It's bullshit, really, since everyone involved in pro whatever is a distinct individual who may have a very different body, training regimen, strategy, etc. There's no equal ground here, and what there is is accomplished via matchmaking and classes, which you can do anyway with trans fighters.
I agree largely, but the bigger issue at play here is ciphering out advantages that transwomen (as a group of athletes) may have over ciswomen (as a group of athletes) despite whatever transition has made their bodies into. I mentioned basketball as an area where no matter what their hormone level, muscle tone, or skill, on average the height of a transwoman basketballer is going to be substantially higher than their ciswomen competitors.
Average height of NBA player: 6'7"
Average height of WNBA player: 5'11"
That's a big freakin' deal.
Individually it may not matter; there are tall women after all. But on average, your professionally competitive transwomen would likely hold a huge (nigh insurmountable) physical advantage over their competition.
As I said before, the entire existence of women's leagues is to provide as equal a level of competition as can be provided for a group of people who aren't able to compete at the skill level of their male counterparts. I'm a big advocate of trans issues, but I can't rightly sit here and say that transitioning alone negates the advantages of being born male, not without having a lot more study and research to look at. I would like to believe that, but I don't think it's fair to assume anything.
Overall there is simply insufficient research for speculation. And the only way to do research is to let people fight. So...
There is also very little research into the effects of mud on female's combat abilities. Now that we've established that my mud-wrestling league is, like, totally sciencey, where do I send my grant application?
According to independent research I may or may not have performed personally, this line of inquiry will only lead you down a perpetual path of inconclusive results which need to be re-validated with further experiments.
It's bullshit, really, since everyone involved in pro whatever is a distinct individual who may have a very different body, training regimen, strategy, etc. There's no equal ground here, and what there is is accomplished via matchmaking and classes, which you can do anyway with trans fighters.
I agree largely, but the bigger issue at play here is ciphering out advantages that transwomen (as a group of athletes) may have over ciswomen (as a group of athletes) despite whatever transition has made their bodies into. I mentioned basketball as an area where no matter what their hormone level, muscle tone, or skill, on average the height of a transwoman basketballer is going to be substantially higher than their ciswomen competitors.
Average height of NBA player: 6'7"
Average height of WNBA player: 5'11"
That's a big freakin' deal.
Individually it may not matter; there are tall women after all. But on average, your professionally competitive transwomen would likely hold a huge (nigh insurmountable) physical advantage over their competition.
As I said before, the entire existence of women's leagues is to provide as equal a level of competition as can be provided for a group of people who aren't able to compete at the skill level of their male counterparts. I'm a big advocate of trans issues, but I can't rightly sit here and say that transitioning alone negates the advantages of being born male, not without having a lot more study and research to look at. I would like to believe that, but I don't think it's fair to assume anything.
Yes, there may be some natural advantages to being born male, but this does not mean that men are generally superior and women are naturally inferior at any particular physical attribute.
The division of athletes into male and female was not an inappropriate one to make; it solves lots of problems like increasing the number of professional female athletes. At the same time, it creates other issues like this one. I would support competition between sexes in a heartbeat if I knew there was a way to do so without decreasing male or female involvement and/or pay.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
joshofalltrades on
+1
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
It's bullshit, really, since everyone involved in pro whatever is a distinct individual who may have a very different body, training regimen, strategy, etc. There's no equal ground here, and what there is is accomplished via matchmaking and classes, which you can do anyway with trans fighters.
I agree largely, but the bigger issue at play here is ciphering out advantages that transwomen (as a group of athletes) may have over ciswomen (as a group of athletes) despite whatever transition has made their bodies into. I mentioned basketball as an area where no matter what their hormone level, muscle tone, or skill, on average the height of a transwoman basketballer is going to be substantially higher than their ciswomen competitors.
Average height of NBA player: 6'7"
Average height of WNBA player: 5'11"
That's a big freakin' deal.
Individually it may not matter; there are tall women after all. But on average, your professionally competitive transwomen would likely hold a huge (nigh insurmountable) physical advantage over their competition.
As I said before, the entire existence of women's leagues is to provide as equal a level of competition as can be provided for a group of people who aren't able to compete at the skill level of their male counterparts. I'm a big advocate of trans issues, but I can't rightly sit here and say that transitioning alone negates the advantages of being born male, not without having a lot more study and research to look at. I would like to believe that, but I don't think it's fair to assume anything.
Okay, so a random tgirl might be taller than the average player.
But so can a random cgirl.
I honestly don't see the problem here.
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I would support competition between sexes in a heartbeat if I knew there was a way to do so without decreasing male or female involvement and/or pay.
What about weight divisions? A flyweight boxer might be technically brilliant, but would get destroyed if you put them up against a heavyweight with less technical skill. Couldn't a similar system be used for mixed-gender competition?
It could work for individual sports, but team games would be a bit more awkward as you'd have to have a light, medium, and heavyweight leagues.
If you stick the trans women in with the men, you'd then have to stick the trans men in with the women. And except for height that'd probably be much, much more unfair.
Cinders: Then simplify it to "No man is going to transition". It still works, because when you're talking sports, SRS is the part of transition that has the least effect.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Yes, there may be some natural advantages to being born male, but this does not mean that men are generally superior and women are naturally inferior at any particular physical attribute.
On the contrary, I think you can say that quite easily, especially if we're talking about generalities. I wouldn't use the word "inferior," but there is a reason that there aren't any women playing in the men's leagues, and that reason ISN'T because they won't let them. MLB is the only major professional sport in the US with a gender requirement; the NFL even had its first female athlete to try out for a team this year.
I see the question from the other side of the equation; if there is a genetic component to having a Y chromosome that makes your potential as an athlete higher than an XX woman even after a full and complete hormonal transition, I think there's cause to ensure that the ciswomen competitors aren't getting left out of their own game.
This is all speculation and advocacy, by the way. If the science says that a transwoman who has completed transition has no defined chemical, physical, or mental advantage over her ciswoman competitors, then I'm all for it.
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
+2
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
If you stick the trans women in with the men, you'd then have to stick the trans men in with the women. And except for height that'd probably be much, much more unfair.
Cinders: Then simplify it to "No man is going to transition". It still works, because when you're talking sports, SRS is the part of transition that has the least effect.
I don't see the problem with transmen competing in the mens league.
I honestly don't understand the issue here, so if I'm missing something please explain it to me in simpler terms.
There's a lot of assumptions here that someone who can participate in the highest tiers of MALE sports, will transition and then dominate the highest tiers of FEMALE sports. That's a weird assumption, the profession athletes are already above average due to mostly genetic reasons.
Michael Jordan was better than his peers because of reasons.
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
0
Options
Clown ShoesGive me hay or give me death.Registered Userregular
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
The emphasis is understandable - most of the media are hettie males and our lives often revolve around our dicks.
0
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
The female height averages for the basketball players are the male height averages for the male population (of the US)
So you need an above average tgirl etc.
And even if all these things align, all you have is an obvious outlier like Michael Jordan, but with people actually giving a reason (regardless of how accurate) of why she's an outlier, rather than he's just really good.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
The emphasis is understandable - most of the media are hettie males and our lives often revolve around our dicks.
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
The female height averages for the basketball players are the male height averages for the male population (of the US)
So you need an above average tgirl etc.
And even if all these things align, all you have is an obvious outlier like Michael Jordan, but with people actually giving a reason (regardless of how accurate) of why she's an outlier, rather than he's just really good.
More like Manute Bull (7' 7" and wiry). At 6'6", Jordan was below the average height noted above. As to what height alone is worth, I probably don't need to point out which of the two was actually an exceptional pro baller.
ArbitraryDescriptor on
+1
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
The emphasis is understandable - most of the media are hettie males and our lives often revolve around our dicks.
And boobs.
Yet no one asks creepy questions about breast augmentation :P
0
Options
Clown ShoesGive me hay or give me death.Registered Userregular
I think you'll find that it's actually spelled "BOOBS!"
+2
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
The emphasis is understandable - most of the media are hettie males and our lives often revolve around our dicks.
And boobs.
Yet no one asks creepy questions about breast augmentation :P
I'd much rather talk about the boobs themselves than the details of augmentation. Don't spoil the magic!
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
The female height averages for the basketball players are the male height averages for the male population (of the US)
So you need an above average tgirl etc.
And even if all these things align, all you have is an obvious outlier like Michael Jordan, but with people actually giving a reason (regardless of how accurate) of why she's an outlier, rather than he's just really good.
More like Manute Bull (7' 7"). At 6'6", Jordan was below the average height noted above. As to what height alone is worth, I probably don't need to point out which of the two was actually an exceptional pro baller.
I think that over enough time, transwomen playing at 6'6" would become less of an outlier and more of a rule. It's not the outliers that are the problem and I'm not worried about them. There's a transwoman playing basketball for a college in California right now that's almost a foot taller than the average player, and by all accounts she's kinda shitty, so whatever. But when having that much height advantage becomes fairly standard, you're going to see some problems.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
I feel like this has gotten tangent-y, so let me ground my prior post in LGBT on-topicness: I believe that the only current solution to this question of where transgendered people should compete is to allow them to compete with the gender they currently are. I promise you, no man who identifies as male is going to have an operation so he can "beat up girls" professionally. It won't happen.
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
The emphasis is understandable - most of the media are hettie males and our lives often revolve around our dicks.
And boobs.
Yet no one asks creepy questions about breast augmentation :P
I think it's weird when people have their nipples relocated for augmentation. It deadens the nerves in the nipples when they do that.
I actually met Kiki Vandeweghe personally when I was a veeeeerrry small kid.
I didn't care that he wasn't the best player ever, he was tall and cool as shit for letting a 2-year-old Nuggets fan sit on his knee. I still have the autographed ball he gave me somewhere, even though I lost all interest in sports at about age 5.
Now, when I look at him compared to Michael Jordan, he may have had worse stats, but he refused to play for Dallas and so a childhood hero became oddly even more awesome after I grew up.
I'm not sure why height is being bandied about as the end-all be-all of basketball but it really, really isn't. Skill, as in many things, factors in heavily.
Isner might be ridiculously tall for a tennis player, and that gives him a huge serving advantage due to simple logistics (better access to steep serving angles), but he still gets his ass handed to him on a regular basis. I don't see any reason to exclude transgendered people based upon frame height or width. I still hold that sports are about competition; normalize performance between sports seasons, divide the participants into leagues based on their performance (allowing for enough divisions where no gender is excluded) and then nobody will care if a trans person competes against a cis person. Or do something similar, but better thought out. But looking at gender demographics as a whole instead of performance within the relatively small group of professionals who compete seems inappropriate. And it also doesn't solve the problem of involving transgendered people in sports, if they have the skill -- and they do.
EDIT: Damn you ArbitraryDescriptor. Damn you and your ability to type posts that are short and to the point.
joshofalltrades on
0
Options
Clown ShoesGive me hay or give me death.Registered Userregular
It's not a size thing it's a "HOLY SHIT, THERE'S SOME BOOBS!" thing.
*I have no idea how the sizes work, or what a C-cup actually is
It's a cup size that you can actually C.
Back to LGBT issues, George Takei posted a map on Facebook filled in with a bunch of red states where you can supposedly be fired for being gay -- but the map is simply showing at-will employment states. That makes me sad. I normally love George Takei, but that's a fairly misleading post.
There are plenty of ways to argue for gay rights without making arguments in a similar fashion to the DEA.
Yes, there may be some natural advantages to being born male, but this does not mean that men are generally superior and women are naturally inferior at any particular physical attribute.
On the contrary, I think you can say that quite easily, especially if we're talking about generalities. I wouldn't use the word "inferior," but there is a reason that there aren't any women playing in the men's leagues, and that reason ISN'T because they won't let them. MLB is the only major professional sport in the US with a gender requirement; the NFL even had its first female athlete to try out for a team this year.
I see the question from the other side of the equation; if there is a genetic component to having a Y chromosome that makes your potential as an athlete higher than an XX woman even after a full and complete hormonal transition, I think there's cause to ensure that the ciswomen competitors aren't getting left out of their own game.
This is all speculation and advocacy, by the way. If the science says that a transwoman who has completed transition has no defined chemical, physical, or mental advantage over her ciswoman competitors, then I'm all for it.
Cuban's talked about letting Brittany Griner try out. Mostly a publicity thing, because that's what Cuban does, but still interesting.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
The female height averages for the basketball players are the male height averages for the male population (of the US)
So you need an above average tgirl etc.
And even if all these things align, all you have is an obvious outlier like Michael Jordan, but with people actually giving a reason (regardless of how accurate) of why she's an outlier, rather than he's just really good.
More like Manute Bull (7' 7"). At 6'6", Jordan was below the average height noted above. As to what height alone is worth, I probably don't need to point out which of the two was actually an exceptional pro baller.
I think that over enough time, transwomen playing at 6'6" would become less of an outlier and more of a rule. It's not the outliers that are the problem and I'm not worried about them. There's a transwoman playing basketball for a college in California right now that's almost a foot taller than the average player, and by all accounts she's kinda shitty, so whatever. But when having that much height advantage becomes fairly standard, you're going to see some problems.
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
The female height averages for the basketball players are the male height averages for the male population (of the US)
So you need an above average tgirl etc.
And even if all these things align, all you have is an obvious outlier like Michael Jordan, but with people actually giving a reason (regardless of how accurate) of why she's an outlier, rather than he's just really good.
More like Manute Bull (7' 7"). At 6'6", Jordan was below the average height noted above. As to what height alone is worth, I probably don't need to point out which of the two was actually an exceptional pro baller.
I think that over enough time, transwomen playing at 6'6" would become less of an outlier and more of a rule. It's not the outliers that are the problem and I'm not worried about them. There's a transwoman playing basketball for a college in California right now that's almost a foot taller than the average player, and by all accounts she's kinda shitty, so whatever. But when having that much height advantage becomes fairly standard, you're going to see some problems.
I'm trying to imagine the dynamics of a world that has progressed to a point where t-girls have displaced c-girls to become the norm in college basketball. I have to think that's going to be a gradual process, if it's even a realistic outcome.
Presently, "you're too short to play basketball," isn't a rule, but it's something a lot of us would accept if rejected. Those who don't may try harder and get on the team anyway; that would still happen. As we progress toward the theoretical towering t-girl team saturation point, I suspect that the gradual increase in height requirement, and the increase in "too short" rejections, will continue to feel pretty normal. Unless it happens overnight, I'm not sure it will every really be felt as a 'problem' that the already slim chance for c-girl to get a pro basketball career will be slightly slimmer.
Are there actually enough t-girls who want to play basketball for that to happen?
I doubt it. I mean, let's say trans women are one in a thousand. Then we have to restrict ourselves to the top 0.1% of cis women in terms of athletic ability before we have the same number of people. If trans women are one in two thousand, then we would need only the top 0.05% of cis women to math them in number.
I really doubt trans women as a whole are as capable as the top half of a tenth of a hundredth of cis women. I could be wrong, but I really doubt trans women are going to be overrunning sports at these numbers.
+4
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I'm still lobbying for a major comprehensive study of trans issues.
Though, I don't know who to lobby at. To lob at? To lob things at.
If you stick the trans women in with the men, you'd then have to stick the trans men in with the women. And except for height that'd probably be much, much more unfair.
For who?
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
Everyone?
Except cis men of course.
0
Options
Clown ShoesGive me hay or give me death.Registered Userregular
That's what I thought.
Also, is the average t-girl body type closer to a male athlete or a female athlete? Come to think of it, is the average female athlete closer to the average male athlete than the average male? I'm about 5'7" and most female athletes I've seen would ruin me in a fight.
The more you look at it, the less sense it makes to have gender divisions in sport rather than weight/height divisions.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Also, is the average t-girl body type closer to a male athlete or a female athlete? Come to think of it, is the average female athlete closer to the average male athlete than the average male? I'm about 5'7" and most female athletes I've seen would ruin me in a fight.
The more you look at it, the less sense it makes to have gender divisions in sport rather than weight/height divisions.
At lot of it has to do with when the person started and finished their transition. The younger their start, the more typically feminine they're likely to be.
0
Options
Clown ShoesGive me hay or give me death.Registered Userregular
Also, is the average t-girl body type closer to a male athlete or a female athlete? Come to think of it, is the average female athlete closer to the average male athlete than the average male? I'm about 5'7" and most female athletes I've seen would ruin me in a fight.
The more you look at it, the less sense it makes to have gender divisions in sport rather than weight/height divisions.
At lot of it has to do with when the person started and finished their transition. The younger their start, the more typically feminine they're likely to be.
But if they were competing based on height/weight, would that really be a problem? I suppose that some people might go up or down a division, but as long as the divisions are based on height & weight rather than gender, would that create any more problems than cis-gendered people who are already close to the division boundaries?
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
Height/weight doesn't work well because the ratio of fat to muscle and muscle distribution is one of the biggest effects that sex hormones modulate.
But while we're talking about averages, it's also important to realize that the average man is going to have some very feminine features and the average woman is going to have some very masculine traits. Being trans shifts the averages to one side or the other, but it's still fundamentally a bunch of different traits, where (as is often said), the variance within a gender is greater than the average variance between genders.
Back to LGBT issues, George Takei posted a map on Facebook filled in with a bunch of red states where you can supposedly be fired for being gay -- but the map is simply showing at-will employment states. That makes me sad. I normally love George Takei, but that's a fairly misleading post.
There are plenty of ways to argue for gay rights without making arguments in a similar fashion to the DEA.
No. Bad. Wrong.
It's a list of at-will states where sexual orientation and gender identity/expression are not protected classes.
Uruguay's House of Representatives passed the gay marriage bill overwhelmingly, with 71 of 92 representatives voting yes, making Uruguay the 2nd country in Latin America and the 12th country overall to legalize marriage equality. The president has promised to sign it, and it will become law within 2 weeks, with marriages taking effect either before or during summer. Congratulations, Uruguay.
Posts
I agree largely, but the bigger issue at play here is ciphering out advantages that transwomen (as a group of athletes) may have over ciswomen (as a group of athletes) despite whatever transition has made their bodies into. I mentioned basketball as an area where no matter what their hormone level, muscle tone, or skill, on average the height of a transwoman basketballer is going to be substantially higher than their ciswomen competitors.
Average height of NBA player: 6'7"
Average height of WNBA player: 5'11"
That's a big freakin' deal.
Individually it may not matter; there are tall women after all. But on average, your professionally competitive transwomen would likely hold a huge (nigh insurmountable) physical advantage over their competition.
As I said before, the entire existence of women's leagues is to provide as equal a level of competition as can be provided for a group of people who aren't able to compete at the skill level of their male counterparts. I'm a big advocate of trans issues, but I can't rightly sit here and say that transitioning alone negates the advantages of being born male, not without having a lot more study and research to look at. I would like to believe that, but I don't think it's fair to assume anything.
According to independent research I may or may not have performed personally, this line of inquiry will only lead you down a perpetual path of inconclusive results which need to be re-validated with further experiments.
Yes, there may be some natural advantages to being born male, but this does not mean that men are generally superior and women are naturally inferior at any particular physical attribute.
The division of athletes into male and female was not an inappropriate one to make; it solves lots of problems like increasing the number of professional female athletes. At the same time, it creates other issues like this one. I would support competition between sexes in a heartbeat if I knew there was a way to do so without decreasing male or female involvement and/or pay.
Okay, so a random tgirl might be taller than the average player.
But so can a random cgirl.
I honestly don't see the problem here.
Besides, using those stats, you're assuming that the tgirl would be the average for NBA players, (and not the population at large), and is a professional basketball player.
That's a minority of a minority of a minority.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
Lot of transfolk aren't going to have SRS either.
What about weight divisions? A flyweight boxer might be technically brilliant, but would get destroyed if you put them up against a heavyweight with less technical skill. Couldn't a similar system be used for mixed-gender competition?
It could work for individual sports, but team games would be a bit more awkward as you'd have to have a light, medium, and heavyweight leagues.
Cinders: Then simplify it to "No man is going to transition". It still works, because when you're talking sports, SRS is the part of transition that has the least effect.
On the contrary, I think you can say that quite easily, especially if we're talking about generalities. I wouldn't use the word "inferior," but there is a reason that there aren't any women playing in the men's leagues, and that reason ISN'T because they won't let them. MLB is the only major professional sport in the US with a gender requirement; the NFL even had its first female athlete to try out for a team this year.
I see the question from the other side of the equation; if there is a genetic component to having a Y chromosome that makes your potential as an athlete higher than an XX woman even after a full and complete hormonal transition, I think there's cause to ensure that the ciswomen competitors aren't getting left out of their own game.
This is all speculation and advocacy, by the way. If the science says that a transwoman who has completed transition has no defined chemical, physical, or mental advantage over her ciswoman competitors, then I'm all for it.
Honestly, despite the emphasis the media and law put on them, genitals are one of the least interesting and least relevant part of many trans people's lives and transitions.
I don't see the problem with transmen competing in the mens league.
I honestly don't understand the issue here, so if I'm missing something please explain it to me in simpler terms.
There's a lot of assumptions here that someone who can participate in the highest tiers of MALE sports, will transition and then dominate the highest tiers of FEMALE sports. That's a weird assumption, the profession athletes are already above average due to mostly genetic reasons.
Michael Jordan was better than his peers because of reasons.
I don't know how to articulate my point.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
Hormonal transition doesn't affect things like height unless you start before or immediately during puberty, which the large majority of transpeople do not.
If there is a market for women's sports that tolerates the inclusion of transwomen, history has shown that all sports trend toward recruiting the most physically able specimens. In many sports, being a transwoman probably isn't going give anyone a substantial advantage. But in sports where height is a major factor in athleticism? It's definitely going to be a factor. And that accounts for most of the high-profile women's sports: basketball, volleyball, and softball. It's also going to correlate with longer reaches for boxing and martial arts.
I'm just saying: it's not a cut-and-dried issue.
The emphasis is understandable - most of the media are hettie males and our lives often revolve around our dicks.
The female height averages for the basketball players are the male height averages for the male population (of the US)
So you need an above average tgirl etc.
And even if all these things align, all you have is an obvious outlier like Michael Jordan, but with people actually giving a reason (regardless of how accurate) of why she's an outlier, rather than he's just really good.
And boobs.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
More like Manute Bull (7' 7" and wiry). At 6'6", Jordan was below the average height noted above. As to what height alone is worth, I probably don't need to point out which of the two was actually an exceptional pro baller.
I'd much rather talk about the boobs themselves than the details of augmentation. Don't spoil the magic!
That's a mostly American obsession with size. I'm more of a C-cup* man myself.
*I have no idea how the sizes work, or what a C-cup actually is**
**Feel free to PM informative pictures
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
I think that over enough time, transwomen playing at 6'6" would become less of an outlier and more of a rule. It's not the outliers that are the problem and I'm not worried about them. There's a transwoman playing basketball for a college in California right now that's almost a foot taller than the average player, and by all accounts she's kinda shitty, so whatever. But when having that much height advantage becomes fairly standard, you're going to see some problems.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/12/18/6-foot-8-transgender-player-takes-court-against-delta-college/
I think it's weird when people have their nipples relocated for augmentation. It deadens the nerves in the nipples when they do that.
The nipples are the best part!
I didn't care that he wasn't the best player ever, he was tall and cool as shit for letting a 2-year-old Nuggets fan sit on his knee. I still have the autographed ball he gave me somewhere, even though I lost all interest in sports at about age 5.
Now, when I look at him compared to Michael Jordan, he may have had worse stats, but he refused to play for Dallas and so a childhood hero became oddly even more awesome after I grew up.
I'm not sure why height is being bandied about as the end-all be-all of basketball but it really, really isn't. Skill, as in many things, factors in heavily.
Isner might be ridiculously tall for a tennis player, and that gives him a huge serving advantage due to simple logistics (better access to steep serving angles), but he still gets his ass handed to him on a regular basis. I don't see any reason to exclude transgendered people based upon frame height or width. I still hold that sports are about competition; normalize performance between sports seasons, divide the participants into leagues based on their performance (allowing for enough divisions where no gender is excluded) and then nobody will care if a trans person competes against a cis person. Or do something similar, but better thought out. But looking at gender demographics as a whole instead of performance within the relatively small group of professionals who compete seems inappropriate. And it also doesn't solve the problem of involving transgendered people in sports, if they have the skill -- and they do.
EDIT: Damn you ArbitraryDescriptor. Damn you and your ability to type posts that are short and to the point.
It's a cup size that you can actually C.
Back to LGBT issues, George Takei posted a map on Facebook filled in with a bunch of red states where you can supposedly be fired for being gay -- but the map is simply showing at-will employment states. That makes me sad. I normally love George Takei, but that's a fairly misleading post.
There are plenty of ways to argue for gay rights without making arguments in a similar fashion to the DEA.
Cuban's talked about letting Brittany Griner try out. Mostly a publicity thing, because that's what Cuban does, but still interesting.
The only problem we're seeing is people trying to fit transpeople into their own little bracket.
So a small minority of tgirls are above average for female athletes.
What about the minority of cgirls that are above average for female athletes? Which number is larger?
Is the physical differences between tgirls and cgirls larger than between the cgirls?
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
I'm trying to imagine the dynamics of a world that has progressed to a point where t-girls have displaced c-girls to become the norm in college basketball. I have to think that's going to be a gradual process, if it's even a realistic outcome.
Presently, "you're too short to play basketball," isn't a rule, but it's something a lot of us would accept if rejected. Those who don't may try harder and get on the team anyway; that would still happen. As we progress toward the theoretical towering t-girl team saturation point, I suspect that the gradual increase in height requirement, and the increase in "too short" rejections, will continue to feel pretty normal. Unless it happens overnight, I'm not sure it will every really be felt as a 'problem' that the already slim chance for c-girl to get a pro basketball career will be slightly slimmer.
The consensus national player of the year in college is a fringe lottery pick because he's 6'0" right now. Kind of a rule.
I doubt it. I mean, let's say trans women are one in a thousand. Then we have to restrict ourselves to the top 0.1% of cis women in terms of athletic ability before we have the same number of people. If trans women are one in two thousand, then we would need only the top 0.05% of cis women to math them in number.
I really doubt trans women as a whole are as capable as the top half of a tenth of a hundredth of cis women. I could be wrong, but I really doubt trans women are going to be overrunning sports at these numbers.
Though, I don't know who to lobby at. To lob at? To lob things at.
I'm trying to throw things, is what I'm saying.
For who?
Except cis men of course.
Also, is the average t-girl body type closer to a male athlete or a female athlete? Come to think of it, is the average female athlete closer to the average male athlete than the average male? I'm about 5'7" and most female athletes I've seen would ruin me in a fight.
The more you look at it, the less sense it makes to have gender divisions in sport rather than weight/height divisions.
At lot of it has to do with when the person started and finished their transition. The younger their start, the more typically feminine they're likely to be.
But if they were competing based on height/weight, would that really be a problem? I suppose that some people might go up or down a division, but as long as the divisions are based on height & weight rather than gender, would that create any more problems than cis-gendered people who are already close to the division boundaries?
But while we're talking about averages, it's also important to realize that the average man is going to have some very feminine features and the average woman is going to have some very masculine traits. Being trans shifts the averages to one side or the other, but it's still fundamentally a bunch of different traits, where (as is often said), the variance within a gender is greater than the average variance between genders.
No. Bad. Wrong.
It's a list of at-will states where sexual orientation and gender identity/expression are not protected classes.
3DS: 1607-3034-6970
Steam