10 ms·

Taking hormone therapy dramatically changes your body, making using just your sex also problematic. It's a complex subject. Here's the best article I've found o

Taking hormone therapy dramatically changes your body, making using just your sex also problematic. It's a complex subject. Here's the best article I've found on it: https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/shades-of-gray-sex-gender-and-fairness-in-sport/ https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/shades-of-gray-sex-gend...

ffggvv 5y ago
yeah but it doesn’t make your body exactly like someone with different chromosomes than you that lived with that hormone set their entire life through puberty etc, and with a different bone structure and musculature
- gugagore 5y ago
  that is correct, and to be fair, not contested by the parent comment. you might be hard-pressed to find two bodies each "exactly like" the other. The interesting questions here are not about exactly equal, but about equivalence classes of people, and in different contexts.
  - eptcyka 5y ago
    The argument is that even hrt isn't enough to transfer someone from one class to another.
    - ben_w 5y ago
      There are plenty of banned performance enhancing substances, so regardless of what anyone means by gender, I doubt that’s a useful distinction with regard to the relationship between gender and athletic performance. I think a better question is: Where is the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable medical intervention?
- ben_w 5y ago
  I believe this is one reason why some trans people are very keen for their hormonal therapy to begin before puberty.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - jdjsksmdj 5y ago
    No, activists are keen to see these children, most of whom would turn out to be homosexual if not pushed through affirmative therapy, sterilized. The "treatments" for transition render the trans person incapable of orgasm, obliterate their sex drive, and remove their genitals. About half will commit suicide, and detransitioners are shunned and mocked. Resources and communities online like r/egg_irl that offer "support" for trans questioning people downplay the negatives of transition That's the only explanation that makes sense to me. More persecution of homosexuals. Read the "When Sons Become Daughters" series on Quillette. And don't get me started on the propaganda that's out there that nobody will talk about in polite company. Go search for "sissy training" on PornHub. Ask yourself: who is making hypnosis videos encouraging boys to sterilize themselves and have sex with men, and why?
    - yerwhat01010 5y ago
      > Go search for "sissy training" on PornHub. I searched. I can't figure out what these videos are about from the titles/thumbnails, and I'll be damned if I'm actually going to watch these things. Can you summarize?
  - ffggvv 5y ago
    yeah but even then it doesn’t change your chromosomes
    - ben_w 5y ago
      Ultimately irrelevant, given the chromosomes produce stuff we can synthesise or inhibit. Not yet perfectly of course, but anabolic steroids have been synthesised since the 1930s, and are effective enough to be banned in sport.
CodeGlitch 5y ago
But it doesn't change your skeletal structure, or the size of your lungs. Both of which dramatically affect your performance.
- prox 5y ago
  I think the core question is, does Hubbard have an advantage so she will win 95% of the time? If so, it’s not really a competition, especially if that result derives from her innate male physiology giving her an unfair advantage. We don’t allow doping either. If there is a way to level it out, that might be a solution, if it’s possible.
  - andyxor 5y ago
    The core question is when sanity will return and men will no longer be allowed to compete against women. Hopefully the wave of opposition to this travesty will be strong enough to change the regulations. Boycott the Olympics.
    - maybeOneDay 5y ago
      It's possible to be against the idea of trans women competing in female competitive sports without intentionally misgendering all trans athletes/humans.
      - memling 5y ago
        > It's possible to be against the idea of trans women competing in female competitive sports without intentionally misgendering all trans athletes/humans. Genuine question, one about which I haven't seen much in the way of conversation—although my experience is relatively limited. Why is the subjective experience of gender privileged over the objective biology of sex? I can anticipate a couple possible responses for which I'm not sure I have very clear thoughts, either—maybe someone can contribute more light than heat here? 1. Biology isn't actually all that objective: one's subjective experience is at least partially determined by biology, too. 2. We can turn the question on its head: why should objective biology be privileged over subjective experience?
austincheney 5y ago
If terminology is your hang up then how about BSA, birth sex assignment. Then it is only about biology and not about identity.
- nandhinianand 5y ago
  only if you ignore the brain and it's processes as not "biological phenomena"
  - llimos 5y ago
    Sport is about the body more than the brain. Particularly weightlifting.
    - nandhinianand 5y ago
      Agreed... And I am not arguing that trans women (who take hormones after the male puberty) don't have an advantage over non-trans women. Just that trans women are about identity and not biology. Oh BTW, at the highest levels of competition like olympics, I suspect there's a brain/mind involvement to a very strong level. But that doesn't change your argument anyways.
candybar 5y ago
I'm not sure if it makes sense to include the effects of medical interventions for the purposes of determining which group, athletically speaking, trans-women should belong to. My understanding is that trans-women are women, not because they received medical treatments that affirm their gender, but because they identify as women. Thus, gender identity, except to the extent that it correlates with biological sex, has very little direct effect on athletic performance. Yes, some choose to receive treatments that reduce their athletic performance, but that's true of many other athletes - sometimes you have to choose between your own health and competition and making the best choices for health often means forgoing a chance to be a top athlete. If anything, going by biology is more inclusive because it allows both trans-women and trans-men to compete fairly against others that share their biological sex, as long as they postpone treatments until their athletic career is over. If we go by this evolving combination of gender identity and hormone level checks, pre-treatment trans-women aren't allowed in any category, post-treatment trans-women have a massive advantage over biologically female bodies, pre-treatment trans-men cannot compete at all and post-treatment trans-men are still at an extreme disadvantage.

ffggvv 5y ago

yeah but it doesn’t make your body exactly like someone with different chromosomes than you that lived with that hormone set their entire life through puberty etc, and with a different bone structure and musculature

gugagore 5y ago
that is correct, and to be fair, not contested by the parent comment. you might be hard-pressed to find two bodies each "exactly like" the other. The interesting questions here are not about exactly equal, but about equivalence classes of people, and in different contexts.
- eptcyka 5y ago
  The argument is that even hrt isn't enough to transfer someone from one class to another.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    There are plenty of banned performance enhancing substances, so regardless of what anyone means by gender, I doubt that’s a useful distinction with regard to the relationship between gender and athletic performance. I think a better question is: Where is the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable medical intervention?
ben_w 5y ago
I believe this is one reason why some trans people are very keen for their hormonal therapy to begin before puberty.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- jdjsksmdj 5y ago
  No, activists are keen to see these children, most of whom would turn out to be homosexual if not pushed through affirmative therapy, sterilized. The "treatments" for transition render the trans person incapable of orgasm, obliterate their sex drive, and remove their genitals. About half will commit suicide, and detransitioners are shunned and mocked. Resources and communities online like r/egg_irl that offer "support" for trans questioning people downplay the negatives of transition That's the only explanation that makes sense to me. More persecution of homosexuals. Read the "When Sons Become Daughters" series on Quillette. And don't get me started on the propaganda that's out there that nobody will talk about in polite company. Go search for "sissy training" on PornHub. Ask yourself: who is making hypnosis videos encouraging boys to sterilize themselves and have sex with men, and why?
  - yerwhat01010 5y ago
    > Go search for "sissy training" on PornHub. I searched. I can't figure out what these videos are about from the titles/thumbnails, and I'll be damned if I'm actually going to watch these things. Can you summarize?
- ffggvv 5y ago
  yeah but even then it doesn’t change your chromosomes
  - ben_w 5y ago
    Ultimately irrelevant, given the chromosomes produce stuff we can synthesise or inhibit. Not yet perfectly of course, but anabolic steroids have been synthesised since the 1930s, and are effective enough to be banned in sport.

CodeGlitch 5y ago

But it doesn't change your skeletal structure, or the size of your lungs. Both of which dramatically affect your performance.

prox 5y ago
I think the core question is, does Hubbard have an advantage so she will win 95% of the time? If so, it’s not really a competition, especially if that result derives from her innate male physiology giving her an unfair advantage. We don’t allow doping either. If there is a way to level it out, that might be a solution, if it’s possible.
- andyxor 5y ago
  The core question is when sanity will return and men will no longer be allowed to compete against women. Hopefully the wave of opposition to this travesty will be strong enough to change the regulations. Boycott the Olympics.
  - maybeOneDay 5y ago
    It's possible to be against the idea of trans women competing in female competitive sports without intentionally misgendering all trans athletes/humans.
    - memling 5y ago
      > It's possible to be against the idea of trans women competing in female competitive sports without intentionally misgendering all trans athletes/humans. Genuine question, one about which I haven't seen much in the way of conversation—although my experience is relatively limited. Why is the subjective experience of gender privileged over the objective biology of sex? I can anticipate a couple possible responses for which I'm not sure I have very clear thoughts, either—maybe someone can contribute more light than heat here? 1. Biology isn't actually all that objective: one's subjective experience is at least partially determined by biology, too. 2. We can turn the question on its head: why should objective biology be privileged over subjective experience?

austincheney 5y ago

If terminology is your hang up then how about BSA, birth sex assignment. Then it is only about biology and not about identity.

nandhinianand 5y ago
only if you ignore the brain and it's processes as not "biological phenomena"
- llimos 5y ago
  Sport is about the body more than the brain. Particularly weightlifting.
  - nandhinianand 5y ago
    Agreed... And I am not arguing that trans women (who take hormones after the male puberty) don't have an advantage over non-trans women. Just that trans women are about identity and not biology. Oh BTW, at the highest levels of competition like olympics, I suspect there's a brain/mind involvement to a very strong level. But that doesn't change your argument anyways.

candybar 5y ago

I'm not sure if it makes sense to include the effects of medical interventions for the purposes of determining which group, athletically speaking, trans-women should belong to. My understanding is that trans-women are women, not because they received medical treatments that affirm their gender, but because they identify as women. Thus, gender identity, except to the extent that it correlates with biological sex, has very little direct effect on athletic performance. Yes, some choose to receive treatments that reduce their athletic performance, but that's true of many other athletes - sometimes you have to choose between your own health and competition and making the best choices for health often means forgoing a chance to be a top athlete. If anything, going by biology is more inclusive because it allows both trans-women and trans-men to compete fairly against others that share their biological sex, as long as they postpone treatments until their athletic career is over. If we go by this evolving combination of gender identity and hormone level checks, pre-treatment trans-women aren't allowed in any category, post-treatment trans-women have a massive advantage over biologically female bodies, pre-treatment trans-men cannot compete at all and post-treatment trans-men are still at an extreme disadvantage.