If we allow determinism to explain being transgender then we may also have to allow determinism to explain doping.
It’s really not a huge leap to say someone’s difference in nature/nurture predetermines their decision to dope, in the same way it is said that nature/nurture determines a person’s gender identity.
And we’re back at comparing transgender people with dopers.
I don’t know man, that does seem like a pretty big leap for me.
Right back at you, bro.
That’s essentially my perspective, but I know most people have a hard time coming around to it.
I guess, but you are saying that self-identifying as weak and hence needing to dope, is the same as gender identity and wanting to transsion.
We’re treading in “attack helicopter” territory.
Nah, a better comparison would be a drug that boosts performance but only works on ~1% of the population, and the discussion is about if that drug should be allowed in sports or not. Doping is just an easy yet imperfect corollary to retained advantage
The point wasn’t the size of the leap, it’s that the leap exists at all, and allowing determinism to explain one person’s outcome necessarily allows the possibility that it explains other, different outcomes.
But what is the athlete that wants to dope (or needs to dope) self-identifying as?
Gender identity is a crucial aspect of one’s self-identity. And I’m struggling with understanding how that other athlete is identifying himself. Is it “I identify as a weak athlete, therefore I am going to dope”?
No, I’m saying I’m pretty much a determinist. That doesnt have anything to do with equating different behaviors and decisions.
Or all of them 
Didn’t have “gradients of determinism” on the bingo card for this thread, love it
You don’t have to put a label or identity on it for it to be a real feeling/instinct/behavior.
Imagining a doper who has been raised in the 90’s era of cycling, Festina et al. Races tri’s now and sees the lackluster testing in tri compared to other sports. Believes rightly or wrongly that those around him are doping. This is all standard. You even rightly say that they identify as a weak athlete, relative to their competitors, further reinforcing that they need to dope to compete. I don’t know if they would outwardly describe themself as weak, but the fundamental condition for doping is that you aren’t strong enough to win without it.
Why is it that there are hundred/thousands of athletes that fit that description yet some dope and some don’t? Surely the possibility exists that differences in brain chemistry (nature) or experience (nurture) create a decision framework that is in effect deterministic. Some might view this predetermined series of choices their “identity”.
You could create the exact same framework for why someone would identify as transgender.
And Tulkas’ point that you don’t seem to understand, is that you don’t transition to be ‘better’ at sport (relatively to others in your new category, because you actually regress when transitioning). You just transition because you want to be who you really feel you are. And then some may still want to take part in sport for all the benefits (mental, physical) it brings to them.
How is that a comparable decision process to deciding to dope?
So what would be the best solution for all involved?
A) Race in the category you percieve/want/feel yourself to be (which is the fair play issue they are trying to figure out and solve by banning TG in biological women’s cat)
B) Race in a category with “everyone” that isn’t biological female (basically the “open” category that WT just created)
C) Race in an newly created Transgender MtF or FtM category?
It sounds like you are saying (and others) if said person is a transgender female they want to race in the female division because they assume the id of a female. So if the “fair play” says let’s put you in another category, what would keep those athletes happy and social in our sport? Or is the resounding stance that if they can’t compete amongst the ladies then all is lost?
I know of races that have non-binary categories within triathlon. I had an athlete last year that any time that was an option raced under that category (biological female that simply wanted to be non-binary; so close to the transgender movementn but not exactly).
I’m not saying in any way that people transition to be better at sports. Tulkas and your statement is that transitioning is largely deterministic. “You transition because you want to be who you truly are”, “it’s not a decision”, these statements remove agency from the person and suggest that there is no free will present in the change.
But for doping the possibility of determinism is disallowed.
I’m saying if one choice is deterministic then the possibility exists that other choices are deterministic too. That is to say: maybe it wasn’t “a decision to dope”, maybe that persons biology and life experience fully determined their decision to dope, in the same way that a person’s biology and life experience may fully determine their decision to transition.
Doping is a bad example because of the rightly negative connotation, but it’s what we were talking about in the thread. A better example could be moving far away, or buying a house, or getting married, or even trivial things like speeding on a highway, picking a movie to watch, or what beer to order at the bar. All are “decisions” that we feel like we make. It’s fundamentally unknowable if we ever could have decided differently (linear time and all that)
Pretty much. It’s the most inclusive option, and people make too much of a beef about it considering the very small size of the transgender population, let alone those who would consider doing triathlon, or even do well at it at an age-group level even.
I think it’s then OK to put rules in place for the very few special cases where a transgender female would excel and vye for podiums at age-group level, Kona qualification and definitely if reaching the elite level of racing.
Western States 100 used to have a rule that outside the money-paying positions you sex was whatever you said it was, but for the money you had to be within the gender rules they laid out.
More complicated with KQ and stuff, but send pretty logical to me
Been scrolling to the end to make basically this comment. Seems like it doesn’t have to be a one or the other situation. For transgender women, no varsity, and realistically should compete on the men’s team if they haven’t taken hormones, etc. Amateur sport, should be whatever they choose if they’ve been taking hormones. Elite sport, as in actual pro, no elite amateur nonsense, transgender women should be either in their own category or compete in the open category. I think people forget that elite sport is a privilege, not a right, although amateur sport should be open to all.
Amateur sport is a privilege as well and just because you “say” you want to compete in the female class doesn’t give you the right to.
People invest thousands to get to the top as an amateur. Are you saying it is fair to ignore the science of the distinct advantage a TG athlete has over a female?
I made an incredibly brave/foolish decision to discuss this with my physio last night during a needling session. She was able to really impress upon me some perspectives I’d previously been blind to 
We are/were both in the philosophical space of holding ‘liberal’ accepting views. We both agreed that in elite sport then you did need to have clear rules and there was an advantage that would be /is unfair if MtF athletes are in the women’s competition.
We are also both in the space that for social sport then in most cases it should be a non-issue and the ability for all people to engage in sport is a key part of being a member of society. The cases where there would be danger (ie let’s say boxing, rugby) then that should be prevented, but the vast majority of sports (including tri) there is no danger. So in the ‘get a participation medal’ non elite/professional the presumption should be for inclusion.
What was interesting was that she has a background of just failing to make it to that professional level of sport. I came from the other end of the spectrum…
And so she was much more aware of the pathway to elite/professional in the under 20 group through the ‘non elite’ events. And that got me thinking that tri has a history of attracting some top talent from the single disciplines in that 'young adult" after where they are at an age that TG athletes could impact future professional opportunities. From my perspective as support being a metal heath and leisure activity then placings are not key to what I want from it.
Tldr. There will be many different requirement valid views on all this and in the end done people will have a good case for why the outcome is fundamentally wrong. Because there is no right answer -all scenarios fail to meet the basic needs of one group. And so the best we can do is to make sure we being empathy to the situation, no matter which perspectives and views you bring
That begs the question, what if there is no advantage? Let’s say a transgender woman never went through male puberty, still has female levels of hormones, and most importantly, was a 50th percentile finisher against males and competing as a female is still a 50th percentile finisher. Ok for them to compete in the women’s category since they don’t appear to have a sex based advantage?
Now whether there is any sport out there where that could happen is a different issue.