, plainly speaking?

---

VipaGTS posted...

im not implying that at all.

VipaGTS posted...

neither of those are my takes.

What is your take exactly?

---

WizardPowers posted...

What is your take exactly?

that there is no clear competitive advantage, win or lose. Trans athletes have already participated, and if you can't point out a clear competitive advantage, like protestors claimed there would be, then the notion of a competitive advantage is overblown. Waiting for Weightlifting and letting that one event hold more weight is disingenuous. Overall, there hasn't been a clear cut advantage at all. Nothing has stood out.

---

VipaGTS posted...

that there is no clear competitive advantage, win or lose. Trans athletes have already participated, and if you can't point out a clear competitive advantage, like protestors claimed there would be, then the notion of a competitive advantage is overblown. Waiting for Weightlifting and letting that one event hold more weight is disingenuous. Overall, there hasn't been a clear cut advantage at all. Nothing has stood out.

Why wouldn't there be a competitive advantage? Are you saying an advantage doesn't exist because one hasn't been shown in the elite trans athlete class? I mean I thought we all agreed this is a problem with having a solid amount of data.

Like all the foundational theory from what we know about how testosterone and male puberty works is there. What we need to prove "no competitive advantage" would be an even bigger theory that transitioning removes that advantage completely.

If you ask me, the arguments about trans athletes in sport work on an ethical and ideological level, and the conversation should be about whether it's exclusion before evidence or inclusion before evidence. But to imply that there's not even an argument for performance advantage...the whole conversation becomes ludicrous. Like what even is strength? What makes you have more of it?

The gaslighting on this topic is unreal.

---

What does "clear competitive advantage" mean to you just so we know what definition you're working from here.


---

WizardPowers posted...

What does "clear competitive advantage" mean to you just so we know what definition you're working from here.

That its not one person coming in and dominating like people fear mongered. that the competition is still there. that its not a big issue, not as big as it was made out to be.

---

VipaGTS posted...

That its not one person coming in and dominating like people fear mongered. that the competition is still there. that its not a big issue, not as big as it was made out to be.

Alright fine, and that's definitely an overblown concern. But here's my argument: if I stuck you on an electric bike and put you on the front line of the tour de france, you would still absolutely lose. I could get a hundred mediocre athletes on electric bikes and they would still all be absolutely smoked by most every elite athlete in that sport. But does that prove that having an electric bike is not an advantage?

---

VipaGTS posted...

That its not one person coming in and dominating like people fear mongered. that the competition is still there. that its not a big issue, not as big as it was made out to be.

So would it be fair to say that in your opinion any advantage a person could have after transitioning is irrelevant if they can't beat the tip top performers of the sport in question?

---

pinky0926 posted...

Alright fine, and that's definitely an overblown concern. But here's my argument: if I stuck you on an electric bike and put you on the front line of the tour de france, you would still absolutely lose. I could get a hundred mediocre athletes on electric bikes and they would still all be absolutely smoked by most every elite athlete in that sport. But does that prove that having an electric bike is not an advantage?

Problem is everyone here qualified for the Olympics. These arent mediocre athletes. Any of them. Full stop. False equivalence.

pinky0926 posted...

Alright fine, and that's definitely an overblown concern. But here's my argument: if I stuck you on an electric bike and put you on the front line of the tour de france, you would still absolutely lose. I could get a hundred mediocre athletes on electric bikes and they would still all be absolutely smoked by most every elite athlete in that sport. But does that prove that having an electric bike is not an advantage?

if your argument is in the semantics of the word advantage then i don't really care to debate that. this is about the competition, and so far Trans athletes haven't shown to unfairly ruin or overpower the competition. its not a big deal.

---

UnfairRepresent posted...

South Park

South Parks entire point was that we should be able to at least have the conversation of biological/anatomical differences without being called a transphobe by PC babies.

That was the point. The Ms Swanson character wasnt actually trans, hes a sexist pos ex boyfriend being a jerk.

---

WizardPowers posted...

So would it be fair to say that in your opinion any advantage a person could have after transitioning is irrelevant if they can't beat the tip top performers of the sport in question?

Yes, that is my point. Technically, someone who works out twice as hard as the next person has an advantage too, but we're not going to kick her out because she worked harder. a team that has Lebron James has an advantage, but we're not gonna kick LeBron out of the league. Its a non issue and not something that needs to be pointed out. Its not affecting the competition. Everyone still has the same chance as if the Trans athlete wasn't in it.

---

did the weight lifting comp go down yet?

---

daynlokki posted...

Problem is everyone here qualified for the Olympics. These arent mediocre athletes. Any of them. Full stop. False equivalence.

Mediocre male athletes would absolutely be elite level female athletes comparatively in weightlifting, that's why this is a big discussion. Its a 40% difference in performance in a sport where the difference between gold and bronze is 3%. "how much does transitioning remove that advantage, is it completely removed?" It's a totally fair question. Laurel Hubbard went through male puberty and then spent her entire prime years benefiting (respective to sports performance) from male physiology. Unlike most other athletic pursuits, strength is one you can continue to accumulate well into your 30s. That's not a made up thing, it just is.

In summary (if you want to point holes in that analogy), what if I got you an electric bike that got you fast enough just to reach the back of the peloton? Is it fair now, since you didn't get a medal?

VipaGTS posted...

if your argument is in the semantics of the word advantage then i don't really care to debate that. this is about the competition, and so far Trans athletes haven't shown to unfairly ruin or overpower the competition. its not a big deal.

I don't really agree with the argument that this would only become a big deal in a hypothetical scenario where many trans women dominate women's sport. Like maybe we should just agree on what the sports division is supposed to be about before it happens even once?

---

pinky0926 posted...

Mediocre male athletes would absolutely be elite level female athletes comparatively in weightlifting, that's why this is a big discussion. Its a 40% difference in performance in a sport where the difference between gold and bronze is 3%. "how much does transitioning remove that advantage, is it completely removed?" It's a totally fair question. Laurel Hubbard went through male puberty and then spent her entire prime years benefiting (respective to sports performance) from male physiology. Unlike most other athletic pursuits, strength is one you can continue to accumulate well into your 30s. That's not a made up thing, it just is.

In summary (if you want to point holes in that analogy), what if I got you an electric bike that got you fast enough just to reach the back of the peloton? Is it fair now, since you didn't get a medal?

I don't really agree with the argument that this would only become a big deal in a hypothetical scenario where many trans women dominate women's sport. Like maybe we should just agree on what the sports division is supposed to be about before it happens even once?

Fact is she didnt dominate in womens sport after transitioning. The hormones alone she has to take just to compete completely fuck with her body on a day to day basis.

Real quick, name me a transgender person with an Olympic medal. Just off the top of your head since its an advantage and all.

daynlokki posted...

Fact is she didnt dominate in womens sport after transitioning. The hormones alone she has to take just to compete completely fuck with her body on a day to day basis.

This is a really poor way to measure how the transitioning affected her perfomance. Did she dominate men's sport when she was an entirely physiologically normal (germane to sports performance) male? And also is that it, we're just saying "if you dominate literally the highest achievement of athletics then there's possibly an advantage, but if you're just in the top 1% of the world's athletes then there's not"?

Here's a better way: what level of athlete were they before transitioning? Like in literal terms: top 1% competitor? Top 5%? You can measure that in raw stats. You can say "Ok, (his) squat/snatch/C&J is X, therefore he is in the top 10%." You can do this for literally any athlete, we have the numbers.

After transitioning though, you would expect a raw drop in numbers, but if the percentage doesn't appreciably change, then you can very reasonably argue that no advantage exists. "Athlete lost 15kgs on their snatch however they are still in the same league of competitor relative to sex, therefore no advantage exists."

However if a competitor transitions, loses a certain amount of strength on their lifts and somehow goes from a top 10% competitor to a top 1% competitor WAY past their prime age, then questions are entirely reasonable. Like if this happened in any other circumstance you would assume PEDs up the wazoo.

---

daynlokki posted...

Real quick, name me a transgender person with an Olympic medal. Just off the top of your head since its an advantage and all.

You're trying a gotcha for an argument I've never made and never will make since it's completely irrelevant to what an "advantage" means.

---

Someone having an unfair advantage does not require domination. Relative performance in male and female leagues would be one indicator of fairness.

Flauros posted...

did the weight lifting comp go down yet?

Yes. At least for one women's category, because that one girl(deservedly) won gold.

If she doesn't have a movie soon ill be disappointed >.>

---

VipaGTS posted...

that there is no clear competitive advantage, win or lose. Trans athletes have already participated, and if you can't point out a clear competitive advantage, like protestors claimed there would be, then the notion of a competitive advantage is overblown. Waiting for Weightlifting and letting that one event hold more weight is disingenuous. Overall, there hasn't been a clear cut advantage at all. Nothing has stood out.

Multiple users (especially UR) have repeatedly posted actual studies that show that mtf trans athletes do in fact have a clear, competitive advantage? Like, is any amount of evidence actually going to change your mind?

Here's a quick few I found searching the logs:
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.full?ijkey=yjlCzZVZFRDZzHz&keytype=ref

Summary The 1531% athletic advantage that transwomen displayed over their female counterparts prior to starting gender affirming hormones declined with feminising therapy. However, transwomen still had a 9% faster mean run speed after the 1 year period of testosterone suppression that is recommended by World Athletics for inclusion in womens events

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/28/bjsports-2020-103106

Conclusion In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3

We have shown that under testosterone suppression regimes typically used in clinical settings, and which comfortably exceed the requirements of sports federations for inclusion of transgender women in female sports categories by reducing testosterone levels to well below the upper tolerated limit, evidence for loss of the male performance advantage, established by testosterone at puberty and translating in elite athletes to a 1050% performance advantage, is lacking. Rather, the data show that strength, lean body mass, muscle size and bone density are only trivially affected.

Rather, the data show that strength, lean body mass, muscle size and bone density are only trivially affected. The reductions observed in muscle mass, size, and strength are very small compared to the baseline differences between males and females in these variables, and thus, there are major performance and safety implications in sports where these attributes are competitively significant.

These data significantly undermine the delivery of fairness and safety presumed by the criteria set out in transgender inclusion policies, particularly given the stated prioritization of fairness as an overriding objective (for the IOC).If those policies are intended to preserve fairness, inclusion and the safety of biologically female athletes, sporting organizations may need to reassess their policies regarding inclusion of transgender women.

Here's a whole webmd interview on the subject:
https://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/news/20210715/do-trans-women-athletes-have-advantages

---

pinky0926 posted...

You're trying a gotcha for an argument I've never made and never will make since it's completely irrelevant to what an "advantage" means.

If not one has even received a medal how would you equate their advantage? If as you said, mediocre male athletes would be elite female athletes, why are male to female transitioned athletes not dominating their sports, but are instead mostly mediocre?

VipaGTS posted...

but other Trans athletes have played...why are you just focused on weight lifting?

Have they? (genuinely asking)

---

daynlokki posted...

If not one has even received a medal how would you equate their advantage? If as you said, mediocre male athletes would be elite female athletes, why are male to female transitioned athletes not dominating their sports, but are instead mostly mediocre?

Because (as you know) there are so few trans athletes, and the regulations on trans athletes on sports is still quite severe that they're simply not allowed to compete in so many male divisions in so many parts of the world. You're dealing with incredible barriers to entry on top of an extremely small selection bias. It would actually be stunning if a super elite athlete happened to be trans.

Advantage is relatively easy to equate. Again, go back to the electric bike example. We know that your ability to generate speed on a bike is a function of force over time. An athlete that can produce more force with less effort is going to pedal faster for longer, simply put. But if we give you a motor - a device that literally produces more force with less effort - then there is by definition an advantage, even if you are mediocre in many other respects important to sports performance (VO2 MAX, technique, conditioning, etc.) that's how you can have an advantage but still lose. Other athletes happened to overcome that advantage you had with advantages of their own.

And males enjoy this thing called puberty that makes them much much stronger, much faster, much better at breathing, much better at endurance, much better at producing force, much taller with better levers. And we have all the stats to show how big this advantage is between cis male and cis females. It's an astonishingly large difference.

The question then becomes, what is the quality of the advantage? Is it something you accrued naturally? Is it big enough that it deserves discussion or division? Well obviously a motor on a bike is not natural. A performance enhancing drug (like steroids) is not natural. We clearly define what is allowed and not allowed and we do it in granular detail. Why? Because we try to protect whatever reason the category exists for in the first place.

But then again, the advantage for male physiology is absolutely clear, and its huge.Like enough to turn mediocre athletes into elite ones given no division. And it's never natural to cis women. The better argument you should be making is "Well it's natural to have testosterone if you transitioned, so is it any different from other advantages, like long limbs or fast twitch muscles or being tall". That's still an argument I would get into but at least it would be better than arguing that advantages don't exist for male genetics, which is absolutely absurd.

---

pinky0926 posted...

Because (as you know) there are so few trans athletes, and the regulations on trans athletes on sports is still quite severe that they're simply not allowed to compete in so many male divisions in so many parts of the world. You're dealing with incredible barriers to entry on top of an extremely small selection bias. It would actually be stunning if a super elite athlete happened to be trans.

Advantage is relatively easy to equate. Again, go back to the electric bike example. We know that your ability to generate speed on a bike is a function of force over time. An athlete that can produce more force with less effort is going to pedal faster for longer, simply put. But if we give you a motor - a device that literally produces more force with less effort - then there is by definition an advantage, even if you are mediocre in many other respects important to sports performance (VO2 MAX, technique, conditioning, etc.) that's how you can have an advantage but still lose. Other athletes happened to overcome that advantage you had with advantages of their own.

And males enjoy this thing called puberty that makes them much much stronger, much faster, much better at breathing, much better at endurance, much better at producing force, much taller with better levers. And we have all the stats to show how big this advantage is between cis male and cis females. It's an astonishingly large difference.

The question then becomes, what is the quality of the advantage? Is it something you accrued naturally? Is it big enough that it deserves discussion or division? Well obviously a motor on a bike is not natural. A performance enhancing drug (like steroids) is not natural. We clearly define what is allowed and not allowed and we do it in granular detail. Why? Because we try to protect whatever reason the category exists for in the first place.

But then again, the advantage for male physiology is absolutely clear, and its huge.Like enough to turn mediocre athletes into elite ones given no division. And it's never natural to cis women. The better argument you should be making is "Well it's natural to have testosterone if you transitioned, so is it any different from other advantages, like long limbs or fast twitch muscles or being tall". That's still an argument I would get into but at least it would be better than arguing that advantages don't exist for male genetics, which is absolutely absurd.

You keep talking about all these advantages. What about their disadvantages because of hormone therapy?

Transphobes never care about facts, they'll still find a way to distort it as being unfair.

---