Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nadera78

Transgender Players

Recommended Posts

With Cricket Australia announcing that transwomen will be allowed to play in women's cricket, the NRL has said it is in advanced stages of finalising its policy on this hugely controversial issue.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/cricket-australia-launches-its-transgender-and-gender-diverse-policy-20190807-p52eq9.html

My own views on this topic are guided by feminists; this is fundamentally an issue of women being denied opportunities and, certainly in the case of a sport like RL, women being exposed to increased risk of injury by competing against biological men. I hope the NRL doesn't give way to the vocal trans rights lobby on this issue.

  • Like 2

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

My own views on this topic are guided by feminists;

You mean Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists or Gender Critical Feminists, or TERFs, as opposed to Intersectional Third Wave Feminists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

You mean Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists or Gender Critical Feminists, or TERFs, as opposed to Intersectional Third Wave Feminists.

Whatever (loaded) names get thrown around, I'll listen to women who speak up for women.

  • Like 1

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

Whatever (loaded) names get thrown around, I'll listen to women who speak up for women.

What about non binary players? 

Ducks for cover 🙈

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RFU have just published theirs

https://www.englandrugby.com/about-rfu/rfu-policies/transgender-policy

 

Basically up to age 12 and touch irrelevant as both genders can play

Over that anyone identifying as Male can play male rugby  if they sign a declaration 

anyone identifying as female must sign the declaration and have testosterone below a certain level and keep it there

If you are not sure then you can play either as long as you meet the Testosterone test for female rugby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/08/2019 at 14:19, nadera78 said:

Whatever (loaded) names get thrown around, I'll listen to women who speak up for women.

We should also listen to those who speak up for trans people too though. 

Where do you propose trans people play their sport?

It needs sensible discussion, which is too often missing in these discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dave T said:

We should also listen to those who speak up for trans people too though. 

Where do you propose trans people play their sport?

It needs sensible discussion, which is too often missing in these discussions.

I'd love for there to be sensible discussion on this issue - unfortunately whenever a woman is brave enough to speak out on this she, at best, gets told to shut up, and at worst is called a bigot and attacked mercilessly.

But when I see a woman like Caster Semenya being told she cannot compete against other women whilst men who "feel like a woman" are allowed to, then I instinctively think we're going down the wrong route.

  • Like 1

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

I'd love for there to be sensible discussion on this issue - unfortunately whenever a woman is brave enough to speak out on this she, at best, gets told to shut up, and at worst is called a bigot and attacked mercilessly.

But when I see a woman like Caster Semenya being told she cannot compete against other women whilst men who "feel like a woman" are allowed to, then I instinctively think we're going down the wrong route.

The alternative is also true .... if a man speaks out against it he is automatically told he is sexist. Yet there are also women who disagree with the situation as well as men who agree with it.

It would be better if everyone was just judged on whether you were born male or female (ie: with or without the relevant physical differences). If a person happens to have any sort of natural disorder in their body then that's either a fortunate thing if it helps them or not if it doesn't.

I would like to compete at the Olympics but my legs will not move as fast as Usain Bolt's ... so one reason he is competing because of me is that he has something naturally within his body that I don't have ... which, to me, is no different to the Caster Semenya issue.

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

I'd love for there to be sensible discussion on this issue - unfortunately whenever a woman is brave enough to speak out on this she, at best, gets told to shut up, and at worst is called a bigot and attacked mercilessly.

But when I see a woman like Caster Semenya being told she cannot compete against other women whilst men who "feel like a woman" are allowed to, then I instinctively think we're going down the wrong route.

Unfortunately, extremists (on anything) are an issue and on many hot topics like this they can drown out sensible debate.

But I dont think your point of generalizing is either right or helpful. Plenty of people speak about this without getting told to shut up or abused, although abuse is a problem in most debates from all sides,  unfortunately social media has encouraged that. There does need to be balance though and we need to not make the assumption that because somebody is a woman then they are automatically right on this subject. Nobody has that privilege. 

I personally also feel your positioning of men who "feel like a woman" is unhelpful too and really underplays the complexity of the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

The alternative is also true .... if a man speaks out against it he is automatically told he is sexist. Yet there are also women who disagree with the situation as well as men who agree with it.

It would be better if everyone was just judged on whether you were born male or female (ie: with or without the relevant physical differences). If a person happens to have any sort of natural disorder in their body then that's either a fortunate thing if it helps them or not if it doesn't.

I would like to compete at the Olympics but my legs will not move as fast as Usain Bolt's ... so one reason he is competing because of me is that he has something naturally within his body that I don't have ... which, to me, is no different to the Caster Semenya issue.

I agree on Caster Semenya, she shouldn't be penalised for the way her body is. Unless she has doped it is all fair game surely.

I'm not in agreement on your first point though. The world is a far more complicated place now, and I dont believe it is right to just ignore the trans world. I'm not an expert to know the best solution, but I don't think ignoring it is the best way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I agree on Caster Semenya, she shouldn't be penalised for the way her body is. Unless she has doped it is all fair game surely.

I'm not in agreement on your first point though. The world is a far more complicated place now, and I dont believe it is right to just ignore the trans world. I'm not an expert to know the best solution, but I don't think ignoring it is the best way.

I wasn't trying to ignore it but just give a way how such people can compete but without also giving any disadvantage to their opponents. Something has to be the definitive marker for all concerned and the physical difference is something everyone can relate to from birth, irrespective of what others factors may later come into the reckoning. It's like if someone was born a boy and then decided in later life to make himself like a woman ... which events should he/she compete in ?

Another alternative is to just have separate events for transgenders. Yet, if so, do you have one for women who became men and also another for those who did the opposite ? However, going down that path could open the way for people with any different characteristics requesting tournaments just for them (as per my earlier example of me versus Usain Bolt).

In the same way as yourself, I am not an expect but I was just trying to give a possible solution. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dave T said:

Unfortunately, extremists (on anything) are an issue and on many hot topics like this they can drown out sensible debate.

But I dont think your point of generalizing is either right or helpful. Plenty of people speak about this without getting told to shut up or abused, although abuse is a problem in most debates from all sides,  unfortunately social media has encouraged that. There does need to be balance though and we need to not make the assumption that because somebody is a woman then they are automatically right on this subject. Nobody has that privilege. 

I personally also feel your positioning of men who "feel like a woman" is unhelpful too and really underplays the complexity of the situation.

I haven't seen much in the way of discussion tbh. I do see vocal and aggressive Trans Rights Activists. And I also see men in positions of authority (like the Cricket Australia chief above) placing the rights of transpeople above those of women - but then that's the easy option for them given the potential flak they face for doing the opposite. And, of course, as men they have nothing to lose by doing so - they're not missing out on sporting opportunities, or losing the safeguarding protections that have been put in place for good reason.

My description of the condition was simply for brevity, but it's largely accurate. I could describe it, accurately, as a series of inter-related mental health conditions, but then that would upset the TRAs.

Edited by nadera78

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

I haven't seen much in the way of discussion tbh. I do see vocal and aggressive Trans Rights Activists. And I also see men in positions of authority (like the Cricket Australia chief above) placing the rights of transpeople above those of women - but then that's the easy option for them given the potential flak they face for doing the opposite. And, of course, as men they have nothing to lose by doing so - they're not missing out on sporting opportunities, or losing the safeguarding protections that have been put in place for good reason.

My description of the condition was simply for brevity, but it's largely accurate. I could describe it, accurately, as a series of inter-related mental health conditions, but then that would upset the TRAs.

I'm of the opinion that Rugby League (and sport overall) should be as inclusive as possible, and that obviously includes Trans people. A view I struggle with is the view that Trans people are somehow trying to cheat the system or get unfair advantages, and are often treated with suspicion, which think is a distasteful starting point. I don't think we are in a place where men spot an opportunity to be a world champ at a women's sport and start to wear frocks and demand a place at the Olympics. It is far more complex than that, and the human side has to come first before any sport requirements. 

I am in favour of science being used for Trans people in sport, I know some use it already and have hormone demands etc. and whilst not too knowledgeable about it, that seems reasonable. If science is confirming that there is no health risk to other competitors, then I see little issue. 

I'm not sure I agree with your position that the rights of trans people are being placed above those of women. 

Sport is a funny thing, we draw these boundaries artificially, some sports have weight categories etc. disability sports will have different categories, so we can do whatever we want - I sometimes think if we replaced the gender argument with black and white instead of female and trans female would our arguments seem as palatable. 

I do think the ultimate starting point is whether people see trans women as women. If they do, then they generally support this approach, if not, they don't. I think it will take a fair bit of effort to get over that hurdle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'm of the opinion that Rugby League (and sport overall) should be as inclusive as possible, and that obviously includes Trans people. A view I struggle with is the view that Trans people are somehow trying to cheat the system or get unfair advantages, and are often treated with suspicion, which think is a distasteful starting point. I don't think we are in a place where men spot an opportunity to be a world champ at a women's sport and start to wear frocks and demand a place at the Olympics. It is far more complex than that, and the human side has to come first before any sport requirements. 

I am in favour of science being used for Trans people in sport, I know some use it already and have hormone demands etc. and whilst not too knowledgeable about it, that seems reasonable. If science is confirming that there is no health risk to other competitors, then I see little issue. 

I'm not sure I agree with your position that the rights of trans people are being placed above those of women. 

Sport is a funny thing, we draw these boundaries artificially, some sports have weight categories etc. disability sports will have different categories, so we can do whatever we want - I sometimes think if we replaced the gender argument with black and white instead of female and trans female would our arguments seem as palatable. 

I do think the ultimate starting point is whether people see trans women as women. If they do, then they generally support this approach, if not, they don't. I think it will take a fair bit of effort to get over that hurdle. 

I'm not suggesting that men are deliberately gaming the system in order to win medals, more that women are missing out because their opportunities are being taken by men. 

Race is an interesting one. If I declared myself to be black and, as a result, became eligible for something I otherwise wouldn't, would people be quite so sanguine about that as they are women missing out?


"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

I'm not suggesting that men are deliberately gaming the system in order to win medals, more that women are missing out because their opportunities are being taken by men. 

Race is an interesting one. If I declared myself to be black and, as a result, became eligible for something I otherwise wouldn't, would people be quite so sanguine about that as they are women missing out?

Again, I dont see it as women missing out, but I dont see trans women as men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One reason why I suggested that gender qualification for events should be judged on how they were born is that I think a potential problem could arise if such qualification is divided into many various strands and, if so, where does it end ?

Yes, most people are not wanting to cheat the system but these days there are always those who you have to protect yourself against in case they argue that they have not been given a fair opportunity. I know I have mentioned it before but just to emphasise my point ... Could I claim that I want to have a 100m event for people whose body won't let them run as fast as Usain Bolt ? However, if that was granted then what if someone else can't run as fast as me and said they also wanted an event for even slower people ? How far down the line do you go ?

I wouldn't be allowed to compete in the Paralympics because I don't fit into their disability guidelines, so by not allowing me to also compete in the Olympic Games could I claim there is discrimination against people who have a body structure like mine that won't allow them to move their legs too fast ?

We started with male and female ... we now go on to transgenders, which itself could be split into men who recognise themselves as women, as well as women who recognise themselves as men ... so what's next and when do we eventually say to someone "No, you can't enter a particular event because you don't fit the criteria" ? If that ever happens then there will always be someone claiming discrimination. Yes, "all-inclusive" is a good thing but if people want events to be all inclusive then they must all compete together.

The paralympics have events for various degrees of ability, so would we get to a point where competitions at the actual Olympic Games have to be sub-divided so much so that nobody can claim they are being discriminated against ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/08/2019 at 12:56, Marauder said:

I'd keep it simple and divided by the got's and haven't got's. it seemed to work OK in the past.

Exactly what I said ....

On 21/08/2019 at 18:45, RL does what Sky says said:

One reason why I suggested that gender qualification for events should be judged on how they were born is that I think a potential problem could arise if such qualification is divided into many various strands and, if so, where does it end ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/08/2019 at 12:56, Marauder said:

I'd keep it simple and divided by the got's and haven't got's. it seemed to work OK in the past.

What happens to the had's but now haven't?  Or the didn't but now does?


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a hugely difficult issue as what can clearly arise is the disparity between levels of ability in men and women's sport.

Kent Women for example have a player who iirc fairly recently transitioned and has a batting average of 120-odd whilst being at least half a foot taller than most of her opponents and team-mates. I'm instinctively uneasy about the effects of such things on the credibility of women's only sport. 

After the Women's world cup game against France, one USA player, I assume Rapinoe, said that women's teams 'couldn't win without gay players' after they beat what I assume was an all straight French side (not that it matters in the slightest imo). How long does it take till it becomes teams 'couldn't win without transgender players'? And crucially what damage does that do to the credibility of the women's game in the eyes of female sport's fans and the wider general public. You bet it wouldn't be long till social media is full of comments on how many 'blokes' each women's team had. That's not a view I agree with, but anyone with any sort of social media knows it would be true. That's before you get onto second wave feminists taking on their third wave rivals in everything from Facebook comments to academia.

Like I said its a hugely difficult issue. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/08/2019 at 18:45, RL does what Sky says said:

 

I wouldn't be allowed to compete in the Paralympics because I don't fit into their disability guidelines, so by not allowing me to also compete in the Olympic Games could I claim there is discrimination against people who have a body structure like mine that won't allow them to move their legs too fast ?

 

I just don't think these kind of arguments are helpful. It makes a bit of a mockery of an extremely complex issue tbh.

In the nonsense case you highlight, you are eligible, you just aren't talented enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/08/2019 at 14:47, SSoutherner said:

RFU have just published theirs

https://www.englandrugby.com/about-rfu/rfu-policies/transgender-policy

 

Basically up to age 12 and touch irrelevant as both genders can play

Over that anyone identifying as Male can play male rugby  if they sign a declaration 

anyone identifying as female must sign the declaration and have testosterone below a certain level and keep it there

If you are not sure then you can play either as long as you meet the Testosterone test for female rugby

Why not just use this - i know it is union so heresy to admit they may have something correct 

BUT

can anyone see any issue with their policy at all ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The “normal” or healthy level of testosterone in the bloodstream varies widely, depending on thyroid function, protein status, and other factors.

According to recent guidelines from the American Urological Association (AUA), a testosterone level of at least 300 nanograms per deciliter (ng/dL) is normal for a man. A man with a testosterone level below 300 ng/dL should be diagnosed with low testosterone.

For women ages 19 and up, normal testosterone levels range from 8 to 60 ng/dL, according to Mayo Clinic Laboratories.

 

https://www.healthline.com/health/low-testosterone/testosterone-levels-by-age

So how long does it take for a 20-30-year-old male to drop to the female level? I can't find it anywhere. This was from the IOC about 5 years ago:

Quote

2.2.  The athlete must demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition (with the requirement for any longer period to be based on a confidential case-by-case evaluation, considering whether or not 12 months is a sufficient length of time to minimize any advantage in women's competition).

Just to make thigs more confusing, the USA seems to use ng/dL while IOC uses nmol/L.

10 nmol/L  =  288.42 ng/dL

http://unitslab.com/node/136

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...