Not sure who has watched it, but I think it is one of the most fair and research based discussions I have seen on the subject. I know this issue is SO very complicated, and often gets very emotional for many people.
And yes I am being a little vague on purpose, because I would like to keep the discussion on the research presented in the video, and if you are just going to comment with your opinion without watching it, I am sure this topic will be shut down by the end of the day.
Agree.
It was well presented, well researched, and thoughtful on a controversial subject.
Of course one always has to ask if the researched was cherry picked. Kind of like if you watch “the gamechangers” (I have to go vegan!) and “Fat” (I need more bacon!) back to back.
I don’t think there’s any need to tiptoe around the subject of transgender inclusion in athletics. There have been several recent threads here and in the LR that have been of reasonable quality.
I was not trying to tiptoe around it, as much as trying to make sure people are discussing the same information that is presented. Honestly, the video did shift my opinion a bit on the matter. I think he brings up an excellent point in that the discussion is not about inclusion, so much as the balance between inclusion and fairness.
Of course one always has to ask if the researched was cherry picked. Kind of like if you watch “the gamechangers” (I have to go vegan!) and “Fat” (I need more bacon!) back to back.
He didn’t cherry pick. The science is consistent - following puberty men have biological advantages for athletic performance over women, and even following testosterone suppression these advantages are not eliminated. World rugby came to the same conclusion from their expert round table.
It comes down to fairness Vs inclusion. From a scientific point of view it’s simply unfair (and possibly dangerous) for transwomen to compete against biological women. From an ethical point of view it’s seems unfair to exclude transwomen. That’s why there is no agreement between the two sides they are arguing different causes.
That’s why there is no agreement between the two sides they are arguing different causes.
That is a great way of putting it. I think the issue I see is the backlash that is expressed when someone leans towards fairness rather than inclusion. IE USA cycling moving the marathon mountain bike nationals from an undisclosed state which prohibited transwomens from participating in high school sports.
That is a great way of putting it. I think the issue I see is the backlash that is expressed when someone leans towards fairness rather than inclusion. IE USA cycling moving the marathon mountain bike nationals from an undisclosed state which prohibited transwomens from participating in high school sports.
I agree in principle. But it could be argued that state did not engage in open, honest dialog with all stakeholders (transgender athletes, non-transgender athletes, sports governing bodies, scientists, educators, coaches, et al.) before writing legislation and voting on it. The legislation seems informed primarily by dogma.
I am torn in my personal position. I haven’t decided on any position other than treating transgender people with respect throughout the debate. Transgender people themselves are not unified in their positions, showing the complexity.
Transgender people themselves are not unified in their positions, showing the complexity.
Yup, many of them are horrified about the clumsy attempts by various sporting bodies to ensure they are being inclusive when it comes to transgenders participating in sport.
The only resolution I can see is creating a category separate to men and women for transgender athletes. But that’s not being inclusive is it? r
I think separate categorization is what should happen. Maybe think of it as putting those categorizations in with the Paralympics while at the same time get rid of the “Para” prefix and make all of the current categorizations of the Paralympics as well as the transgender classifications just all part of the “normal” Olympics. What’s the harm in that? Fairness, inclusion, entertaining competition. Everybody wins, no?
They will never be able to get to the point that they can “prove” or demonstrate physical equality between trans and women. Because they will need to allow transgender athletes to participate in all sports with women which includes boxing, MMA, full contact sports etc and serious injury/death will result. Followed by shitloads of lawsuits.
he stated that performance difference between genders is low in endurance sport. He missed the part that a woman’s menstrual cycle definitely affects performance in this area.
he stated that performance difference between genders is low in endurance sport. He missed the part that a woman’s menstrual cycle definitely affects performance in this area.
“Lower” rather than “low”. I think he said 10% in the video, which sounds reasonable - women’s marathon record and full distance tri record are both about 9% lower than men’s.
For context in Tokyo weightlifting the 87kg women winning total was 270kg Vs 374kg for the 81kg men. So around 28% lower for women, and they are 6kg heavier than the men. Equal body weights and we’d see even bigger differences.
Bearing in mind a trans woman competing in Tokyo as a weightlifter kind of sparked the video I think it’s fair (and quite an interesting discussion point) for him to point out that the advantages of a trans woman over biological women may vary between sports.
The response in the cycling community has been overwhelmingly negative and people are pouncing on him
.
The response in the cycling community has been overwhelmingly negative and people are pouncing on him
Who exactly is the cycling community?! The video has 2.5k likes and 105 dislikes which is an overwhelmingly positive ratio for any YouTube video, let alone one on a potentially controversial subject. Are we just talking about a loud minority of people that like to think they represent the entire world of cyclists?
I really don’t really see how anyone can have an overwhelmingly positive or negative reaction to him. He literally just showed a basic overview of the science in a very neural and respectful way. I can understand if your pro trans women competing with biological women you don’t like the science, but that’s not on him.
I have not watched Dylan’s video on the matter, yet. I would say that for an empathetic and objective person, there is no easy set of rules which provides “fairness.â€
I think that in the long term there should probably be a fuller set of biological metrics for categorization that are gender agnostic, something like those in motorsports, where there’s a “formula.†Everyone then, including genetic outliers (by gender) would then not compete by gender but my some matching set of physical and hormonal markers, maybe bone density, body fat, vo2max, whatever makes sense for a given competition.
I think such a ruleset could be devised such that certain categories would allow for representation for everyone, perhaps with overlapping categories in some competitions where there is no clear gender divide within that performance formula, and some which would manifest as effectively the classical female/male categories without explicitly excluding sex or gender.
Thinking about the issue in this manner, sex or gender has served as a sloppy proxy for physical or hormonal traits, and some day the time will come where governing bodies will have to be more biologically accurate in their classifications.