Transsexuals in the Olympics

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:21:22 GMT

So, it's been five years since the IOC's policy was enacted. Has it been a problem for anyone yet? :bump:

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:37:25 GMT

Does anyone think Ben Johnson will get a *** job and then take Marion Jones' medals? Wow. Geek the Prophet. He made the above statement way back in 2004... Anna Lea

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:56:05 GMT

Is it too early to say that I tried to get on the list but was caught an imposter?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:39:46 GMT

Who is going to keep that list??? Not I.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:21:02 GMT

This thread was before my arrival to the swimming scene. How about a new thread..."Transexuals in USMS"? Who is going to keep that list??? :rofl: "Can you prove you're weren't born a male?"

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 12:01:45 GMT

This thread was before my arrival to the swimming scene. How about a new thread..."Transexuals in USMS"?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 11:55:53 GMT

OMG, how in the world did I miss this thread?!? :wiggle:

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

The Fortress — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:03:53 GMT

Who is going to keep that list??? Well, I can't prove it of course, but perhaps Howard Squirm should ACTUALLY be on "the list?" Or maybe it's just Halloween?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 15:14:45 GMT

Aren't you the one that saw no point in debating/arguing things you had no control over?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 13:42:29 GMT

Originally posted by LindsayNB For the record I am in favor of separate competition for the women at the Olympics Originally posted by gull80 With gender evolving into such a "blurry" issue (could be too much chlorine), pehaps we need more categories for competition. For example, what do we do with the transsexual who later becomes gender dysphoric again? Do we force him/her to compete with their new gender, or do we allow them to compete with the gender they were "assigned" at birth? I guess we can just wait until the About Gender UK site is complete to give us all the answers. Alternatively, we could just do away with separate competitions for men and women (as LindsayNB suggests) and compete as one species (although we may need to establish some criteria for that). Since Craig's post could be read to say that I prefer that we do away with separate competition let me put myself on the record yet again: my prefered solution is to separate competition by gender, dealing with cases where there is a conflict between gender based on chromosomes and surgically assigned gender according to the guidelines developed by the international group of experts on a case-by-case basis.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 12:08:33 GMT

With gender evolving into such a "blurry" issue (could be too much chlorine), pehaps we need more categories for competition. For example, what do we do with the transsexual who later becomes gender dysphoric again? Do we force him/her to compete with their new gender, or do we allow them to compete with the gender they were "assigned" at birth? I guess we can just wait until the About Gender UK site is complete to give us all the answers. Alternatively, we could just do away with separate competitions for men and women (as LindsayNB suggests) and compete as one species (although we may need to establish some criteria for that).

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

aquageek — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 11:19:10 GMT

I can glue wings on a pig. I also believed I clarified that.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

aquageek — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 10:00:32 GMT

Originally posted by LindsayNB where there is a conflict between gender based on chromosomes and surgically assigned gender according to the guidelines developed by the international group of experts on a case-by-case basis. There is no such thing as a conflict between gender based on chromosomes and cosmetic surgery. What makes you think that the removal and reconstruction of external parts is the sum total of a person's sex and all that contributes to that sex? You cannot be assigned sex by having a surgical procedure any more than you can glue wings on a pig, throw it off a barnyard roof and call it an eagle. Also, I have yet to ever see any panel of so called experts on any controversial issue ever reach concensus. This isn't some drag show. This is serious competition where the lack or addition of body parts may or may not make anydifference. You willing to water it down that far?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 09:45:08 GMT

Mark: Apparently the IOC has made a distinction between those who are "reassigned" before puberty and those who do so after. Interestingly, in congenital adrenal hyperplasia surgery is performed (in early childhood) not to reassign sex but rather to match external appearance with the chromosomal and gonadal sex of the child. I see this as a very different situation from that of the gender dysphoric individual. As for the About Gender site, my point was that this is not exactly an online medical textbook, and consequently the information presented should be taken with a grain of salt.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

aquageek — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 09:03:45 GMT

Some items to ponder: 1. The very first thing the doctor says at birth is either "boy" or "girl." There are no reference manuals, gender dysporia or sex continuum slide rules to consider. Pretty simple, boy or girl. 2. Do men who have the surgery go to OB/GYNs for their health care issues down there? If not, are they really women? 3. If a female swimmer who use to be a male swimmer, stops taking their shots or reduces their shots for a week or so prior to competition, does that constitute unfair advantage?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 07:40:39 GMT

Mark, not just up until birth, you can not change chromosomes through hormones, your individual body structure is determined by genetics, it can not be changed by cutting things off or adding things on. Each individuals' structure even amongst male/female is slightly different. But the norm for males is different from the norm for females. Unless I am wrong (won't be the first time), the example of AIS and CAH is not the norm but rather the exception. Exceptions exist for almost every rule and law in nature and physiology. Those should be looked at one by one.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 06:08:44 GMT

The physiology of a male vs. female is what gives males the advantage. Go do some research on why men swim or run faster than women. It is because of muscle/bone structure, all the hormones in the world do not change your initial structure, be it male or female.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 05:12:42 GMT

I used the word gender not sex, I even put it in italics. If you want to define sex as immutable all that does is change the question to whether sex, so defined, is the appropriate way to divide the competition. As indicated by my use of the word "appropriate" the answer to that question will come down to a value judgement.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

aquageek — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 02:45:37 GMT

mattson: Good catch, I had trouble explaining it. There are a lot of components of sex but you are still one sex, not subject to change. The baby example was my (poor) attempt to state it's easy early on to figure it out and it doesn't get any harder even if you do all sorts of strange things to your body. You are always fundamentally the sex you were born. Societal notions change with time on this but you are always a man or a woman. If a person wants to change gender, that's fine by me but I'm not convinced that person still doesn't have a competitive advantage. My point with chromosomes has always been you can't take all the man/woman out of a person to make them the other sex, not now anyway. I've always wondered about people who change sexes as saying they are a mistake, they shold be a man when they are a woman or vice versa. Who made a mistake?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

mattson — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 02:36:37 GMT

Originally posted by tjburk The physiology of a male vs. female is what gives males the advantage. Go do some research on why men swim or run faster than women. It is because of muscle/bone structure, all the hormones in the world do not change your initial structure, be it male or female. So Tracy, you are saying that gender should be based on development up until birth (or maybe up until puberty?), and not chromosomes? I gave the example of AIS and CAH, where physiological development does not match genetics. Originally posted by gull80 I guess we can just wait until the About Gender UK site is complete to give us all the answers. Craig, when I read this, it came across as a snide remark. Was that your intent? I listed that site because it had a wealth of facts and information that seemed appropriate for this discussion. I assumed that there were some people out there, besides myself, who never really considered the issue of gender (before this thread), and do not have an informed opinion. I do not see how providing more information can be considered "giv(ing) us all the answers". (If you decide they are wrong somewhere, you can prove it because they cited their references.) This is a medical condition quite distinct from "gender dysphoria" and should properly be considered separately (which the IOC seems to have done). I had missed this comment before. How does the IOC decide for medical condition?

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

mattson — Tue, 01 Jun 2004 01:44:57 GMT

Originally posted by aquageek 1. The very first thing the doctor says at birth is either "boy" or "girl." There are no reference manuals, gender dysporia or sex continuum slide rules to consider. Pretty simple, boy or girl. You have been pretty vocal about using chromosomes to determine sexual identity. Have you changed that? You appear to have switched, to what is written on the birth certificate by a doctor. (The examples given show that some doctors chose "boy", some chose "girl", for the same type of baby. That decision is often made based on development up until birth.) (I'm not claiming to have an answer. I'm just trying to argue that there are (rare) cases that are not so cut and dry.)

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

mattson — Mon, 31 May 2004 11:20:15 GMT

Did a little Google search, and found this: About Gender UK site. This would appear to be a goldmine of scientific, medical, and psychological information. (As opposed to the personal opinions that have been expressed here, myself included.) In their definition section, found this: Sexual identity. The objective categorisation of a person's physiological status as male or female. Sexual identity, especially, gives problems. Does it mean genetic status as XX or XY, or does it mean the sum of our development up until birth? Or is it simply the social label applied to us by our birth certificates? Under the section Genetic Errors of Metabolism, they discuss Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (XY who can develop as girls), and Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (which can lead to XX who have been raised as boys). These are "natural" conditions where the gender lines have been blurred.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

aquageek — Mon, 31 May 2004 06:53:12 GMT

Values have no place in this discussion. You have returned to the notion that the entirety of sex is determined by clothing, a document, hormones and shots. This is about competition, not values. You can't change your sex, it's that simple.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Sun, 30 May 2004 16:56:56 GMT

The point is that one's sex is determined by one's chromosomes. A pseudohermaphrodite has XX or XY chromosomes but does not exhibit the typical female or male characteristics due to a disorder of sexual development/differentiation. This is a medical condition quite distinct from "gender dysphoria" and should properly be considered separately (which the IOC seems to have done). To ignore the distinction and conclude that genetics are of secondary importance is inconsistent and misguided.

RE: Transsexuals in the Olympics

Former Member — Sun, 30 May 2004 16:34:22 GMT

Originally posted by gull80 In the first place, there are not a lot of these (where do you get your information?), Mea culpa for using a subjective term like "a lot", in any case the number is irrelevant to the logic of the argument. and second what we're really debating are the "gender dysphoric" individuals who decide as adults to undergo the procedure (rather than pseudohermaphrodites). As I've said before, the argument that whether a person has XX or XY chromosomes is the one and only factor that ought to be considered is saying that a person whose sex is reassigned at birth, and has not undergone any of the typical male developmental changes that lead to male advantages in post-adolescent swimmers but still has XY chomosomes, should none the less swim according to their chromosomes. This is logically inconsistant with the claim that females should not have to compete with males due to their disadvantage as the person whose sex was reassigned at birth has the same disadvantages. I therefore assert that chomosomes are not of themselves a sufficient basis for the decision. The IOC policy uses case-by-case evaluation to determine which sex a post-pubescent transexual competitor should compete in. Either one objects to the post-pubescent qualification or one believes that there should be an absolute rule rather than a case-by-case evaluation to determine whether an advantage actually exists. This argument says that actual advantage is irrelevant, undermining the rational for the original male/female distinction. As for minimzing the role of chromosomes ("Chromosomes play no role in the act of moving through water"), read On Human Nature by Edward O. Wlison, a professor at Harvard. Wilson deals with the effect of genes on human nature, what I asserted was that the genes themselves do not directly (i.e. physically) help you swim (microscopic strands of DNA internal to cells that they are) but indirectly through the changes they cause in the body. The outcrop of this logic is that it is better to base decisions directly on whether the advantage actually developed. One could argue that the advantages endowed by XY chromosomes extend into the mental realm, but I'm certainly not going to!