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."
Lindsay has asked for a definition of fairness that makes a race between any two people with different chromosomes unfair but a race between two people with the same chromosomes but different physiques fair.
Okay, according to Webster’s dictionary, A definition of fairness is “conforming with established standards or rules”.
USMS rules specifically allow for Men’s and Women’s competition. Therefore, by definition and by rule, competition amongst men is fair and competition amongst women is fair. USMS rules have no specific provisions for transsexuals, therefore any organizational view of fairness would either need to come down as a new rule or policy. This could lead people to conclude that the specific inclusion of men and women and the exclusion of transsexuals, within USMS code would constitute a difference.
Obviously Lindsay and everyone else is entitled to draw their own conclusion on recognizing fairness as an issue or non-issue, however USMS rules of competition are “designed to provide fair and equitable conditions of competition and promote uniformity in the sport so that no swimmer shall obtain unfair advantage over another”. So for me fairness and sporting behavior are issues of great importance in Masters swimming competition.
Originally posted by swimr4life
I think this argument for "fairness" is sooo out there, soon some will suggest that we all will have to weigh the same thing in competition.... the lighter swimmers will have to drag weights to "equal" the playing field!
Interesting idea. It would be like horse racing--Seabiscuit had to carry a lot of weight at the end of his career (not because he was lighter but because he was so fast). I don't know if he ever considered "sex reassignment" surgery; you'd have to get that from the horse's mouth.
Originally posted by LindsayNB
No Tom, by definition having separate competitions for men and women is sexist (discriminatory on the basis of sex). But it is socially justifiable sexism.
You say that as if you're implying that here is something bad about that. At least that is the way it comes across.
Originally posted by LindsayNB
Strangely this seems to be a common reaction, "No way would I do that" but "some people" would. The reality of the situation is that the motivations that people have for wanting an Olympic medal are defeated by undergoing a sex change to get one.
How is that?
There is a lot more benefit to winning the gold'carries, than an ego trip.
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
Heck, if I am to embrace your thoughts on what is a fair competition, Mr. Moose and I are going to the Olympic Trials…..heck, sign us up!
Mr. Moose would win, hands down!
Originally posted by old dog
Everything is relative.
Except YOUR relatives....They are absolute. ;)
{unless maybe your father becomes a transexual??? :confused: }
How about Inlaws? Are they relatives, and how relevant are they?
And they're definately not absolute ;)
Originally posted by Conniekat8
How about Inlaws? Are they relatives, and how relevant are they?
And they're definately not absolute ;)
You'd have to meet my ex-mother-in-law to understand...:D :mad:
Lindsay...the XX or XY chromosomes determine how your body composition will turn out. Men's major leg muscles turn out to me more vertical, hence the ability to piston the legs straighter and faster, because a woman's leg muscles are actually more angled to the side. That is why you will probably never see a woman swim or run faster then a man. Men's records will always be faster then women's. That is one of the reasons why it is not fair to combine women and men.
QUOTE: Originally posted by LindsayNB
"As I have said in my earlier posts I think that the justification for separating men's and women's competitions is based on encouraging women to participate in sport, not on fairness according to any definition of fairness that I can think of."
I think that is a sexist statement. Women do not need encouragement to compete in sports. They simply need a level playing field, and in MOST cases, competition against men is not a level playing field. Men, by in large, are stronger, and that is a FACT. NEXT….
