Cut From Yahoo News:
LAUSANNE, Switzerland - Transsexuals were cleared Monday to compete in the Olympics for the first time.
Under a proposal approved by the IOC executive board, athletes who have undergone sex-change surgery will be eligible for the Olympics if their new gender has been legally recognized and they have gone through a minimum two-year period of postoperative hormone therapy.
The decision, which covers both male-to-female and female-to-male cases, goes into effect starting with the Athens Olympics in August.
The IOC had put off a decision in February, saying more time was needed to consider all the medical issues.
Some members had been concerned whether male-to-female transsexuals would have physical advantages competing against women.
Men have higher levels of testosterone and greater muscle-to-fat ratio and heart and lung capacity. However, doctors say, testosterone levels and muscle mass drop after hormone therapy and sex-change surgery.
IOC spokeswoman Giselle Davies said the situation of transsexuals competing in high-level sports was "rare but becoming more common."
IOC medical director Patrick Schamasch said no specific sports had been singled out by the ruling.
"Any sport may be touched by this problem," he said. "Until now, we didn't have any rules or regulations. We needed to establish some sort of policy."
Until 1999, the IOC conducted gender verification tests at the Olympics but the screenings were dropped before the 2000 Sydney Games.
One of the best known cases of transsexuals in sports involves Renee Richards, formerly Richard Raskind, who played on the women's tennis tour in the 1970s.
In March, Australia's Mianne Bagger became the first transsexual to play in a pro golf tournament.
Michelle Dumaresq, formerly Michael, has competed in mountain bike racing for Canada.
Richards, now a New York opthamologist, was surprised by the IOC decision and was against it. She said decisions on transsexuals should be made on an individual basis.
"Basically, I think they're making a wrong judgment here, although I would have loved to have that judgment made in my case in 1976," she said.
"They're probably looking for trouble down the line. There may be a true transsexual — not someone who's nuts and wants to make money — who will be a very good champion player, and it will be a young person, let's say a Jimmy Connors or a Tiger Woods, and then they'll have an unequal playing field.
"In some sports, the physical superiority of men over women is very significant."
Parents
Former Member
From what I understand, a 'transgendered female' is phenotypically female, in form and muscles, and even hormonally. They act in life as one of the female gender. We use female pronouns not only because it is polite, but because it is correct.
There are many cases of unclear sex, and the decision to be male or female (driven by our society) is decided by appearance, personal history, and which sex is easier to medically accomplish, not by XX or XY chromosome. (I read recently of a child who had some organs XX, others XY)
So I fail to understand Beth's argument, "because it is unfair." How is it unfair? Is it unfair because a women is taller? We deal with that type of unfairness all the time. I think it is far more unfair that a man is born to the wrong sex. Besides that, Beth's argument ignores and in effect ridicules the intellectual argument that is needed to make such a moral decision -- others here are very eloquently trying to explore the fundamental points of this issue, but evidently Beth did not do well in her philosophy or medical ethics courses.
Also, Aquageek, I would not try to explain why "a man cut of his willie to race with the girls." The whole tone and word choice of this question ridicules a serious issue -- people who put up with the social and physical difficulties of changing sex do not 'cut off their willie." The word is penus, not something silly like willie, and I don't think cutting it off is either necessary nor sufficient. I don't think anyone would change sex to swim with the 'girls,' and they are not girls, they are women.
It is too bad that perfectly good words are treated like insults. If you think that races should not mix, as I heard a man on the radio claim yesterday, then you are a racist. If you think people of one sex should only live certain gender roles, or not live others, you are a sexist. If you think that people should not change genders, you are a . . . . genderist (?)
Finally, it is the case that Tom, either wittingly or unwittingly, starts the most controversial threads. ;)
From what I understand, a 'transgendered female' is phenotypically female, in form and muscles, and even hormonally. They act in life as one of the female gender. We use female pronouns not only because it is polite, but because it is correct.
There are many cases of unclear sex, and the decision to be male or female (driven by our society) is decided by appearance, personal history, and which sex is easier to medically accomplish, not by XX or XY chromosome. (I read recently of a child who had some organs XX, others XY)
So I fail to understand Beth's argument, "because it is unfair." How is it unfair? Is it unfair because a women is taller? We deal with that type of unfairness all the time. I think it is far more unfair that a man is born to the wrong sex. Besides that, Beth's argument ignores and in effect ridicules the intellectual argument that is needed to make such a moral decision -- others here are very eloquently trying to explore the fundamental points of this issue, but evidently Beth did not do well in her philosophy or medical ethics courses.
Also, Aquageek, I would not try to explain why "a man cut of his willie to race with the girls." The whole tone and word choice of this question ridicules a serious issue -- people who put up with the social and physical difficulties of changing sex do not 'cut off their willie." The word is penus, not something silly like willie, and I don't think cutting it off is either necessary nor sufficient. I don't think anyone would change sex to swim with the 'girls,' and they are not girls, they are women.
It is too bad that perfectly good words are treated like insults. If you think that races should not mix, as I heard a man on the radio claim yesterday, then you are a racist. If you think people of one sex should only live certain gender roles, or not live others, you are a sexist. If you think that people should not change genders, you are a . . . . genderist (?)
Finally, it is the case that Tom, either wittingly or unwittingly, starts the most controversial threads. ;)
