Transgender - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.

 

[Gralin]

Whilst this bolded is true, there is also a cohort for which this topic is very new and who lack knowledge. They'll often come up with similar arguments because those arguments are the obvious ones to ask about.

I was talking generally not specifically to this thread, about consistent patterns of behaviour across all sorts of issues and groups historically

some people will remain unconvinced no matter what evidence is presented

Yes, those who are simply opposed to transgender people in any form are going to use arguments that will appeal to those who aren't necessarily opposed to transgender people but who also aren't certain of transgender athletes participating as their chosen gender.

That bad people will piggyback on fairly obvious and normal questions doesn't make those questions inherently discriminatory or invalid, and trying to lump them all in together is likely to do more harm than good.

but this is the thing I don't agree with

the bad people will continue to repeat the talking points that we know are incorrect and they don't care that they are incorrect because they want those to be the talking points that are discussed all the time

saying that's a terf talking point and incorrect apparently is the same as calling someone a terf these days

which is great for the people that want to keep pushing those talking points to sway everyone

and the constant cover for, excusing of and defending people bringing up these points just helps that continue

if an ignorant person asks a racist question, their ignorance doesn't stop the question from being racist and pretending the question isn't racist doesn't address the actual problem

that's racist and you're racist are two different things

that's a terf talking point and you're a terf are two different things

If female athletes have concerns about competing with transgender women, because they've spent their entire sporting careers competing separately to biological men, then that's something that needs to be addressed with education and knowledge - of which we only have a small portion of that knowledge even available right now. It doesn't inherently make those athletes transphobic, or TERFs, or whatever other label gets thrown very quickly their way

we're not convincing those female athletes on here though, we're talking to people who are saying but these women disagree so your position in invalid

they want to keep putting it back to any disagreement with those female athletes positions as being discriminatory, mysognistic etc when this is two other groups talking about a situation

 

[faible]

I was talking generally not specifically to this thread, about consistent patterns of behaviour across all sorts of issues and groups historically

some people will remain unconvinced no matter what evidence is presented

but this is the thing I don't agree with

the bad people will continue to repeat the talking points that we know are incorrect and they don't care that they are incorrect because they want those to be the talking points that are discussed all the time

saying that's a terf talking point and incorrect apparently is the same as calling someone a terf these days

which is great for the people that want to keep pushing those talking points to sway everyone

and the constant cover for, excusing of and defending people bringing up these points just helps that continue

if an ignorant person asks a racist question, their ignorance doesn't stop the question from being racist and pretending the question isn't racist doesn't address the actual problem

that's racist and you're racist are two different things

that's a terf talking point and you're a terf are two different things



we're not convincing those female athletes on here though, we're talking to people who are saying but these women disagree so your position in invalid

they want to keep putting it back to any disagreement with those female athletes positions as being discriminatory, mysognistic etc when this is two other groups talking about a situation

I understand where you're coming from but I disagree here.

A question coming from a place of lack of knowledge and understanding is quite different to one coming from a deliberate place of discrimination.

Many female athletes have grown up their entire lives competing against female athletes specifically, because there's a significant gap between similarly talented and trained biological cisgender male athletes that they simply can't bridge (without PEDs).

Suddenly they're being asked to accommodate transgender athletes with no real concept of what that means or looks like for their sport.

It's entirely logical and reasonable that they'll have questions and concerns. Saying "oh that's a TERF talking point" doesn't magically address those questions or concerns. It's an attempt to shut down discussion.

Yes, some people will use those talking points for malicious purposes. That's how it works, those with ill intentions take things that many people who are not across a topic will naturally raise or be concerned about and use them for their own discriminatory purposes.

The way to combat this isn't to shout at people saying 'they're TERF talking points!' but to provide education to those who are asking questions - like kirsti does repeatedly.

Provide the information to athletes about why the regulations are appropriate - both for the transgender athletes who are being asked to abide by them, and the existing female athletes who are being asked to accommodate transgender athletes.

Yes, that means answering the same questions over, and over, and over. Yes, that means some groups will try to hijack those questions for nefarious purposes.

 

[the_interloper]

Hmm...

I'm not big into labels; you call someone a monster enough times, they internalise it. You call someone a TERF, over time they become more likely to be a TERF; J.K. Rowling is I think a pretty decent example of this. She flirted with the progressive side of Twitter, and didn't like it when they turned on her in the wake of her supporting TERFS (who were genuinely TERFS, before the term became the catch all for trans-exclusionary people). But the point of the label is that their behaving in transphobic ways. TERF stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist; it's not, as far as things go, a particularly bad label. It refers to behaviour; are you behaving in a trans-exclusionary way? Are you a feminist, or a radical feminist?

If you make certain arguments - I don't think trans women are women, keep them out of our safe spaces, etc - that originated out of the radical feminist right - misreadings of some Judith Butler would have some of her successors as trans-exclusionary on the basis of trans men not showing solidarity towards the repressed gender and abandoning their womanhood, and trans women as being potentially dangerous - then TERF is not at all an inaccurate term. You're making TERF arguments, you're a TERF. If you're behaving in a transphobic way, you're transphobic until you stop that behaviour.

I mean, people kind of take you as you appear on these forums. Are you asking them to stop?

On the subject of boxing/combat sports and trans inclusion, I'm more than willing to wait for the science there to verify what's safe for the athletes. The question I have for those athletes who seem - from the sources provided in this thread - to be dead set against it is, how much do they know about transition science and what information was placed before them before asking them the question in a public forum?

It's very, very easy to get a misinformed response which someone might regret after the moment but due to the backlash double down out of rejection (and we've come full circle back to labels) but the question is, who is or are the people who should decide what the rulesets for certain sports are?

There were athletes who refused to race or fight black people too.

That's a fair enough post. In terms of the bolded for this particular case it's governing purely Olympic boxing I believe, and I'm guessing the feeder tournaments that go into team selection.

In terms of pro boxing it's the athletic commission in the state/country that's allocxated to where the fights are taking place. Boxing has a generally accepted rule set but it can vary between commissions. Again this is why boxing will find it difficult (impossible) to effectively navigate this issue in a uniform way.

The story of the Coloured Heavyweight title is an interesting one, I feel the white champs of the time knew how good the black fighters were and seemed happy enough to avoid them and use a race excuse. The guy Sam Langford mentioned in that wiki link was one of the greats, I believe Jack Dempsey said point blank he'd never fight him. But I digress...

 

[Gralin]

I understand where you're coming from but I disagree here.

A question coming from a place of lack of knowledge and understanding is quite different to one coming from a deliberate place of discrimination.

I'm not disagreeing with this part

Many female athletes have grown up their entire lives competing against female athletes specifically, because there's a significant gap between similarly talented and trained biological cisgender male athletes that they simply can't bridge (without PEDs).

Historically I believe a lot of the segregation of sports was more political than performance based when you look at the history

now that doesn't mean that modern training methods and switching from amateur to professional athletes hasn't changed that

if we're talking the really elite end where being Michael Phelps matters for example

Suddenly they're being asked to accommodate transgender athletes with no real concept of what that means or looks like for their sport.

I wouldn't say suddenly, there have been trans athletes competing in various sports and at various levels for a long time

what we have now though is a hyper focus on this, and a lot of misinformation out there designed to make it seem a lot scarier than it is

It's entirely logical and reasonable that they'll have questions and concerns. Saying "oh that's a TERF talking point" doesn't magically address those questions or concerns. It's an attempt to shut down discussion.

Again, neither of us are elite athletes having to grapple with this, we should be able to talk about whether its a TERF talking point or not

And for those elite athletes that should be part of the education, breaking down why that talking point is wrong, etc

Yes, some people will use those talking points for malicious purposes. That's how it works, those with ill intentions take things that many people who are not across a topic will naturally raise or be concerned about and use them for their own discriminatory purposes.

Yes and it happens consistently and repeatedly, because letting that happen works, there is a reason that this tactic is used

The way to combat this isn't to shout at people saying 'they're TERF talking points!' but to provide education to those who are asking questions - like kirsti does repeatedly.

and here we come to where we start disagreeing

we have multiple posters in this and the previous thread, that pop in to drop some bullshit and then leave to let the rest of us argue about it, and instead we end up arguing about why we can't call that poster a bigot, when if you search their history, every single post is bigotry, they aren't looking to learn, they aren't adding to the discussion, they're just pushing the agenda

and then when someone else picks up the baton and repeats their talking point if we can't say hey this is a problem we're not addressing the issue

now this is a problem and here is why is more constructive sure

but the first type of poster doesn't care

the second type might or might not, but if you're too worried tip toeing around the idea that a particular opinion or view is based in bigotry you can never actually address bigotry

then all you are addressing is symptoms

it doesn't work

Provide the information to athletes about why the regulations are appropriate - both for the transgender athletes who are being asked to abide by them, and the existing female athletes who are being asked to accommodate transgender athletes.

again I'm talking about us on here talking about this, not what needs to be done for the athletes, I'm talking about the people hiding behind well this one athlete has an issue so clearly its a problem types

Yes, that means answering the same questions over, and over, and over. Yes, that means some groups will try to hijack those questions for nefarious purposes.

and again I disagree

we are on a discussion forum, we have pinned posts with links to information, the search function exists, if you spend all your time answering the same questions you never move forward in the discussion at all

and if its the same people asking the same questions, which lets be honest, it mostly is at this point, they just leave a gap between asking, or change the sport but ask the same question, you have to start looking at how to address that because we're still getting the exact same questions we were 3 years ago from the same people

 

[faible]

Historically I believe a lot of the segregation of sports was more political than performance based when you look at the history

now that doesn't mean that modern training methods and switching from amateur to professional athletes hasn't changed that

if we're talking the really elite end where being Michael Phelps matters for example

That's why I said similarly talented and trained athletes; there's plenty of female athletes across all sports that would absolutely school most men that don't have similar levels of talent and training behind them.

I wouldn't say suddenly, there have been trans athletes competing in various sports and at various levels for a long time

Sure, but I'd say many / most people haven't really come across it. It's a lot more public than it once was largely because (IMO) transgender people are more accepted than they once were - which is a pretty low bar given they're still really not accepted by large portions of society.

And for those elite athletes that should be part of the education, breaking down why that talking point is wrong, etc

Yes. Education.

what we have now though is a hyper focus on this, and a lot of misinformation out there designed to make it seem a lot scarier than it is

Education is the counter to misinformation.

neither of us are elite athletes having to grapple with this

Clearly you've never seen me with my shirt off!

we should be able to talk about whether its a TERF talking point or not

We can discuss that, but using it as a way to shut down discussion or education is silly. Someone with a genuine concern asking a genuine question being told 'that's a TERF talking point' achieves very little. They'll just shut down and think what they think and not actually learn anything.

Yes and it happens consistently and repeatedly, because letting that happen works, there is a reason that this tactic is used

Shouting people down doesn't work. We've seen it time and again.

we have multiple posters in this and the previous thread, that pop in to drop some bullshit and then leave to let the rest of us argue about it, and instead we end up arguing about why we can't call that poster a bigot, when if you search their history, every single post is bigotry, they aren't looking to learn, they aren't adding to the discussion, they're just pushing the agenda

Yes, there's bad actors who won't listen no matter how many times you provide the information and education, but people reading those posts might just read the information that they're given and learn from it.

but the first type of poster doesn't care

the second type might or might not, but if you're too worried tip toeing around the idea that a particular opinion or view is based in bigotry you can never actually address bigotry

You're never going to win the first over, it's all about the second type and shutting them down by saying 'oh those are TERF questions' isn't going to change a thing.

we are on a discussion forum, we have pinned posts with links to information, the search function exists, if you spend all your time answering the same questions you never move forward in the discussion at all

Instead you're spending your whole time calling people TERFs, telling them they're using TERF talking points, arguing about who is or isn't a TERF and not even leaving room for anyone to be educated at all.

and if its the same people asking the same questions, which lets be honest, it mostly is at this point, they just leave a gap between asking, or change the sport but ask the same question, you have to start looking at how to address that because we're still getting the exact same questions we were 3 years ago from the same people

Sure, and feel free to call those people out. But assuming every new poster who comes through with legitimate question is one and the same is pretty fraught. Let alone those people in the real world you might come across.

 

[Gralin]

That's why I said similarly talented and trained athletes; there's plenty of female athletes across all sports that would absolutely school most men that don't have similar levels of talent and training behind them.



Sure, but I'd say many / most people haven't really come across it. It's a lot more public than it once was largely because (IMO) transgender people are more accepted than they once were - which is a pretty low bar given they're still really not accepted by large portions of society.



Yes. Education.



Education is the counter to misinformation.

up to a point yes, but we've also seen that education doesn't fix everything

and education requires understanding things that mininfo doesn't

its not a simple fix, especially for lay people

this isn't me saying education isn't an important part of combating misinformation

it is, but we've seen the limitations of attempting to debunk misinfo in real time and consistently

you can't keep up, they'll just jump to the next lie and the next and eventually circle back to the first

you have to do more than just answer the questions every time they come up

Clearly you've never seen me with my shirt off!

did laugh

We can discuss that, but using it as a way to shut down discussion or education is silly. Someone with a genuine concern asking a genuine question being told 'that's a TERF talking point' achieves very little. They'll just shut down and think what they think and not actually learn anything.

ok but this is the thing we always come back to
is it a genuine question
is it a genuine concern

in the case of some posters we know its not right?
are we allowed to remind them that its a terf talking point or whatever kind of talking point it is?

Shouting people down doesn't work. We've seen it time and again.

neither does letting the actual bigots spew hate uncontested

I mean we are at the point in this thread where a poster said trans women are not women in answer to why they don't think trans women should ever play sport with cis women

and since then we've had people argue that "nobody is saying that" when clearly yes people are saying that

no, of course not everybody is saying that, but some people are definitely saying that

pretending they aren't is not a solution

Yes, there's bad actors who won't listen no matter how many times you provide the information and education, but people reading those posts might just read the information that they're given and learn from it.

I'm not arguing that it wont help
im saying its less effective in general than the targeted messaging from the bad faith actors because of how our brains work

You're never going to win the first over, it's all about the second type and shutting them down by saying 'oh those are TERF questions' isn't going to change a thing.



Instead you're spending your whole time calling people TERFs, telling them they're using TERF talking points, arguing about who is or isn't a TERF and not even leaving room for anyone to be educated at all.

no we're spending the whole time arguing that being critical in any way is calling people TERFS and shutting down conversation

Sure, and feel free to call those people out. But assuming every new poster who comes through with legitimate question is one and the same is pretty fraught. Let alone those people in the real world you might come across.

we do, and then we end up in this cycle

 

[Gralin]

Anyway owen87 I don't want to be arguing with you about, your posting in here is good I don't think you're posting in bad faith or anything like that

I don't disagree that education is good

I don't disagree that compassion is good

I do have an issue not related to just this topic and its a very western progressive issue

which is the way certain words trigger a bigger response than the actions they describe

people will read past absolute bullshit in here to argue semantics with the people that respond to that bullshit and its very tiring

 

[faible]

Anyway owen87 I don't want to be arguing with you about, your posting in here is good I don't think you're posting in bad faith or anything like that

I don't disagree that education is good

I don't disagree that compassion is good

I do have an issue not related to just this topic and its a very western progressive issue

which is the way certain words trigger a bigger response than the actions they describe

people will read past absolute bullshit in here to argue semantics with the people that respond to that bullshit and its very tiring

To be fair I've also responded to those other posts that have clearly incorrect and inaccurate information as well as engaging in my favourite pastime of arguing semantics with you!

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Yes. But they don't matter more than the facts.

In a totally commercial system if they draw the majority of the money, and they are not compelled to compete against people they don't want to compete against, then ... whatever.

If they're ignoring the science then they're a false authority. I suppose if they bring in the money then it's based on the personal prejudice of the bigger competitors and tough luck.

They do matter a lot if the best of them choose to walk away from the sport.

 

[Chief]

Females boxers concerned for their safety in the context of competing against males

Perhaps update your knowledge to this decade. If not, century.

 

[kirsti]

Muscle Mass and Strength Changes with Gender Affirming Hormone Therapy

In the general population, on average, men have significantly higher skeletal muscle mass than women both in absolute terms and relative to body mass with approximately 50% of the variance explained by weight and height [Janssen et al., 2000]. Females also have a lower proportion of fast-twitch (type II) muscle fibres [Landen et al., 2021]. The impact of gender affirming hormone therapy on muscle mass of trans people is less definitive and inferences depend upon whether the comparison control group is cisgender men or cisgender women.

In terms of muscle mass, uncontrolled longitudinal studies in trans people commencing gender-affirming hormone therapy represent the best level of evidence, albeit moderate in quality [Harper et al., 2021]. In trans men, 5 longitudinal studies examining lean body mass (measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry) have been all consistent, demonstrating approximately a 10% increase over the first 12 months [Pelusi et al., 2014, Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Auer et al., 2018, Klaver et al., 2018, Tack et al., 2018]. Conversely, in trans women, longitudinal cohort studies have shown that reductions in lean body mass are modest, in the range of approximately 5% in the first 12 months [Mueller et al., 2011, Wierckx et al., 2014, Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Gava et al., 2016, Auer et al., 2018, Klaver et al., 2018, Yun et al., 2021]. The largest longitudinal study in trans women involved 179 trans women and 162 trans men[Klaver et al., 2018]. Trans women had a mean increase of body fat by 28% and reduction in lean mass of 3% over the first 12 months whereas trans men had a 10% decrease in body fat and 10% increase in lean body mass[Klaver et al., 2018].
The longest longitudinal study in trans people followed 19 trans women and 17 trans men for 3 years (no cisgender control group)[Gooren et al., 2004]. Muscle area (a 2D slice of the thigh measured by an MRI scan) decreased in trans women by -9% at 1 year and by -12% at 3 years, and muscle area increased in trans men by 19% but had plateaued by 1 year[Gooren et al., 2004]. Mean muscle area in trans women had decreased significantly but remained significantly greater than in trans men before testosterone treatment , though with an greater overlap that was almost complete when androgen-deprived trans women were again compared to nontreated trans men. The authors noted that trans women were on average 10.7cm taller than trans men and when muscle area was compared to pre-treatment trans men in a linear regression model, height was a strong predictor of muscle area (beta 2.29; 95% CI 1.06 – 3.53; P=0.001). After correction for the effect of gender, the relation between height and muscle area remained significant (beta 1.63; 95% CI0.12 – 3.14;P=0.036). Given the overlap the authors Gooren and Bunck concluded that “therefore, depending on the levels of arbitrariness one wants to accept it is justifiable that trans women compete with other women” [Gooren et al., 2004].

Whilst longitudinal studies have followed trans women for relatively short durations, there have been two cross-sectional studies in non-athletic trans women that have aimed to capture longer periods of hormone therapies. After a mean duration of 8 years of feminising hormone therapy, 23 trans women were found to have 32% higher fat mass, 17% lower lean mass, 25% lower grip strength, 33% lower biceps peak torque and 25% lower quadriceps peak torque relative to cisgender men [Lapauw et al., 2008]. There was no cisgender female control group. Similarly, in a study designed to match participants for the same birth assigned sex, after a mean duration of 39 months, 41 trans women had a statistically significant 6.9 kg lower total lean mass and 9.8kg higher fat mass relative to cisgender men[Bretherton et al., 2021]. In 43 trans men who had been on testosterone for a median of 44 months, lean mass was 7.8kg higher than cisgender women but fat mass was not statistically significantly different[Bretherton et al., 2021]. Whilst the raw total lean mass in trans women was higher than the cisgender women group, trans women were on average taller than cis women, and as such, the percentage fat mass and lean mass could be considered a more appropriate comparison of body composition. Overall body composition in trans women (fat mass 32.3%, lean mass 65.0%) was no different to cisgender women (fat mass 32.8%, lean mass 64.5%, p=0.763). Trans men had fat mass 29% with lean mass 68.3% which was statistically significantly different to cisgender men (fat mass 19.7%, lean mass 77%, pheight2 and percentage fat mass was not statistically different between 15 trans women and 13 cisgender women, but statistically significantly different to cisgender men[Alvares et al., 2022].

Notably, whilst muscle mass and area are positively correlated with muscle strength, population based studies suggest that the strength of the linear relationship once adjusted for age and gender between skeletal muscle mass and muscle strength is low, with correlation coefficient approximately 0.4[Chen et al., 2013, Hayashida et al., 2014].

Studies assessing muscle strength have been few, with 5 uncontrolled longitudinal studies in trans women [Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Auer et al., 2018, Tack et al., 2018, Scharff et al., 2019, Wiik et al., 2020] and two cross-sectional studies comparing trans women to cisgender men [Lapauw et al., 2008, Van Caenegem et al., 2015]. All assessed hand grip strength given the practicality of hand-grip dynamometry, except for two small studies which assessed knee extension or flexion. Hand grip changes in trans women have shown variable results with some studies demonstrating significant reductions of -4 to -7% over 12 months[Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Scharff et al., 2019] and smaller studies showing no significant change[Aueret al., 2018, Tack et al., 2018].

In trans men only two longitudinal studies have been performed, both examining hand grip strength from the European Network for the Investigation of Gender Incongruence (ENIGI) study. A prospective controlled analysis found that 23 trans men had a mean 18% increase in grip strength over 12 months relative to 23 cisgender women[Van Caenegem et al., 2015]. A larger longitudinal analysis of 278 trans men showed an increase in grip strength of +6.1kg (18%) over 12 months[Scharff et al., 2019]. Interestingly, in trans men, the increase in grip strength was associated with an increase in lean body mass (per kg increase in grip strength: +0.010 kg, 95% CI +0.003; +0.017), while this was not found in trans women (per kg increase in grip strength: +0.004 kg, 95% CI -0.000; +0.009). A cross-sectional study comparing hand grip strength in 19 trans men (mean 29kg) with 19 cisgender men (mean 40kg) showed that strength was considerably lower in the trans men[Andrade et al., 2022].

Whilst hand grip strength has correlated with biomarkers of health in older adults, we need to be cautious in using grip strength alone as an indicator of overall strength or of athletic performance. There is evidence that hand grip strength is a poor correlate of knee flexion or extension strength[Felicio et al., 2014] and is far more reliable of physical function if used together with other markers such as lower limb strength[Fried et al., 2001, Sanderson et al., 2016]. Hand grip strength is more relevant for some physical performance activities such as rotational movements that transfer force and torque to the hand (i.e. ball throwing), but less relevant for other sports disciplines[Cronin et al., 2017]. Hand grip strength shows poor correlation to sports which require technical ability, physical capacity, aerobic fitness or tactical ability (i.e. Tennis stroke placement or cricket fielding performance)[Cronin et al., 2017]. Research also suggests that once a threshold of hand grip strength is attained, such as within a group of elite athletes, there is no further competitive advantage in sports where timing (i.e. bat or racquet sports) or skilled manoeuvres (i.e. martial arts) are required [Tan et al., 2001, Cronin et al., 2017].

In terms of lower-body strength, a cross-sectional analysis of 23 trans women who had been on feminising hormone therapy for a mean of 8 years, showed that knee extension was -25% statistically significantly lower than cisgender men. In contrast, a small longitudinal cohort study of 11 trans women and 12 trans men at the over the first 12 months of gender affirming hormone therapy found that trans men had an increase in knee extension and knee flexion isometric torque, but there was not statistically significant change in trans women over the first 12 months[Wiik et al., 2020]. The data was compared to a retrospective group of 17 cis men and 14 cis women and the height-adjusted values for knee strength remained higher in trans women compared to cis women[Wiik et al., 2020]. Height-adjusted knee strength in trans men appeared to be inbetween that of cisgender women and cisgender men. Whilst the study was small and the comparison group were not concurrently assessed, the findings suggest that 12 months of feminising hormone therapy may not be sufficient to significantly reduce knee strength in trans women to the level of cisgender women, or significantly increase knee strength in trans men to the level of cisgender men.

It should also be noted that whilst the findings of existing studies provide some indication of strength changes, it is challenging to extrapolate the findings to sporting performance


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[kirsti]

Health and safety is a fair concern in 2024,
especially when it comes to head trauma.
Not racing BMXs here

Conducted well, health and safety consultation provides a framework through which both gender-diverse and cisgender athletes can give voice to their concerns in a psychologically safe environ- ment, without fear of negative consequences to self-image, status or career. It also enables the discussion to be transitioned away from issues specific to transgender and intersex athletes, to a broader discussion about athlete health and safety and the risks associated with outliers — be they transgender, cisgender or intersex. This, in turn, provides an opportunity to deal with the participation of transgender and intersex athletes in a non-discriminatory manner.


WHS law presents sport governing bodies, clubs and athletes — transgender, cisgender and intersex — with a valuable avenue to pivot the discussion away from the moralism of a debate grounded in competing rights to a focus on risks and solutions grounded in a debate about safety. This, can only be a good thing.

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

If you are coming here thinking that we the bf community are going to solve this via our collective hive mind I would call that optimistic..

no I am not thinking we the bigfooty hive mind are going to solve anything...

Speaking for myself I think it's a topic of interest in and of itself. Humanity's worthy struggle for universal civil rights, even for those massively under-represented in the general population, is a topic I've always found fascinating. Those with existing rights and privilege getting down in the trenches to ensure that those without might soon have them too.

The dark side too - the politics of exclusion. Hate of the 'other'. Violations of 'God's Intelligent Design' as some of the religionists might put it.

Conversations like these help shape opinion and awareness. Who might be lurking and reading here? Who might learn something?

Who knows?

 

[faible]

Muscle Mass and Strength Changes with Gender Affirming Hormone Therapy

In the general population, on average, men have significantly higher skeletal muscle mass than women both in absolute terms and relative to body mass with approximately 50% of the variance explained by weight and height [Janssen et al., 2000]. Females also have a lower proportion of fast-twitch (type II) muscle fibres [Landen et al., 2021]. The impact of gender affirming hormone therapy on muscle mass of trans people is less definitive and inferences depend upon whether the comparison control group is cisgender men or cisgender women.

In terms of muscle mass, uncontrolled longitudinal studies in trans people commencing gender-affirming hormone therapy represent the best level of evidence, albeit moderate in quality [Harper et al., 2021]. In trans men, 5 longitudinal studies examining lean body mass (measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry) have been all consistent, demonstrating approximately a 10% increase over the first 12 months [Pelusi et al., 2014, Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Auer et al., 2018, Klaver et al., 2018, Tack et al., 2018]. Conversely, in trans women, longitudinal cohort studies have shown that reductions in lean body mass are modest, in the range of approximately 5% in the first 12 months [Mueller et al., 2011, Wierckx et al., 2014, Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Gava et al., 2016, Auer et al., 2018, Klaver et al., 2018, Yun et al., 2021]. The largest longitudinal study in trans women involved 179 trans women and 162 trans men[Klaver et al., 2018]. Trans women had a mean increase of body fat by 28% and reduction in lean mass of 3% over the first 12 months whereas trans men had a 10% decrease in body fat and 10% increase in lean body mass[Klaver et al., 2018].
The longest longitudinal study in trans people followed 19 trans women and 17 trans men for 3 years (no cisgender control group)[Gooren et al., 2004]. Muscle area (a 2D slice of the thigh measured by an MRI scan) decreased in trans women by -9% at 1 year and by -12% at 3 years, and muscle area increased in trans men by 19% but had plateaued by 1 year[Gooren et al., 2004]. Mean muscle area in trans women had decreased significantly but remained significantly greater than in trans men before testosterone treatment , though with an greater overlap that was almost complete when androgen-deprived trans women were again compared to nontreated trans men. The authors noted that trans women were on average 10.7cm taller than trans men and when muscle area was compared to pre-treatment trans men in a linear regression model, height was a strong predictor of muscle area (beta 2.29; 95% CI 1.06 – 3.53; P=0.001). After correction for the effect of gender, the relation between height and muscle area remained significant (beta 1.63; 95% CI0.12 – 3.14;P=0.036). Given the overlap the authors Gooren and Bunck concluded that “therefore, depending on the levels of arbitrariness one wants to accept it is justifiable that trans women compete with other women” [Gooren et al., 2004].

Whilst longitudinal studies have followed trans women for relatively short durations, there have been two cross-sectional studies in non-athletic trans women that have aimed to capture longer periods of hormone therapies. After a mean duration of 8 years of feminising hormone therapy, 23 trans women were found to have 32% higher fat mass, 17% lower lean mass, 25% lower grip strength, 33% lower biceps peak torque and 25% lower quadriceps peak torque relative to cisgender men [Lapauw et al., 2008]. There was no cisgender female control group. Similarly, in a study designed to match participants for the same birth assigned sex, after a mean duration of 39 months, 41 trans women had a statistically significant 6.9 kg lower total lean mass and 9.8kg higher fat mass relative to cisgender men[Bretherton et al., 2021]. In 43 trans men who had been on testosterone for a median of 44 months, lean mass was 7.8kg higher than cisgender women but fat mass was not statistically significantly different[Bretherton et al., 2021]. Whilst the raw total lean mass in trans women was higher than the cisgender women group, trans women were on average taller than cis women, and as such, the percentage fat mass and lean mass could be considered a more appropriate comparison of body composition. Overall body composition in trans women (fat mass 32.3%, lean mass 65.0%) was no different to cisgender women (fat mass 32.8%, lean mass 64.5%, p=0.763). Trans men had fat mass 29% with lean mass 68.3% which was statistically significantly different to cisgender men (fat mass 19.7%, lean mass 77%, pheight2 and percentage fat mass was not statistically different between 15 trans women and 13 cisgender women, but statistically significantly different to cisgender men[Alvares et al., 2022].

Notably, whilst muscle mass and area are positively correlated with muscle strength, population based studies suggest that the strength of the linear relationship once adjusted for age and gender between skeletal muscle mass and muscle strength is low, with correlation coefficient approximately 0.4[Chen et al., 2013, Hayashida et al., 2014].

Studies assessing muscle strength have been few, with 5 uncontrolled longitudinal studies in trans women [Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Auer et al., 2018, Tack et al., 2018, Scharff et al., 2019, Wiik et al., 2020] and two cross-sectional studies comparing trans women to cisgender men [Lapauw et al., 2008, Van Caenegem et al., 2015]. All assessed hand grip strength given the practicality of hand-grip dynamometry, except for two small studies which assessed knee extension or flexion. Hand grip changes in trans women have shown variable results with some studies demonstrating significant reductions of -4 to -7% over 12 months[Van Caenegem et al., 2015, Scharff et al., 2019] and smaller studies showing no significant change[Aueret al., 2018, Tack et al., 2018].

In trans men only two longitudinal studies have been performed, both examining hand grip strength from the European Network for the Investigation of Gender Incongruence (ENIGI) study. A prospective controlled analysis found that 23 trans men had a mean 18% increase in grip strength over 12 months relative to 23 cisgender women[Van Caenegem et al., 2015]. A larger longitudinal analysis of 278 trans men showed an increase in grip strength of +6.1kg (18%) over 12 months[Scharff et al., 2019]. Interestingly, in trans men, the increase in grip strength was associated with an increase in lean body mass (per kg increase in grip strength: +0.010 kg, 95% CI +0.003; +0.017), while this was not found in trans women (per kg increase in grip strength: +0.004 kg, 95% CI -0.000; +0.009). A cross-sectional study comparing hand grip strength in 19 trans men (mean 29kg) with 19 cisgender men (mean 40kg) showed that strength was considerably lower in the trans men[Andrade et al., 2022].

Whilst hand grip strength has correlated with biomarkers of health in older adults, we need to be cautious in using grip strength alone as an indicator of overall strength or of athletic performance. There is evidence that hand grip strength is a poor correlate of knee flexion or extension strength[Felicio et al., 2014] and is far more reliable of physical function if used together with other markers such as lower limb strength[Fried et al., 2001, Sanderson et al., 2016]. Hand grip strength is more relevant for some physical performance activities such as rotational movements that transfer force and torque to the hand (i.e. ball throwing), but less relevant for other sports disciplines[Cronin et al., 2017]. Hand grip strength shows poor correlation to sports which require technical ability, physical capacity, aerobic fitness or tactical ability (i.e. Tennis stroke placement or cricket fielding performance)[Cronin et al., 2017]. Research also suggests that once a threshold of hand grip strength is attained, such as within a group of elite athletes, there is no further competitive advantage in sports where timing (i.e. bat or racquet sports) or skilled manoeuvres (i.e. martial arts) are required [Tan et al., 2001, Cronin et al., 2017].

In terms of lower-body strength, a cross-sectional analysis of 23 trans women who had been on feminising hormone therapy for a mean of 8 years, showed that knee extension was -25% statistically significantly lower than cisgender men. In contrast, a small longitudinal cohort study of 11 trans women and 12 trans men at the over the first 12 months of gender affirming hormone therapy found that trans men had an increase in knee extension and knee flexion isometric torque, but there was not statistically significant change in trans women over the first 12 months[Wiik et al., 2020]. The data was compared to a retrospective group of 17 cis men and 14 cis women and the height-adjusted values for knee strength remained higher in trans women compared to cis women[Wiik et al., 2020]. Height-adjusted knee strength in trans men appeared to be inbetween that of cisgender women and cisgender men. Whilst the study was small and the comparison group were not concurrently assessed, the findings suggest that 12 months of feminising hormone therapy may not be sufficient to significantly reduce knee strength in trans women to the level of cisgender women, or significantly increase knee strength in trans men to the level of cisgender men.

It should also be noted that whilst the findings of existing studies provide some indication of strength changes, it is challenging to extrapolate the findings to sporting performance


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Have there been studies done on transitioning athletes where you've either got a transgender female who is trying to maintain their existing strength base, or a transgender male who already had a good strength base to begin with?

It would be interesting to see how those increase / decrease figures vary based on the level of background an athlete has and tries to maintain.

 

[faible]

therefore, depending on the levels of arbitrariness one wants to accept

Also this is potentially one of the most accurate findings of any scientific study ever.

 

[Chief]

pivot the discussion away from the moralism of a debate grounded in competing rights to a focus on risks and solutions grounded in a debate about safety. This, can only be a good thing.

A key point for discussion like this amongst laypeople.

The solution to concerns seems to always end up on the side of exclusion, rather than information gathering and problem solving to enable inclusion.

In relation to boxing, the opinions of boxers and fans seems to be around about where the discussion stops and defensive lines are drawn.

The point about hormone therapy might be valid, but it probably has a solution that leads to inclusion.

Tweets from boxers aren't answers to even remotely complex problems.



As an aside, add to this the complete lack of honesty from some political operatives aiming to stir up concern and outrage to make bank:

Launceston Newspaper Gets Caught Publishing Letter About Non-Existent Transgender Incident

Having grown up in Launny, I've got extremely personal reasons for thinking The Examiner is a low rent rag. It would appear that things haven't improved, given this stuff up. Who the editor is is illuminating though. "Mr Westfield was appointed editor of the Examiner — Tasmania's second-largest...

www.bigfooty.com

And of course culture wars are usually designed to be a distraction from class issues, and many people who are generally progressive lefties through to hard communists seem to fall for it.



(He says, posting a video from a "lefty independent" channel published by a media group worth tens of millions of dollars.


)

 

[the_interloper]

Have there been studies done on transitioning athletes where you've either got a transgender female who is trying to maintain their existing strength base, or a transgender male who already had a good strength base to begin with?

It would be interesting to see how those increase / decrease figures vary based on the level of background an athlete has and tries to maintain.

Yeah agreed, I did raise the potential of a male boxer who had been using PEDs previously transitioning. Might be hard to do a study on this given the illegal status of PEDs in boxing, it does seem to be common though.

 

[faible]

Yeah agreed, I did raise the potential of a male boxer who had been using PEDs previously transitioning. Might be hard to do a study on this given the illegal status of PEDs in boxing, it does seem to be common though.

From memory they looked at testosterone levels in elite sprinters / throwers and found curiously low numbers as compared to middle / long distance runners when they were coming up with hormone level requirements for athletes like Semenya. Very suspicious findings and meant that the hormone level analysis would possibly be inaccurate.

 

[the_interloper]

From memory they looked at testosterone levels in elite sprinters / throwers and found curiously low numbers as compared to middle / long distance runners when they were coming up with hormone level requirements for athletes like Semenya. Very suspicious findings and meant that the hormone level analysis would possibly be inaccurate.

Previous steroid use can result in this as I understand it, one potential example below

"Literally like a female" - Derek of MPMD suggests on Joe Rogan's podcast that Jon Jones had unnaturally low testosterone levels for Daniel Cormier fight

Jon Jones has numerous accolades to his name but his legacy has sustained some damage due to his drug testing nightmares over the years.

www.sportskeeda.com

 

[kirsti]

The theory of ‘muscle memory’ has been increasingly discussed in relation to trans women athletes. Muscle memory theorizes that muscle retains the capacity to perform tasks it has previously undergone, with suggestions that trans women, therefore, may retain muscle strength advantages over cis women after transition due to cellular or epigenetic marks retained from prior life exposures to testosterone and myonuclei retention. However, it is important to highlight that this area has not been explored in those undergoing GAHT. Myonuclei retention plays a potential role in muscle memory, with prior research showing myonuclei numbers are associated with training and testosterone use. In mice, a 2010 study in mice found muscle fibre myonuclei increased after exercise, with the acquired myonuclei retained during the detraining phase. Similar findings were found in female mice treated with testosterone propionate, with a 66% increase in myonuclei content observed following 14 days and a 10% elevation in myonuclei remaining across the mouse lifespan.

In humans, a 1999 study compared the muscle physiology of powerlifters who were users (n = 9) and non-users of high-dose steroids (n = 10) and found that the number of myonuclei and the proportion of myonuclei were significantly higher in the steroid users. However, the concept of muscle memory has mainly been based on animal models, with a recent comprehensive review and systematic review and meta-analysis finding no clear evidence for the existence of muscle memory by myonuclei retention in both animal and human studies. In particular, it appears that ‘muscle memory’ is a phenomenon that is not observed in many studies or not retained long term, with many studies, and it could be debated that any memory marks altered during previous training would be easily modified or overridden by changes in sex hormone concentrations and the subsequent systematic effects of GAHT. Further research exploring physiological and epigenetic changes in trans men and women using GAHT could provide great molecular insights into the performance differences between cis and trans populations and is an area of future need.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/20420188231178373?fbclid=IwAR2lL08IkBC97kD33awi_QHG5ocNMKcJsNIG2UYEJP3A58louY-UMaBL4X0_aem_AbDjMoEUDRMInJuuz3KRDytn-fj_7sXZ1r_iqRgOc3-bUmaaQx19Pz_VhpLYRPsCPCk

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

The theory of ‘muscle memory’ has been increasingly discussed in relation to trans women athletes. Muscle memory theorizes that muscle retains the capacity to perform tasks it has previously undergone, with suggestions that trans women, therefore, may retain muscle strength advantages over cis women after transition due to cellular or epigenetic marks retained from prior life exposures to testosterone and myonuclei retention.

Thing is though, wouldn't 'muscle memory' draw on reserves that just won't be there anymore post-transition? It might even put the system under more strain, looking for and not finding the energy reserves that once existed.

Of course I'm no sports scientist.

 

[Chief]

Comedy Interlude (only the first couple of minutes - the_interloper you don't have to watch all of it)



Impressionable people watch this doofus.

 

[the_interloper]

Comedy Interlude (only the first couple of minutes - the_interloper you don't have to watch all of it)



Impressionable people watch this doofus.

Lasted 3 mins, maybe the funny bits hadn't been on yet!

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Lasted 3 mins, maybe the funny bits hadn't been on yet!

Yeah, I'm still waiting too... nah, I give up!