I would add i never entered a poll choice as I thought what a horrible way to word your choices in your poll @Doubleme, It is a serious discussion to be had but you just sound vitriolic with them choices and as for the 3rd choice????? what was the point
I would add i never entered a poll choice as I thought what a horrible way to word your choices in your poll @Doubleme, It is a serious discussion to be had but you just sound vitriolic with them choices and as for the 3rd choice????? what was the point
Yes, as Polls go, it was dreadfully constructed & clearly biased. That probably explains why despite it being a very interesting topic, & having 3 pages of replies & over 500 views, the Poll only attracted 3 votes. Sad to see such a difficult & sensitive topic being treated that way. Hopefully the wider world take a more understanding view.
Trans woman should not be able to play in woman's sport.
Overall woman don't want it (yet they have it forced upon them) as not only is it dangerous if it is a contact sport but the trans woman has a massive biological advantage and over time would start to dominate woman's competitions. We have already seen numerous cases of biological males competing in the men's sports at a young age where they lets say are average at best, then they transition over to the woman's sport and are winning by a mile. Not only is this dangerous but it is immoral.
I just the other day heard an interview with a young girl of 16 who competed in a national skateboarding competition in Canada with the prizes being prize money and for the top 3 a scholarship. She had trained all year for this event in the hope of getting that scholarship but lone behold a trans woman entered (competed previously as a male and didn't qualify) but blew the field away and finished 1st in the woman's event this pushing the young girl being interviewed into 4th place where she missed out on the scholarship. She has now taken her case to court..... How can this be fair?
I also seen a trans woman enter weightlifting competition in Canada. They walked out at 6 foot 2 weighing over 20 stone, and had full facial hair and towered above all the female athletes (There was not one visual feature that suggested this was a woman) and lifted near double what 2nd place lifted. The look of dejection on the womans faces who finished 2nd and 3rd at the medal ceremony said it all. A male athlete then deliberately entered the woman's competition went on stage quickly lifted a weight that was impossible for any female to lift and walked off rejecting any medal to highlight how absurd this has become.
Serena Williams done a now famous interview backing up John McEnroe's that she shouldn't be considered one of the greatest players ever but acknowledged she was the greatest female player of all time (There is a massive difference). McEnroe got a big backlash from that until Serena went on an interview and agreed 100% with McEnroe saying she would not be able to beat or find it extremely hard to beat a top 200 rated male tennis player.
We have all seen videos of MMA and Boxing Fights between a transwoman and a biological woman and they have ended horribly for the biological females and it put their lives at risk.
In all cases stated above the Trans athlete competed in the mens events and couldnt compete at that level, crossed over and all of a sudden find themselves winning by a country mile.
Woman have the right to a safe place to practice sports as well as any minority. By trying to accommodate the few by putting the lives and health of many at risk
You should be made to compete in the biological sex category you born in. Life isn't fair and there will always be disadvantaged people and its ok to try and accommodate them where possible but not to the disadvantage of 50% of the population. The only solution I can see is to have a voluntary gender free catagory where woman and men nd trans and everyone else for that matter can voluntarily compete in run along side a female only and male only catagory
A considered opinion. Which, in its own way, serves to show just how difficult attempting to resolve this dilemma is for anyone. That every "solution" has massive problems associated with them (including, of course, mine).
On various occasions, I agree entirely with you. When it comes to professional sport, I think the short answer is that people who started out as men should not be allowed to make money from women's sport. For all sorts of reasons. Including safety.
Where I differ is relating to purely recreational sport. Where (in my example) an unfit 52 year old Trans man or Trans Woman wants to play sport purely for fun. And for their mental health. And to feel part of the human race.
There are also problems in relation to the categories you want to use. As an example:-
"You should be made to compete in the biological sex category you were born in." There are 2 problems with this:-
1. Some intersex athletes were designated as female at birth, for example Castor Semenya. People cannot have it both ways-cannot be able to change someone's sex when it suits. And, FWIW, I do not believe intersex athletes should be allowed to compete professionally as women 2. All that would achieve is to flip the coin. The problem would then be passed on to Trans Men rather than Trans Women. Because people born as Women and undergo a sex change legally have all sorts of chemical changes
I get that there will always be unfairness. And that women need to be protected. But Trans people need to be treated like the rest of the World.
Professional Women's sport has been littered with cheats (much like men's sport). But lots of the female athletes have been given "male" drugs, such as testosterone. This logically puts women in danger. Do these people get banned for life? No. There are many high-profile female athletes caught-from Flo Jo, to Marion Jones. And, generally, people receive short bans and then continue or play a different professional sport. To give the MMA example, how many women have been punched in the face by Chris Cyborg since 2012?
Do women need protection in female sports? Of course they do. From unacceptable risk. And from people pretending to be women for commercial gain. Not from the Trans Community.
My opinion of the Castor Semenya case is I think she should be allowed to compete as a woman as that is what she is and her case is extremely rare ( so I imagine after a few years of dominating she would retire and the status quo would resume with no long term damage to the sport) . As long as no drugs have been put into her body that boost what chemicals she naturally produces or gives her chemicals that enhances her performance that her body doesn't produce naturally. Some might see that as unfair but as we agree life isn't fair and their really isn't a suitable alternative.
I also agree that when not in competitive sport i.e playing for fun or training all should be inclusive I don't see any harm in that. But as soon as it becomes competitive at any level, rules should apply as to who can play.
Where I disagree is I don't believe it should just be professional levels that are protected as people that play amateur/junior/semi pro levels also take it incredibly serious and prize money and scholarships are also on offer. Also you have to start at these levels before you become professional thus competing against someone with a biological/unfair advantage can seriously impact your future prospects.
By all means have an all inclusive gender category so every male/female/trans person that consents can compete against each other. I also wish everyone had a space to fit into that didn't disadvantage others but that doesn't exist we can only try and be as inclusive as we can where possible and sometimes unfortunately it is not possible
Trans woman should not be able to play in woman's sport.
Overall woman don't want it (yet they have it forced upon them) as not only is it dangerous if it is a contact sport but the trans woman has a massive biological advantage and over time would start to dominate woman's competitions. We have already seen numerous cases of biological males competing in the men's sports at a young age where they lets say are average at best, then they transition over to the woman's sport and are winning by a mile. Not only is this dangerous but it is immoral.
I just the other day heard an interview with a young girl of 16 who competed in a national skateboarding competition in Canada with the prizes being prize money and for the top 3 a scholarship. She had trained all year for this event in the hope of getting that scholarship but lone behold a trans woman entered (competed previously as a male and didn't qualify) but blew the field away and finished 1st in the woman's event this pushing the young girl being interviewed into 4th place where she missed out on the scholarship. She has now taken her case to court..... How can this be fair?
I also seen a trans woman enter weightlifting competition in Canada. They walked out at 6 foot 2 weighing over 20 stone, and had full facial hair and towered above all the female athletes (There was not one visual feature that suggested this was a woman) and lifted near double what 2nd place lifted. The look of dejection on the womans faces who finished 2nd and 3rd at the medal ceremony said it all. A male athlete then deliberately entered the woman's competition went on stage quickly lifted a weight that was impossible for any female to lift and walked off rejecting any medal to highlight how absurd this has become.
Serena Williams done a now famous interview backing up John McEnroe's that she shouldn't be considered one of the greatest players ever but acknowledged she was the greatest female player of all time (There is a massive difference). McEnroe got a big backlash from that until Serena went on an interview and agreed 100% with McEnroe saying she would not be able to beat or find it extremely hard to beat a top 200 rated male tennis player.
We have all seen videos of MMA and Boxing Fights between a transwoman and a biological woman and they have ended horribly for the biological females and it put their lives at risk.
In all cases stated above the Trans athlete competed in the mens events and couldnt compete at that level, crossed over and all of a sudden find themselves winning by a country mile.
Woman have the right to a safe place to practice sports as well as any minority. By trying to accommodate the few by putting the lives and health of many at risk
You should be made to compete in the biological sex category you born in. Life isn't fair and there will always be disadvantaged people and its ok to try and accommodate them where possible but not to the disadvantage of 50% of the population. The only solution I can see is to have a voluntary gender free catagory where woman and men nd trans and everyone else for that matter can voluntarily compete in run along side a female only and male only catagory
A considered opinion. Which, in its own way, serves to show just how difficult attempting to resolve this dilemma is for anyone. That every "solution" has massive problems associated with them (including, of course, mine).
On various occasions, I agree entirely with you. When it comes to professional sport, I think the short answer is that people who started out as men should not be allowed to make money from women's sport. For all sorts of reasons. Including safety.
Where I differ is relating to purely recreational sport. Where (in my example) an unfit 52 year old Trans man or Trans Woman wants to play sport purely for fun. And for their mental health. And to feel part of the human race.
There are also problems in relation to the categories you want to use. As an example:-
"You should be made to compete in the biological sex category you were born in." There are 2 problems with this:-
1. Some intersex athletes were designated as female at birth, for example Castor Semenya. People cannot have it both ways-cannot be able to change someone's sex when it suits. And, FWIW, I do not believe intersex athletes should be allowed to compete professionally as women 2. All that would achieve is to flip the coin. The problem would then be passed on to Trans Men rather than Trans Women. Because people born as Women and undergo a sex change legally have all sorts of chemical changes
I get that there will always be unfairness. And that women need to be protected. But Trans people need to be treated like the rest of the World.
Professional Women's sport has been littered with cheats (much like men's sport). But lots of the female athletes have been given "male" drugs, such as testosterone. This logically puts women in danger. Do these people get banned for life? No. There are many high-profile female athletes caught-from Flo Jo, to Marion Jones. And, generally, people receive short bans and then continue or play a different professional sport. To give the MMA example, how many women have been punched in the face by Chris Cyborg since 2012?
Do women need protection in female sports? Of course they do. From unacceptable risk. And from people pretending to be women for commercial gain. Not from the Trans Community.
I would like to say that I am not biased against anyone. I am just pro fairness.
Men arent allowed to compete in womens sports for obvious reasons. You dont have to explain that. Nobody would even contemplate allowing any men to choose whether they compete in men or womens sport.
I think it is clear that men, and women should compete in their own sports. The only doubts arise over cases where there are exceptions.
So if you ruled that where there is doubt, those concerned will be classified as male. This may well be considered by some as unfair, but if it is, then at least you would be only being unfair to a very, very, small minority, rather than the many.
This would also eiminate two governing bodies coming to different decisions, as in the case of the two boxers. Where they werent allowed to compete in the Olympics, but not the World Championships. That is a ridiculous state of affairs.
I think you are using irrelevant arguments to cloud the issue. The taking of banned drugs has nothing to do with this debate. The taking of banned drugs is illegal, and suitable penalties should be imposed. Whether or not drug tests are conducted frequently enough, or whether the penalties are harsh enough is a different argument.
I think your now famous 52 year old rugby player, is probably in a smaller minority than intersex people. Even though I think it improbable that a 52 year old would wake up one morning, and suddenly decide to play rugby, I wont argue with the thought. If they neeeded to pursue an activity to save their mental health, then they could choose mens rugby, or another activity. It is the creating of exceptions that causes problems.
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
I would imagine it's because the IOC and the WABA have different criteria.
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
You fundamentally do not understand "drugs" in sport. Because they are totally different to what you think of as "drugs".
So-for example-were you to ban all drugs that might enhance athletic performance. You would just have barred all Type 1 Diabetics (and many Type 2) from Sport. Because non-naturally produced Insulin is a banned drug (and has been used by many drug cheats).
However much you may not like it, there are a lot of people legally classified as intersex. According to the UN, 1.7% of births are intersex. What's 1.7% of the World? 100 million? 150 million?
People persist in trying to classify people by sex. And different tests provide different results. Not least because there is not just 1 "intersex" category-there are lots of different DSDs, with differing effects in differing sports.
Likewise, it is not as black and white as "cheats" and "not cheats". Where money is involved, people will always take advantage of the Rules as they currently exist. for profit. Just like everyone else.
What is, or is not, fair changes constantly. There was a time when there were calls for any woman who trained were banned for cheating. When "gentlemen" and "players" were different breeds in cricket. When people could take various things that are now banned, like EPO. And there will always be perfectly legal ways to get round rules. Seen a 21 year old female gymnast who looked like a 21-year old?
Suppose someone is born a Woman. Is now legally a Man. Had a sex change, got male genitalia and a beard. Plays sport for fun-not least because their natural disadvantages mean that would be the only option.
Your solution. Force them to play with Women. Force Women to play with them. And, of course, ban them from playing sport because of the "enhanced" drugs.
That's 50% of Trans people. Ostracised. Right there.
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
I would imagine it's because the IOC and the WABA have different criteria.
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
I would imagine it's because the IOC and the WABA have different criteria.
That in itself is surely ridiculous?
Not necessarily.
Firstly, what amounts to an unfair competitive advantage is bound to vary between sports. The IOC deals with lots of sports-WABA just the 1.
Secondly, there has been bad blood between the IOC and WABA for a long time. The IOC believes (rightly or wrongly) that WABA follows the every word of Donald Trump. Incidentally, due to the perceived bias in the running of what is now the IBA, boxing is at risk of being dropped from the Olympic programme.
Finally, it goes back to what I was saying earlier. For elite sports (however you define it) the key should be male puberty, as opposed to sex or gender. Because there will always be people who are legally "women" who have the benefit of male puberty...
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
I would imagine it's because the IOC and the WABA have different criteria.
That in itself is surely ridiculous?
Its as clear as mud.
Donald Trump emboldens boxing chiefs to sue Olympics for letting Imane Khelif fight as a woman
The International Olympic Committee is facing legal action for refusing to ban Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting from the women’s boxing competition at last summer’s Olympics.
After Donald Trump’s ‘Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports’ executive order last week, the International Boxing Association said it would file an official complaint with the attorney generals of Switzerland, France and the United States about the IOC’s handling of the gender eligibility row that engulfed Paris 2024.
Khelif and Lin were allowed to compete – and win gold – in the women’s boxing competition last summer despite being thrown out of the previous year’s World Championships for failing sex tests.
The boxing event at Paris 2024 was run by the IOC rather than the IBA, which was stripped of the right to do so amid a row over how the international federation had been run since a corruption scandal centred around the 2016 Games.
The IOC refused to acknowledge the validity of the testing carried out by the IBA to conduct its own assessment of Khelif and Lin, both of whom were assigned female at birth but are suspected to have been born with differences of sex development.
IOC ‘disregarded IBA’s critical information’ Announcing the legal action, the IBA said in a statement: “International Boxing Association (IBA) prides itself on being the sole international federation committed to safeguarding the rights of the athletes worldwide and upholding the integrity of female sports. The executive order of USA president Donald Trump ‘Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports’ proves that IBA stood firm, rightfully protecting female boxers from unfair competition.
“In light of the gender eligibility issues surrounding boxers in 2022 and 2023, the IBA proactively conducted all necessary testing and subsequently banned individuals deemed ineligible from participating in women’s competitions. Despite notifying the IOC about the disqualification of Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting, the IOC disregarded this critical information, allowing both athletes to compete in the qualifiers and ultimately at the 2024 Olympics, where they secured gold medals, denying opportunities to deserving female athletes.
“As a result, IBA is filing an official complaint with the Attorney General of Switzerland, Mr Stefan Blätter, regarding the IOC’s actions that facilitated the participation of these ineligible athletes in the 2024 Olympic boxing tournament in Paris. According to the Swiss law, any action or inaction that poses a safety risk to competition participants warrants investigation and may serve as grounds for criminal prosecution. In addition, similar complaints are to be filed with the Attorneys General of France and the USA.”
‘We will not stand by and watch men batter females’ IBA president Umar Kremlev added: “President Trump’s order to ban transgender athletes from women’s sport validates the IBA’s efforts to protect the integrity of female sports.”
He also urged boxers affected by the IOC’s decision to allow Khelif and Lin to compete in women’s boxing to pursue legal action against IOC president Thomas Bach, sports director Kit McConnell, and their respective teams.
He added: “IBA will provide free-of-charge comprehensive legal support to our boxers in these lawsuits, as this is a clear violation of human rights, an outrage towards the female boxers, and simply a crime that should be punished accordingly. In my personal opinion, Thomas Bach should take the full responsibility for this, as he was in charge when it happened, and he needs to compensate the damages caused, if the court or any other instance rules this.”
Monday’s announcement came less than a week after President Trump signed his executive order during a ceremony at which he indicated he would not be allowing any overseas transgender athletes to compete against women at the next Olympics in Los Angeles.
“In Los Angeles in 2028, my administration will not stand by and watch men beat and batter female athletes. We’re not going to let it happen,” said Trump, who made last summer’s row over Khelif and Lin a central theme of his election campaign last year.
“Just to make sure, I’m also directing our secretary of homeland security to deny any and all visa applications made by men attempting to fraudulently enter the US while identifying as women athletes to try and get into the Games.”
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
I would imagine it's because the IOC and the WABA have different criteria.
That in itself is surely ridiculous?
Not necessarily.
Firstly, what amounts to an unfair competitive advantage is bound to vary between sports. The IOC deals with lots of sports-WABA just the 1.
Secondly, there has been bad blood between the IOC and WABA for a long time. The IOC believes (rightly or wrongly) that WABA follows the every word of Donald Trump. Incidentally, due to the perceived bias in the running of what is now the IBA, boxing is at risk of being dropped from the Olympic programme.
Finally, it goes back to what I was saying earlier. For elite sports (however you define it) the key should be male puberty, as opposed to sex or gender. Because there will always be people who are legally "women" who have the benefit of male puberty...
It was apparently the IBA. They tested and disqualified both boxers. The IOC have then either retested using different criteria, or just disregarded the IBA results. So two governing bodies, each having a different opinion on two people. Really? I stick by my criteria. Coincidentally they both won gold. Now theres a surprise.
The last 2 posts encapsulate the difficulties surrounding this subject. In that the first agrees with the 2nd, whereas I find myself agreeing with most of the 1st, and disagreeing with nearly all of the 2nd. And I tend to agree with more than 90% of @HAYSIE posts.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I only mentioned drugs because you brought up that drugs used by people in the process of transitioning might enhance their performance. I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions. Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born. Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female. Others as mostly female. I wouldnt know where to start on that. But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied. There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating. As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch. We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with. Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics? How could the test results be different? Isnt that just ridiculous?
You fundamentally do not understand "drugs" in sport. Because they are totally different to what you think of as "drugs".
Whether I do, or dont understand drugs, surely any drugs that enhance performance should be banned. Irrespective on any medical condition. If you have a medical condition that forces to take even legal performance enhancing drugs, you are still banned.
So-for example-were you to ban all drugs that might enhance athletic performance. You would just have barred all Type 1 Diabetics (and many Type 2) from Sport. Because non-naturally produced Insulin is a banned drug (and has been used by many drug cheats).
So be it.
However much you may not like it, there are a lot of people legally classified as intersex. According to the UN, 1.7% of births are intersex. What's 1.7% of the World? 100 million? 150 million?
I know this, I posted it earlier in the thread.
People persist in trying to classify people by sex. And different tests provide different results. Not least because there is not just 1 "intersex" category-there are lots of different DSDs, with differing effects in differing sports.
If you classified people at birth as either male, or female. Any exceptions are male. It may be unfair to a very small minority, many of whom will never be involved in sport.
Likewise, it is not as black and white as "cheats" and "not cheats". Where money is involved, people will always take advantage of the Rules as they currently exist. for profit. Just like everyone else.
And the authorities will continue to try to catch up. Just because there will always be cheating, you cant give up on the quest for fairness.
What is, or is not, fair changes constantly. There was a time when there were calls for any woman who trained were banned for cheating. When "gentlemen" and "players" were different breeds in cricket. When people could take various things that are now banned, like EPO. And there will always be perfectly legal ways to get round rules. Seen a 21 year old female gymnast who looked like a 21-year old?
I dont think that what the majority thinks is fair ever changes. Men participating in womens sport is clearly unfair. The first and last time I will ever agree with Donald Trump.
Suppose someone is born a Woman. Is now legally a Man. Had a sex change, got male genitalia and a beard. Plays sport for fun-not least because their natural disadvantages mean that would be the only option.
What is the only option?
Your solution. Force them to play with Women. Force Women to play with them. And, of course, ban them from playing sport because of the "enhanced" drugs.
What options do they have now?
That's 50% of Trans people. Ostracised. Right there.
Is it a 50/50 split? How many people do you think that is in total?
I am uncertain of where you are going with your example. Are you suggesting that they would be good enough to get into a mens sports team, or that they might suffer some indignity playing for a womens team?
Look at where we are today. Two governing bodies cant agree on who is a man and a woman.
I am going to try and explain this. Again. Because you have apparently morphed into Donald J Trump.
I get that you struggle to understand that transgenderism and intersex are 2 separate, entirely unrelated conditions. It's a complex area. What I do not understand is why the Orange man and the IBA, with their wealth of access to medical advice, do not understand this.
Intersex people have both female and male characteristics. I appreciate that Trump and the IBA do not accept that. Thing is, it is a medical issue. And the only thing medical science deals with is the amount and the different types of condition. It does exist.
We do not have the medical evidence available to us. All we do have is the IOC (for reasons unspecified) saying these 2 athletes do meet their criteria. And the IBA stating that they banned them, apparently because intersex as a condition either does not exist, or that they are transgender-neither of which is true.
Here's the thing. I honestly believe that all major sporting bodies try their best to provide fair solutions. I think that any 1 organisation that believes they are the only organisation that cares is delusional. Or playing politics by lying.
FWIW, on the limited info available, I think it more likely than not that these people should not have competed. But that is not the point.
Anybody organising these sorts of competitions (IOC or IBA) is (all other things being equal) entitled to take its own advice, and make its own decisions. And (usually) not make sensitive medical info public. Which is why I tend to hope that anyone suing either body loses.
Here's the next thing. The most important criterion adopted by the IOC is, and always has been, this. They will not allow any Govt, of any country, to provide restrictions via political affiliation into its business. Sport. Not politics.
That cretin Trump has announced that he will not allow any Transgender or Intersex athlete a Visa to enter the USA for the 2028 LA Olympics. Which, unless that is reversed, will mean the 2028 Olympics will not take place in LA.
And every Amateur Boxer will fear that their chance of Olympic Gold has suddenly become a whole lot less likely. Because it will no longer exist as an Olympic sport.
I am going to try and explain this. Again. Because you have apparently morphed into Donald J Trump.
Never.
I get that you struggle to understand that transgenderism and intersex are 2 separate, entirely unrelated conditions. It's a complex area. What I do not understand is why the Orange man and the IBA, with their wealth of access to medical advice, do not understand this.
I dont.
Intersex people have both female and male characteristics. I appreciate that Trump and the IBA do not accept that. Thing is, it is a medical issue. And the only thing medical science deals with is the amount and the different types of condition. It does exist.
This enables you to argue that they are more male than female, or more female. Hence the dispute over the boxers. Even the authorities cant agree. Perhaps you need to educate them. I am just saying that if you categorised them all as male there would be no arguments.
We do not have the medical evidence available to us. All we do have is the IOC (for reasons unspecified) saying these 2 athletes do meet their criteria. And the IBA stating that they banned them, apparently because intersex as a condition either does not exist, or that they are transgender-neither of which is true.
I dont think you need medical evidence that can be disputed. They are all male.
Here's the thing. I honestly believe that all major sporting bodies try their best to provide fair solutions. I think that any 1 organisation that believes they are the only organisation that cares is delusional. Or playing politics by lying.
But they arent.
FWIW, on the limited info available, I think it more likely than not that these people should not have competed. But that is not the point.
But it is the point. If the various authorities cant agree, an alternative solution is required.
Anybody organising these sorts of competitions (IOC or IBA) is (all other things being equal) entitled to take its own advice, and make its own decisions. And (usually) not make sensitive medical info public. Which is why I tend to hope that anyone suing either body loses. Forget the IOC, and the IBA, Trump is not having it for the next Olympics.
Here's the next thing. The most important criterion adopted by the IOC is, and always has been, this. They will not allow any Govt, of any country, to provide restrictions via political affiliation into its business. Sport. Not politics.
He is allegedly not letting them into the USA.
That cretin Trump has announced that he will not allow any Transgender or Intersex athlete a Visa to enter the USA for the 2028 LA Olympics. Which, unless that is reversed, will mean the 2028 Olympics will not take place in LA.
We will see.
And every Amateur Boxer will fear that their chance of Olympic Gold has suddenly become a whole lot less likely. Because it will no longer exist as an Olympic sport.
A solution might be found where the governing bodies might be forced into agreeing a definition of who is a man or a woman, as far as sports are concerned.
there is no third option only the first two options.
This is one of those questions where there just isn't an answer or solution that can't be perceived as totally out of order by a bunch of people because of how complex it is on multiple levels.
You'd need endless streams of data on hormones at different intervals in competition and much much more of all that type of stuff and then for everyone to agree on governable parameters that might not be taken on universally.
In the mean time people are generally just going to hate on the trans community, and they'll throw in all of LGBT while they're at it, and that's what we need people to focus on not doing.
I was enjoying reading the debate between the two forum intellectual heavyweights @HAYSIE and @Essexphil. I'm conceding I am not on your level to try and debate with you two. But i will continue to enjoy reading both points of view. And excuse myself from this one
@kapowblamz I was with you on the last posting until the "in the mean time people are generally just going to hate on the trans community, and they'll throw in all of LGBT while they're at it, and that's what we need people to focus on not doing."
Its comments like this that cause divisiveness, if you don't agree its transphobic or you have an agenda against LGBTQ. Same tactic on the immigration debate we both spoke on a while back if you don't agree with your point of view you are racist or far right.
Although ill give you that the options given on the poll certainly sounded like they came from that point of view. Not everyone if any who has commented (I haven't read through all comments) has come across as trans/LGBTQ haters
I may add I don't know what LGBTQ community has got to do with the Debate as ****/Gay/Bisexual has nothing to do with the discussion its just the trans community the sexuality has nothing to do with it
Its comments like this that cause divisiveness, if you don't agree its transphobic or you have an agenda against LGBTQ. Same tactic on the immigration debate we both spoke on a while back if you don't agree with your point of view you are racist or far right.
There's nothing wrong with division at all. Hate is the problem.
Comments
Yes, as Polls go, it was dreadfully constructed & clearly biased. That probably explains why despite it being a very interesting topic, & having 3 pages of replies & over 500 views, the Poll only attracted 3 votes. Sad to see such a difficult & sensitive topic being treated that way. Hopefully the wider world take a more understanding view.
On various occasions, I agree entirely with you. When it comes to professional sport, I think the short answer is that people who started out as men should not be allowed to make money from women's sport. For all sorts of reasons. Including safety.
Where I differ is relating to purely recreational sport. Where (in my example) an unfit 52 year old Trans man or Trans Woman wants to play sport purely for fun. And for their mental health. And to feel part of the human race.
There are also problems in relation to the categories you want to use. As an example:-
"You should be made to compete in the biological sex category you were born in." There are 2 problems with this:-
1. Some intersex athletes were designated as female at birth, for example Castor Semenya. People cannot have it both ways-cannot be able to change someone's sex when it suits. And, FWIW, I do not believe intersex athletes should be allowed to compete professionally as women
2. All that would achieve is to flip the coin. The problem would then be passed on to Trans Men rather than Trans Women. Because people born as Women and undergo a sex change legally have all sorts of chemical changes
I get that there will always be unfairness. And that women need to be protected. But Trans people need to be treated like the rest of the World.
Professional Women's sport has been littered with cheats (much like men's sport). But lots of the female athletes have been given "male" drugs, such as testosterone. This logically puts women in danger. Do these people get banned for life? No. There are many high-profile female athletes caught-from Flo Jo, to Marion Jones. And, generally, people receive short bans and then continue or play a different professional sport. To give the MMA example, how many women have been punched in the face by Chris Cyborg since 2012?
Do women need protection in female sports? Of course they do. From unacceptable risk. And from people pretending to be women for commercial gain. Not from the Trans Community.
I also agree that when not in competitive sport i.e playing for fun or training all should be inclusive I don't see any harm in that. But as soon as it becomes competitive at any level, rules should apply as to who can play.
Where I disagree is I don't believe it should just be professional levels that are protected as people that play amateur/junior/semi pro levels also take it incredibly serious and prize money and scholarships are also on offer. Also you have to start at these levels before you become professional thus competing against someone with a biological/unfair advantage can seriously impact your future prospects.
By all means have an all inclusive gender category so every male/female/trans person that consents can compete against each other. I also wish everyone had a space to fit into that didn't disadvantage others but that doesn't exist we can only try and be as inclusive as we can where possible and sometimes unfortunately it is not possible
I would like to say that I am not biased against anyone.
I am just pro fairness.
Men arent allowed to compete in womens sports for obvious reasons.
You dont have to explain that.
Nobody would even contemplate allowing any men to choose whether they compete in men or womens sport.
I think it is clear that men, and women should compete in their own sports.
The only doubts arise over cases where there are exceptions.
So if you ruled that where there is doubt, those concerned will be classified as male.
This may well be considered by some as unfair, but if it is, then at least you would be only being unfair to a very, very, small minority, rather than the many.
This would also eiminate two governing bodies coming to different decisions, as in the case of the two boxers.
Where they werent allowed to compete in the Olympics, but not the World Championships.
That is a ridiculous state of affairs.
I think you are using irrelevant arguments to cloud the issue.
The taking of banned drugs has nothing to do with this debate.
The taking of banned drugs is illegal, and suitable penalties should be imposed.
Whether or not drug tests are conducted frequently enough, or whether the penalties are harsh enough is a different argument.
I think your now famous 52 year old rugby player, is probably in a smaller minority than intersex people.
Even though I think it improbable that a 52 year old would wake up one morning, and suddenly decide to play rugby, I wont argue with the thought.
If they neeeded to pursue an activity to save their mental health, then they could choose mens rugby, or another activity.
It is the creating of exceptions that causes problems.
Taking the last post of @Angela124 by paragraph.
1. I disagree that Castor Semenya should be allowed to complete, and the reasons behind it. The Press dress up old problems as though they have never happened before, and will never happen again. Simply not true.
As an example, the first ever sex test at the Olympics was in 1936. Where a Polish newspaper, supposedly on behalf of the 1932 Gold medallist who had just finished 2nd, had been beaten by a man. It was (rather crudely) established that the Gold medallist was female.
That Silver medallist (and previous Gold medallist) was never tested. Continued competitive athletics for more than a decade. Broke World records.
Her name? Stanislawa Walasiewicz. Also known as Stella Walsh. Dubbed by the Press for decades as "Stella the Fella". Intersex-and more male than female. Only proved on Death. And-of course-because under 400 metres, would be free to compete today
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanisława_Walasiewicz
Those boxers you referred to? Mostly female. The important point (to me, at least) is that they appear to have also had the massive advantage of male puberty. So-weird as it may sound-I want more people banned from elite sport. Not less.
We don't actually disagree in relation to it not being just professional levels. Any ban must also include the regular pathways towards pro sport. That's going to vary a lot from sport to sport-it must go further in mass female pro sport (like tennis, athletics and swimming) to emerging mass female pro sports (like football rugby and netball) and again to largely amateur sports. But Junior Internationals, County games should logically have restrictions.
@Haysie. I have only dealt with a few of these sorts of cases. But-with respect-it gives me insight into the complexities involved in Pro Sport. The minute big money is involved, rules get stretched.
Scientists always disagree on everything. But the vast majority agree that the key sporting difference is not male and female-it is going through male puberty. For most sports, the biggest difference between males and females is the massive amount of extra testosterone produced after male puberty. Which is (of course) why various male and female athletes seek to artificially boost that effect.
Sharron Davies is a leading voice on this subject. I disagree with much of what she says. But where she is correct is that she was the most talented IM swimmer of her generation. Who was robbed of at least 1 gold medal by East German women on state doping, effectively competing as men
Your idea of "banned drugs" is lovely. But not in the real world. There are lots of perfectly legal drugs. As a simple example, natural testosterone is perfectly legal-while the artificial identical drug is not.
And that is before we get to "TUE"s. Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Where an Athlete is allowed to take medication that has a side-effect of boosting performance because of a medical condition.
Everyone knows that Sharapova, Povetkin (and recently Mudrykh of Chelsea) have been banned because the East European use of Meldonium for heart conditions was suddenly outlawed in sport.
Whereas the remarkably similar cases involving medication for asthma remain perfectly legal.
Famous sporting asthmatics? Most cyclists. Mark Spitz. Mo Farah. Paula Radcliffe.
They are/were most certainly not cheats. But "fairness" changes over time.
Which is why Jarmila Kratochvilova has held the 800 metre world record since 1983.
I dont believe that any drugs that might enhance performance should be allowed, regardless of any medical conditions.
Drugs are a different debate.
I just think there would be less controversy if you competed in sports that are appropriate to the gender that you were born.
Any exceptions are male.
You described someone above as more male than female.
Others as mostly female.
I wouldnt know where to start on that.
But I think that a better result would have been achieved in the vast majority of disputes, if the above rules had been applied.
There was a massive difference of opinion on the boxers, and a huge outcry at the Olympics.
There will always be cheating.
As time goes on, the cheats will be more difficult to catch.
We should always try to make it as difficult as possible to get away with.
Cheating is another argument.
How could it be possible for the same two boxers to be disqualified from the World Championships, yet allowed to compete in the Olympics?
How could the test results be different?
Isnt that just ridiculous?
So-for example-were you to ban all drugs that might enhance athletic performance. You would just have barred all Type 1 Diabetics (and many Type 2) from Sport. Because non-naturally produced Insulin is a banned drug (and has been used by many drug cheats).
However much you may not like it, there are a lot of people legally classified as intersex. According to the UN, 1.7% of births are intersex. What's 1.7% of the World? 100 million? 150 million?
People persist in trying to classify people by sex. And different tests provide different results. Not least because there is not just 1 "intersex" category-there are lots of different DSDs, with differing effects in differing sports.
Likewise, it is not as black and white as "cheats" and "not cheats". Where money is involved, people will always take advantage of the Rules as they currently exist. for profit. Just like everyone else.
What is, or is not, fair changes constantly. There was a time when there were calls for any woman who trained were banned for cheating. When "gentlemen" and "players" were different breeds in cricket. When people could take various things that are now banned, like EPO. And there will always be perfectly legal ways to get round rules. Seen a 21 year old female gymnast who looked like a 21-year old?
Suppose someone is born a Woman. Is now legally a Man. Had a sex change, got male genitalia and a beard. Plays sport for fun-not least because their natural disadvantages mean that would be the only option.
Your solution. Force them to play with Women. Force Women to play with them. And, of course, ban them from playing sport because of the "enhanced" drugs.
That's 50% of Trans people. Ostracised. Right there.
Firstly, what amounts to an unfair competitive advantage is bound to vary between sports. The IOC deals with lots of sports-WABA just the 1.
Secondly, there has been bad blood between the IOC and WABA for a long time. The IOC believes (rightly or wrongly) that WABA follows the every word of Donald Trump. Incidentally, due to the perceived bias in the running of what is now the IBA, boxing is at risk of being dropped from the Olympic programme.
Finally, it goes back to what I was saying earlier. For elite sports (however you define it) the key should be male puberty, as opposed to sex or gender. Because there will always be people who are legally "women" who have the benefit of male puberty...
Donald Trump emboldens boxing chiefs to sue Olympics for letting Imane Khelif fight as a woman
The International Olympic Committee is facing legal action for refusing to ban Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting from the women’s boxing competition at last summer’s Olympics.
After Donald Trump’s ‘Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports’ executive order last week, the International Boxing Association said it would file an official complaint with the attorney generals of Switzerland, France and the United States about the IOC’s handling of the gender eligibility row that engulfed Paris 2024.
Khelif and Lin were allowed to compete – and win gold – in the women’s boxing competition last summer despite being thrown out of the previous year’s World Championships for failing sex tests.
The boxing event at Paris 2024 was run by the IOC rather than the IBA, which was stripped of the right to do so amid a row over how the international federation had been run since a corruption scandal centred around the 2016 Games.
The IOC refused to acknowledge the validity of the testing carried out by the IBA to conduct its own assessment of Khelif and Lin, both of whom were assigned female at birth but are suspected to have been born with differences of sex development.
IOC ‘disregarded IBA’s critical information’
Announcing the legal action, the IBA said in a statement: “International Boxing Association (IBA) prides itself on being the sole international federation committed to safeguarding the rights of the athletes worldwide and upholding the integrity of female sports. The executive order of USA president Donald Trump ‘Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports’ proves that IBA stood firm, rightfully protecting female boxers from unfair competition.
“In light of the gender eligibility issues surrounding boxers in 2022 and 2023, the IBA proactively conducted all necessary testing and subsequently banned individuals deemed ineligible from participating in women’s competitions. Despite notifying the IOC about the disqualification of Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting, the IOC disregarded this critical information, allowing both athletes to compete in the qualifiers and ultimately at the 2024 Olympics, where they secured gold medals, denying opportunities to deserving female athletes.
“As a result, IBA is filing an official complaint with the Attorney General of Switzerland, Mr Stefan Blätter, regarding the IOC’s actions that facilitated the participation of these ineligible athletes in the 2024 Olympic boxing tournament in Paris. According to the Swiss law, any action or inaction that poses a safety risk to competition participants warrants investigation and may serve as grounds for criminal prosecution. In addition, similar complaints are to be filed with the Attorneys General of France and the USA.”
‘We will not stand by and watch men batter females’
IBA president Umar Kremlev added: “President Trump’s order to ban transgender athletes from women’s sport validates the IBA’s efforts to protect the integrity of female sports.”
He also urged boxers affected by the IOC’s decision to allow Khelif and Lin to compete in women’s boxing to pursue legal action against IOC president Thomas Bach, sports director Kit McConnell, and their respective teams.
He added: “IBA will provide free-of-charge comprehensive legal support to our boxers in these lawsuits, as this is a clear violation of human rights, an outrage towards the female boxers, and simply a crime that should be punished accordingly. In my personal opinion, Thomas Bach should take the full responsibility for this, as he was in charge when it happened, and he needs to compensate the damages caused, if the court or any other instance rules this.”
Monday’s announcement came less than a week after President Trump signed his executive order during a ceremony at which he indicated he would not be allowing any overseas transgender athletes to compete against women at the next Olympics in Los Angeles.
“In Los Angeles in 2028, my administration will not stand by and watch men beat and batter female athletes. We’re not going to let it happen,” said Trump, who made last summer’s row over Khelif and Lin a central theme of his election campaign last year.
“Just to make sure, I’m also directing our secretary of homeland security to deny any and all visa applications made by men attempting to fraudulently enter the US while identifying as women athletes to try and get into the Games.”
The IOC has been approached for comment.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/other/donald-trump-emboldens-boxing-chiefs-to-sue-olympics-for-letting-imane-khelif-fight-as-a-woman/ar-AA1yKqPZ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W230&cvid=76ca218627a74945e237856e9d9251fb&ei=69#
They tested and disqualified both boxers.
The IOC have then either retested using different criteria, or just disregarded the IBA results.
So two governing bodies, each having a different opinion on two people.
Really?
I stick by my criteria.
Coincidentally they both won gold.
Now theres a surprise.
Is it a 50/50 split?
How many people do you think that is in total?
I am uncertain of where you are going with your example.
Are you suggesting that they would be good enough to get into a mens sports team, or that they might suffer some indignity playing for a womens team?
Look at where we are today.
Two governing bodies cant agree on who is a man and a woman.
I get that you struggle to understand that transgenderism and intersex are 2 separate, entirely unrelated conditions. It's a complex area. What I do not understand is why the Orange man and the IBA, with their wealth of access to medical advice, do not understand this.
Intersex people have both female and male characteristics. I appreciate that Trump and the IBA do not accept that. Thing is, it is a medical issue. And the only thing medical science deals with is the amount and the different types of condition. It does exist.
We do not have the medical evidence available to us. All we do have is the IOC (for reasons unspecified) saying these 2 athletes do meet their criteria. And the IBA stating that they banned them, apparently because intersex as a condition either does not exist, or that they are transgender-neither of which is true.
Here's the thing. I honestly believe that all major sporting bodies try their best to provide fair solutions. I think that any 1 organisation that believes they are the only organisation that cares is delusional. Or playing politics by lying.
FWIW, on the limited info available, I think it more likely than not that these people should not have competed. But that is not the point.
Anybody organising these sorts of competitions (IOC or IBA) is (all other things being equal) entitled to take its own advice, and make its own decisions. And (usually) not make sensitive medical info public. Which is why I tend to hope that anyone suing either body loses.
Here's the next thing. The most important criterion adopted by the IOC is, and always has been, this. They will not allow any Govt, of any country, to provide restrictions via political affiliation into its business. Sport. Not politics.
That cretin Trump has announced that he will not allow any Transgender or Intersex athlete a Visa to enter the USA for the 2028 LA Olympics. Which, unless that is reversed, will mean the 2028 Olympics will not take place in LA.
And every Amateur Boxer will fear that their chance of Olympic Gold has suddenly become a whole lot less likely. Because it will no longer exist as an Olympic sport.
You'd need endless streams of data on hormones at different intervals in competition and much much more of all that type of stuff and then for everyone to agree on governable parameters that might not be taken on universally.
In the mean time people are generally just going to hate on the trans community, and they'll throw in all of LGBT while they're at it, and that's what we need people to focus on not doing.
@kapowblamz I was with you on the last posting until the "in the mean time people are generally just going to hate on the trans community, and they'll throw in all of LGBT while they're at it, and that's what we need people to focus on not doing."
Its comments like this that cause divisiveness, if you don't agree its transphobic or you have an agenda against LGBTQ. Same tactic on the immigration debate we both spoke on a while back if you don't agree with your point of view you are racist or far right.
Although ill give you that the options given on the poll certainly sounded like they came from that point of view. Not everyone if any who has commented (I haven't read through all comments) has come across as trans/LGBTQ haters