Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 960 posts

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#911

Post by afroboy »

dmitrygr wrote: post #512
happymellon wrote: post #9

Has anyone measured trans athletes performance? I see this topic come up repeatedly in different guises, protect women from the evil trans-agenda. But I haven't seen where this is actually a problem. Do trans-athletes regularly out perform "born as" (not sure the best way to phrase it) athletes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imane_Khelif

Imane she's not a trans for god sake, she's Algerian from a Muslim family do you really think a nation 99% Muslims will let trans women be part of their national team?? jeez guys.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#912

Post by dwb »

charlesarthur wrote: post #598
RealityVoid wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the Khelif debacle incredibly damning for anti-trans militants since she apparently was born as a woman and has this weird thing where she has male characteristics. The anti-trans hysteria at that point in time was super off-putting for me since she did nothing wrong but merely existed. Before this I was like... meh, have sex separated sports and be done with it, but this made me re-evaluate my views in sex in…

You need to read up about XY 5-ARD (the condition Caster Semenya has and Khelif surely has). Being XY with active SRY means you're male. Khelif has admitted having the SRY gene (in an interview with L'Equipe). Males have very significant advantages (50% plus) in power sports such as weightlifting and, yes, boxing. Sex isn't "more fluid". It's entirely binary, but DSDs (differences of sexual development) can make appe…

Sex is “entirely binary”, except for the ways that it’s not, which you’re going to squeeze into your binary definitions? Scientists update their models and definitions when reality shows itself to be more complex than initially thought. In terms of reproduction, clearly there is quite a bit of a sex binary going on. It’s not nothing. But it’s certainly not everything either.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#913

Post by gzread »

frumplestlatz wrote: post #428
etherus wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were required to compete with people of a gender you do not identify with, even when event organisers recognise you as more fitting among the other group, that's a ban. There are trans masc people. Requiring them to compete with women is unfair and disrespectful. Requiring trans fem people to do so is the same. The rules around gender identification in regulated sports require proof of medical treatment yada y…

The classification is based on sex, expressly due to the material differences between the sexes. It is not and has never been rooted in any sort of sociological concept of gender as an independent category from one’s sex.

If it's based on a material difference, then classify the material difference, directly.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#914

Post by mlrtime »

thrance wrote: post #571
4gotunameagain wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is entirely clear that it can be the case, as proven by the existence of people "detransitioning". It is also entirely clear that there have been parents (usually mothers) who wanted to have a trans child because it was cool.

So-called "detransitions" represent way less than 1% of the trans population. In particular, the proportion of people regretting their transitions is much smaller than that of mothers regretting having their kids. They receive massively inflated media attention because their stories are picked up and turned into propaganda in service of bigoted narratives.

So-called "trans" represent way less than 1% of the world population. ... They receive massively inflated media attention because their stories are picked up and turned into propaganda in service of [self-serving] narratives.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#915

Post by mlrtime »

thrance wrote: post #810
mvdtnz wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think it's ok to hate on them? I don't think that's ok at all.

You were asking "Why do we need a carve out for one particular group because of their genetic bad luck?". I'm telling you the reason is purely ideological: the right needs scapegoats and trans people are one of the current ones. Doesn't go further than than.

The average person has 0 hate for this group. However, not wanting to bend societal rules for a very small vocal group does not equal hate.

The only issue I see strong arguments here are private facilities [bathrooms] and sports. The hate you see is propaganda on both sides.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#916

Post by thrance »

mlrtime wrote: post #914
thrance wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So-called "detransitions" represent way less than 1% of the trans population. In particular, the proportion of people regretting their transitions is much smaller than that of mothers regretting having their kids. They receive massively inflated media attention because their stories are picked up and turned into propaganda in service of bigoted narratives.

So-called "trans" represent way less than 1% of the world population. ... They receive massively inflated media attention because their stories are picked up and turned into propaganda in service of [self-serving] narratives.

The vast majority of trans people wish their demographics received much less media attention... The issue is with right-wing bigots who feel it is their life missions to make their lives as miserable as possible, when they just want to be left alone.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#917

Post by thrance »

mlrtime wrote: post #915
thrance wrote: post #810

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You were asking "Why do we need a carve out for one particular group because of their genetic bad luck?". I'm telling you the reason is purely ideological: the right needs scapegoats and trans people are one of the current ones. Doesn't go further than than.

The average person has 0 hate for this group. However, not wanting to bend societal rules for a very small vocal group does not equal hate. The only issue I see strong arguments here are private facilities [bathrooms] and sports. The hate you see is propaganda on both sides.

Trans people are explicitly on the receiving end of Republican's bigotry. They are constantly targeted through law and rhetoric, stripped of their rights and demonized at every occasions. Exactly like gay people were a few decades ago.

The Left's position on the issue is "let them be" whilst the Right's "they shouldn't exist".

https://translegislation.com/

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#918

Post by locknitpicker »

ahhhhnoooo wrote: post #663
locknitpicker wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The attention this topic receives is disproportionate considering how rare we are, especially close to the Olympics level. We all remember state-sponsored doping scandals from the 60s where iron curtain nations invested heavily on medical research and experiments on prospective athletes to try to get medals. It's not hard to understand how badly this would turn out to be if the same sort of unscrupulous regime coul…

> It's not hard to understand how badly this would turn out to be if the same sort of unscrupulous regime could just abuse this loophole to seek the same benefit. Surely this is something that can be addressed if it ever becomes a problem. Surely we don't need to write rules for scenarios that aren't causing issues...

> Surely this is something that can be addressed if it ever becomes a problem.

You're advocating to create pressure and incentives to commit this class of abuses, which have already been committed even at an industrial stage for decades, and your strategy is to ignore history and facts until the consequences of your actions catch up to you.

And all this in exchange for which tradeoff?

Even the fight against doping is far more proactive than what you are advocating.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#919

Post by lolc »

leoedin wrote: post #829
mikestorrent wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, the purpose is to actually arrange for legitimate competition. Ideally, we would split by whatever facets actually make sense; consider something like fighting disciplines where the split is by weight, or auto racing where it's by the class of vehicle, power-to-weight ratio, etc. The problem is that there is only so much attention to go around, so we cannot have too many splits; depending on the sport it might…

I’m the same age as my wife. More or less the same height and weight too. Neither of us have a history of weight training. I’m much stronger than her. I’ve got 2x the lung capacity she does. If you’re going to divide competition by one trait, sex is the clear winner.

Just comparing genes, a male human is more closely related with all male chimps than with any female human.

Re: Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

#920

Post by lolc »

dpd_dpd wrote: post #876
j_w wrote: post #867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you believe that it is the case that she lived her early life as a male, at the point that a person has made it clear that they have some preferred pronoun/is trans would it not just be disrespectful to intentionally refer to them counter to that?

If I had chosen to refer to Semenya using pronouns that imply he is female, that would have conflicted with the points I was making.

I don't know the specifics in this case, but they can be biologically male and use the female gender. How would that conflict your point?
Post reply on HN