Ridiculous

Yes, it is ridiculous.

TiG? What do you mean?

In sports, such as swimming, where muscle mass and muscle fiber (e.g. fast-twitch) makes a significant difference, a transgendered female has an unfair biological advantage because these qualities are not part of the biological female body.   A transgendered individual can identify as a woman and mentally believe she is a woman, but the fact remains that her body is fundamentally male.

I would not think it fair to have a biologically male body boxing, wrestling, tackling, racing, swimming, etc. against a biologically female body.

So what is the 'work' that female hormones is doing in trans-females? And why are the officials, leagues, and federations open to the science of hormonal transgenderism? In your opinion, my friend?

By the way, do you know if trans-females are 'heavier' due to relative muscle mass than cis-women in water?

(I can see the. . . dilemma. . . but, it seems the 'heads' are determined to see this through the lens of science and not emotion-no slight intended.)

The hormones and other treatments will lessen the muscle mass but not to the level of the biological female body.   In the end, a fully transgendered woman is still substantially stronger, faster and has more endurance than a biological female body.

If this were a competition in chess, dance, marksmanship, etc. I would have no criticism.

One of those conditions requires that a "hormonal therapy appropriate for the female gender has been administered continuously and uninterrupted in a verifiable manner for a sufficient length of time, no less than one year, to minimize gender-related advantages in sport competitions" and subsequent proof of low enough testosterone levels.

I would like to understand the above. For I am convinced, though I know no one in professional sports authority, that these professional people are not blind or deaf to the concerns of girls and women (in women's sports of all things). Why are the authorities pushing this forward. . . unless they do not logically think it is unfair. Every response I read from sports authorities on the subject. . . reads similarly. A version of let's go forward with this.

I don't fully understand any of  this. Thus, I am an open book on this subject-matter. Despite how it comes across in my early writings to date.

It is a good topic for 'us' - if we choose to take it for all its worth! 

For I am convinced, though I know no one in professional sports authority, that these professional people are not blind or deaf to the concerns of girls and women (in women's sports of all things). Why are the authorities pushing this forward. . . unless they do not logically think it is unfair. Every response I read from sports authorities on the subject. . . reads similarly. A version of let's go forward with this.

Because there's political and social pressure to "go forward with this", and those who object are accused of bigotry.

This is political ideology at play.   We see plenty of it with Trump nowadays (e.g. disregard for climate science, the DEI purge, trying to prevent jus soli, deportations, nationalism, protectionism, isolationism, etc.)

Transgender matters are also political ideology and, as always, our society tends to take things too far.   We have to hit a wall and bounce back (iteratively) until things settle to an accepted norm.   Those who are active agents for transgender acceptance are doing their cause a disservice when they push so far that they are taking away from others.   In this case, the biological women (cisgender women) athletes are unnecessarily compromised by biological male competition.   This, IMO, crosses the line and causes people to not be as accepting of transgender individuals.

Okay. I still have to question that the sports authorities are not making or 'negotiating' that point (that I can read). Thank you for sharing insight.

Interesting. I am open to hearing more on this perspective. Sandy, I value a woman's perspective on this. Because I am truly just an onlooker at this topic. That is, I think I can see the actual problem confronting trans-female athletes, that is: They want to be accepted as women and may be eventually blend-in to the female community (homogenize) without having to expose their past lives. 

On the other-hand, I quietly question what the sporting authorities are 'doing'. . .because the pressures are high on both sides of this. Still, they are withstanding it. 

Again, I am just an observer - neutral - in the sense that I would love to see this problem 'fixed' and a happy compromise achieved-even if it means trans-females have to suffer being left out of females sports.

I would love to see this problem 'fixed' and a happy compromise achieved-even if it means trans-females have to suffer being left out of females sports.

Have divisions for trans athletes.  MTF and FTM compete against each other.  If, as we are expected to accept, biologically male bodies don't have advantages over biologically female ones after appropriate hormonal therapy, this should be acceptable to MTF trans athletes.  If it is not acceptable, we know they are being disingenuous.

As far as my perspective as a woman, I played baseball growing up.  There were no leagues for girls then, so I played baseball, not softball, with boys my age.  And I was a starter on my team.  Fielded well, threw well, hit well.  I still have a decent throwing arm (although I pay for it for days when I try), and was still paid the compliment a few years back during a co-ed softball game of having the pitcher tell his team not to move in when I was batting because "she can hit, y'all".

I played basketball, too, and the youth leagues in our town were co-ed before splitting into boys' and girls' team in middle school.

But as the boys hit their growth spurts, I was pretty much done growing.  I was tiny compared to them, as I topped out at five feet.   Their arms kept getting stronger, but mine was pretty much where it was going to be for life.  About that time, a girls' softball league was formed, and I played in it.

Those who are active agents for transgender acceptance are doing their cause a disservice when they push so far that they are taking away from others. 

Emphatically.

People are not 'there' yet. Some people will get 'there.' Some people will not get 'there.' 

I am a strong proponent of avoiding far extremes on either side of any spectrum. And, it strikes that the medical science has not caught up to the sports competition side of 'career life' for a trans-gendered female. 

Of course, that brings into full-frontal view what we have now: Political opposition from conservatives who by design want nothing 'ever' to change. Their perspective is the world is fine in shades of 'black and white.'  Their worldview so resoundingly clouds their judgement that it tends to strain (deny) what is/will/must come to 'be.' 

Transgendered athletes are here-in the present-in the moment and the question of what to do about 'them' sports-wise is here too.

Have divisions for trans athletes.  MTF and FTM compete against each other. 

That could be a potential fix. It has been done before in the form of Special Olympics. It would be a niche market category accordingly - not mainstream. It would do two things on its face:

1. Remind the world that these participants are different from what they express themselves to be (no matter how sanguine their façades may be). 

2. Expose each individual to a double reality, for which s/he will not be able to escape. For their 'feats' will be recorded for history as that of a trans-person - not their chosen gender.

It may be that is all they can hope to get out of this. 

1. Remind the world that these participants are different from what they express themselves to be (no matter how sanguine their façades may be).  2. Expose each individual to a double reality, for which s/he will not be able to escape. For their 'feats' will be recorded for history as that of a trans-person - not their chosen gender.

It would also prevent them from taking opportunities from biological women.  At some point, there has to be an acknowledgement that their participation in sports where they have a biological advantage is taking away from others, and that, IMO, trumps their desire to ignore that biological advantage.

I would hope, if I were a trans woman, that I would recognize that advantage, and realize that at least some of my accomplishments in athletics was due to that advantage.  There are reasons that athletes, male and female, are generally prevented by the rules of their sports from taking anabolic steroids.  Steroids give them an unfair advantage over their competitors.  This taints any victories they might claim.

To be clear, you are not stating that trans-athletes are 'on' (sports) performance enhancing drugs are you? Just to clear up any possibility of confusion on that.

No, CB.

But trans women have had the advantage of innate hormones over cis women during their development.  They have been exposed to testosterone levels which would not be allowed in biologically female athletes, just by virtue of being biological males during puberty (most of them, anyway).

Understood. I think somebody in something I read labeled that: "muscle memory."

As far as my perspective as a woman, I played baseball growing up.

Sandy - We have had a few girls play in the 13-16 year-old league that I have coached for over 20 years, and they were all pretty good players.  I was fortunate enough to coach one of them on our 15 year old all-star team a few years back and that team made it to the Regional and State Tournaments.  I can tell you that she worked harder than the boys and was by far the best first base-person in our league.  She could dig a bad throw out of the dirt better than any of the boys!  She had trouble hitting some of the faster pitchers but she wore blisters on both her hands practicing and truly improved for the tournament.  She was one of my favorite players to coach over the years with her great attitude and hard work ethic.  Her teammates loved her too.

I lost track of her after she aged out of our league, but I'll bet she is kicking ass at whatever she has decided to do.

The only other girl in the league my last year of baseball was our shortstop, and she made All-Stars.  She was quick on her feet, had a good arm (she was also in the pitching rotation), a good batter, and a smart player.  And a good glove, obviously, or she wouldn't have been at short.

We played softball together through high school.  By senior year, she became a bit overconfident and unpredictable.  She looked good playing, but a throw to first might hit the glove, or might go over the dugout.  But it was still hard to get a ball past her at short, and she was dangerous on the bases because she could stretch a hit by at least one base pretty often.  She often ended up in rundown plays, but almost always was safe by the end, and one base further on than she should have been.

Be more openminded. The sporting industry certainly is trying to work this out for the females (all) involved. It's right there in the article that they are! Fortunately, given time and experiences these women athletes will resolve their differences through approved means and policies that they work out between themselves. That would be the order of the day.

Openminded?    Okay, since we are just spitballing here, how about only one category.     No men’s and women’s sports.    There will only be “sports.”    Where all genders and all gender creations will have no choice but to compete against each other.    How about that?    Does that work for you?

I don't play sports so does it works for me? May be. I would look in about as much as I do 'now.'  A better question would be:

Will "Sports" (your spit-balling term) work for sports enthusiasts and viewers?

After all, the interest of the category is participation and enterprise. By the way, the aforementioned should be a significant concern on the part of sports authorities, because well if players stop participating and the enterprise can not put up interesting "competition" - it will suffer, diminish itself, and over time fail.

No classes is what it might end up as. 

That, or women, girls, and the parents of girl athletes may start forming their own leagues, and making and enforcing their own rules, independent of any governing body.

Swim and track and field might go the way of travel baseball/softball/soccer.

Of course, it won't have the prestige of the NCAA or the Olympics.  But travel baseball players don't have a World Series like Little League does, and yet travel baseball is pretty popular.

There will still have to be three winners, lol

It is a rare occasion that I would agree with you, but I agree with you, and with TiG's explanation as to why.

U.S. Masters Swimming's gender eligibility policy allows transgender swimmers to participate in the gender competition category in which they identify, and they may also be recognized for accomplishments, granted certain conditions are met. One of those conditions requires that a "hormonal therapy appropriate for the female gender has been administered continuously and uninterrupted in a verifiable manner for a sufficient length of time, no less than one year, to minimize gender-related advantages in sport competitions" and subsequent proof of low enough testosterone levels.

First, let me compliment you on establishing a proper forum for this line of discussion. I will not discuss trans-people in the military here, but will hew to the topic.

Second, the officials and the federations have made their case for proceeding with trans-athletes having a significant role in female sports. I, for my part, don't have a fixed position, because I can see the dilemma facing girls and women, facing trans-female athletes (whom want to belong somewhere), and officials and federations who wish to keep to the spirit of sports. 

Science, for its part, seems to doing what it can to balance the competitiveness between cis-gender and trans-females (athletes). That said, one does have to wonder just what a male may have learned during his early years in sports that forms a mental basis for 'her' later on in competition.

This is one 'hell' of a dilemma for sports competition.

Your "dilemma" seems to be the contention between reality and fantasy. 

That comment is not helpful to this discussion. It would be better for everyone if we stop churlish behavior and get on with a proper discussion. 

To which end I ask.

1.  Why do we think trans-females want to play competitive sports in the first place? (Don't they know that they are causing a political firestorm in the industry?)

2.  What is the logic being used by the officials and federations (because they clearly are not emotional arguments) to continuing the placement of trans-female athletes in the women's leagues?

That comment is not helpful to this discussion. It would be better for everyone if we stop churlish behavior and get on with a proper discussion.

Okay. So, your argument is that an opinion that doesn't align with your point of view is "churlish" and not helpful with the discussion. Care to explain why you think so? Since you do not answer questions, I don't expect an answer.

 Why do we think trans-females want to play competitive sports in the first place?

Irrelevant. 

What is the logic being used by the officials and federations (because they clearly are not emotional arguments) to continuing allow the placement of trans-female athletes in the women's leagues?

Adherence to an ideology rather than reality. The more physical the sport, the more women (actual women) will be disadvantaged. 

Sports officials, leagues, and federations can not afford to be ideological, per se. The 'name of the game' is competitive fairness. The authorities must have some reason or set of reasons to pronounce this policy position as 'fair' or it could not stand as long as it has.

Also, what is the ideology you would consider at play here?

Sports officials, leagues, and federations can not afford to be ideological, per se. The 'name of the game' is competitive fairness. The authorities must have some reason or set of reasons to pronounce this policy position as 'fair' or it could not stand as long as it has.

No shit? What do you suppose that reason is?

Also, what is the ideology you would consider at play here?

That emotional desire trumps reality. 

It's quite obvious by the nature of your comments that you feel fantasy is a legitimate basis for an argument. I do not agree. Therefore, unless you engage me within the realm of reality (highly unlikely, in my opinion), I'm not going to engage you further. 

I did not ask you to engage me in the first place, Drakkonis.  It was not even a thought that occurred to me as you were nowhere around to consider. You 'shot' off a comment in my direction and I met it head-on. That is the REALITY here. 

Do us both a favor should you continue: discuss the article and not ME. Thank you!

This is one 'hell' of a dilemma for sports competition.

Not for most it’s not.    Biological men have no place in women’s sports.    Period.    Examples like this are just more empirical evidence to support that position.

There is a clear and logical delineation which separates men and women’s sports from a physical capability standpoint.    

Your persistent narrative is noted. However, it would benefit this discussion if you would be fair to trans-individuals to respect them for how they perceive themselves and how the sports world perceives them for the sake of a good discussion. That is, tamp down your bias (talking point). 

Trans-females are not 'biological' males, in the sense that they take 'drastic' steps to alter their physical features and state of mind. And most or some of what makes up the male ethos is a social construct, nevertheless. Science is proving this through medical and chemical activities. 

With that in mind, it could be a relatively better delineating point to argue that an inherent male psyche ('hyper' drive to achieve, impress, aggression) may be a 'force' that pushes trans-female athletes to excel in her mind and body. (I probably will receive a 'hit' on this last point from somebody, but I am "spit-balling" because the subject matter is 'hot.')

I would think that the sports authorities, across the board, are largely from the (world's) sporting communities. Largely not trans-individuals themselves. Subject to having female children in sports of their own. They seem genuinely interested on keeping trans-females in women's competitive sports.

They seem genuinely interested on keeping trans-females in women's competitive sports.

They seem genuinely interested in avoiding the political backlash and potential legal actions driven by angry political zealots who, generally speaking, don't play or follow sports. 

Sorry. The wording there is open to interpretation. Can you be more plain? 

Not really, no.

Well, I had to ask.

They seem genuinely interested on keeping trans-females in women's competitive sports.

I see an inconsistency here.

I have seen no push for trans women to compete in women's gymnastics.

The reality is that those same biological differences that favor male bodies in other sports tend to favor biologically female bodies in women's gymnastics.  Men don't do balance beam exercises in competition for a reason besides the risk of injury to their genitalia - their higher center of gravity.  Landing difficult skills on a 4-inch-wide beam without wobbling (small deduction) or falling off (big deduction) is much easier for somebody whose center of gravity is lower.  Male gymnasts aren't even expected to do so.  Female gymnasts are.  When I see trans women demanding to participate in sports where they are at a biological disadvantage rather than a biological advantage, their argument will have much more credibility.

You remind me of a 'foolishness' that I saw (maybe you all did too) in a commercial featuring the GOAT: Simone Biles. 

A series of ads by Simone Biles and Jonathan Van Ness:

Simone Biles and Jonathan Van Ness in Uber Eats’ ‘Tonight I’ll Be Eating’ campaign

Of course the ad is meant to be silly (you can't see it in this commercial, but in another interview ad with Biles you can clearly see there is a hoist holding Jonathan as he executes a split on the balance beam) but it speaks (or spoke) to some up and coming trans-female somewhere that female gymnastics is a brave new 'frontier.' 

Do I know what I am suggesting? Not really. But just exploring subject matter with you!

(Privately when I saw this ad series I found it insulting to Simone Biles, and had to keep reminding myself that she was being a 'good sport.')

Simone Biles and Jonathan Van Ness in Uber Eats’ ‘Tonight I’ll Be Eating’ campaign

I thought the commercial was amusing.  It was obvious to anybody watching that Van Ness was being "helped" somehow, and that Biles was making a tumbling pass that was pretty easy for her.

I want to share something I found on the internet. (I found several but they are too much of a hassle for me - for now to produce here.) 

Check this out. Do note the age and stature and physique of the man involved. Also, do note at 2:30 in the video the young boy that imitates what the man is doing (briefly):

Man Beam

That is the nature of this 'beast' that is the human spirit! Someone is always pushing the 'envelope'! 

Good for him.

Can he do this?

I follow this bunch on Facebook, because they're just so fun.  They have no trouble admitting that the beam is intimidating to men.

If you mean the full twist in the air, may be he can not (at his age) but a younger, lighter, and more flexible male could surely try it and succeed. Also, a younger male that succeeds in the twist would not have a problem with landing on the beam because of 'cup' protectors/systems :

All I am pointing out the fact that, for some people, where there is a will there is a way and comes a 'day'!

No friggin' way.   Even seriously contemplating that move would send the male amygdala into panic mode.

Not sure that would be enough to deal with that move.   Looks like your entire body weight is slamming down on that beam unless you catch it just right with your inner thigh muscles.   Yikes!

would not have a problem with landing on the beam because of 'cup' protectors/systems :

In my baseball days, I saw a few catchers take a pitch to the groin.  All were wearing cups at the time.  All were writhing on the ground in pain, anyway.

It's actually interesting, how similarly they all reacted.  Pitch forward, hands to groin, halfhearted somersault on home plate, lay on side groaning or crying, depending on the kid and the force of the pitch.

I've seen the gymnasts in the video I posted do the same move a time or three, when things went wrong.

In my baseball days, I saw a few catchers take a pitch to the groin.

I always showed Coach and Umpire the cup or beat on it with a ball or bat at the start of a game.

Then I ditched It so I could throw to second from my catching stance.

Occasionally I got caught by the Umpire.  I remember no difference getting nailed with a pitch with and without the cup.

It was there for Mother's to let their kid's play and leagues to escape liability.

Actually taking a foul ball to the ankles was a lot more painful.

They were pretty strict about catchers wearing a cup in my day.  No other player had to.

When my son was playing, all male players were required to wear a cup, no matter their position.

Actually taking a foul ball to the ankles was a lot more painful.

When I was pitching, I took one line drive to the shin.  One was plenty.

Customize them with additional padding for gymnastics? Just saying. Where there is a will-there is way. Besides girls and women ought not be slamming down like that on a beam either!

But, I am just spit-balling with this 'point.' I fully understand what is being said about female sports being for females - traditionally and anatomically. 

and the Trump administration has frozen funding to UPenn and declared it has violated Title IX.

At the time UPenn was following the NCAA guidelines and that Administration's Title IX and legal guidance.

Prediction, another loss for the Trump Administration in court.