Transgender

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aug 12, 2012
21,058
40,105
sv_cheats 1
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers
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.
 
Last edited:
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
And again, you have no right to dictate that.

I have the same right to dictate it as you to do dictate against it (as you have been).

Give me an example in amateur womens AFL where a trans-female athlete has somehow dominated and been the difference in her side winning or losing.

Presuming you can, then tell me how many times it's happened.

As I posted above Mouncey was playing in an amateur competition, and there was a massive song and dance about her. She wasnt even that ******* good.

I'm just struggling seeing a rule barring trans-women from amateur sports competitions (or forcing them to line up with the men) in order to 'preserve amateur women's competitions fairness' being in any way justified or in line with what sport (a ******* leisure activity for *s sake) is supposed to be about.

Also, while you're at it, should trans-women be forced to go into male prisons? What about forcing them into male bathrooms?
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
I have the same right to dictate it as you to do dictate against it (as you have been).
Fair point, my post two below better outlines what I was trying to say. The word 'you' in that context didn't mean you specifically. Sorry if it came off a bit personal.
Give me an example in amateur womens AFL where a trans-female athlete has somehow dominated and been the difference in her side winning or losing.

Presuming you can, then tell me how many times it's happened.

As I posted above Mouncey was playing in an amateur competition, and there was a massive song and dance about her. She wasnt even that ******* good.

I'm just struggling seeing a rule barring trans-women from amateur sports competitions (or forcing them to line up with the men) in order to 'preserve amateur women's competitions fairness' being in any way justified or in line with what sport (a ******* leisure activity for *s sake) is supposed to be about.
I think I said in my initial post (way back when) that the jury is still out on whether it actually is unfair. This obviously needs more data. I'm working on the assumption that it's perceived by women as being unfair (this is purely anecdotal evidence from the women I've spoken to).

In that context, you might see sport as a leisure activity to be played socially, but i assure you that people that play amateur sport don't see it that way. There is a tonne of passion and people play to win, and take it incredibly personally if they don't win or feel that they didn't get a fair rub. Why do you think there are paid refs? No one has the right to tell them that the way they see sport is wrong.
Also, while you're at it, should trans-women be forced to go into male prisons? What about forcing them into male bathrooms?
I honestly don't know enough about it (ive seen people arguing back and forth but havent really read those posts tbh), but my gut feel/initial thoughts on the issue has me answering no to both those questions, as I don't think it's fair or reasonable. Out of curiosity why do you ask? I don't see the relevance?
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
I'm working on the assumption that it's perceived by women as being unfair (this is purely anecdotal evidence from the women I've spoken to).
Some women probably do think it is unfair.

Some women would probably vote for Hitler or support Gay Conversion Therapy or whatever.

Just because someone thinks s**t like that, doesnt mean we should give it any legs.
In that context, you might see sport as a leisure activity to be played socially, but i assure you that people that play amateur sport don't see it that way.

And those people have to change their opinions, because the alternative position is to exclude trans-women (an already marginalized and victimized group) from participation in amateur and social sporting events.

They're prioritizing their own desires to 'win' over inclusiveness, and the feelings (and victimization, ostracizm, and isolation) of trans-female athletes.

Personally, I'm not going to gripe or bitch to the coach or whatever if some obese spud is playing in my local Footy team, racking up 2 touches a game (both of them turnovers), especially if that 150 kilo spud belongs to not only a marginalized group in society, but also one with no other realistic avenues to play.

In fact, I'm going to go out of my way to have a beer with him after the game, and ensure he's included.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
That's basically what it boils down to.

1) Exclude trans women from amateur sporting events, in favor of the opinions of the few who think it's unfair, or
2) Include trans women in amateur sporting events and educate the few that think it's unfair as to why there are bigger things at stake here than simply winning a game that ultimately means nothing.

Choose a side.
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
Some women probably do think it is unfair.

Some women would probably vote for Hitler or support Gay Conversion Therapy or whatever.

Just because someone thinks s**t like that, doesnt mean we should give it any legs.
Pretty silly analogy. As i said above, the jury is still out on whether there's an inherent advantage, and I don't think it's fair to call either side an unreasonable position.
And those people have to change their opinions, because the alternative position is to exclude trans-women (an already marginalized and victimized group) from participation in amateur and social sporting events.
You're doing it again. Social sport =/= amateur. You need to stop grouping the two. I haven't once said trans people should be barred from social sport, because it's primary aim is social. That isn't the same for amateurs.
They're prioritizing their own desires to 'win' over inclusiveness, and the feelings (and victimization, ostracizm, and isolation) of trans-female athletes.
Yes, they're prioritising their own desires in a voluntary league they signed up to with like minded individuals. There's an understanding of what amateur sport is about, which is very different from social sport.
Personally, I'm not going to gripe or bitch to the coach or whatever if some obese spud is playing in my local Footy team, racking up 2 touches a game (both of them turnovers), especially if that 150 kilo spud belongs to not only a marginalized group in society, but also one with no other realistic avenues to play.

In fact, I'm going to go out of my way to have a beer with him after the game, and ensure he's included.
Good for you, that's your prerogative. Not everyone has to share your views and play with people that hamstring their team from winning. It's their choice.
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
That's basically what it boils down to.

1) Exclude trans women from amateur sporting events, in favor of the opinions of the few who think it's unfair, or
2) Include trans women in amateur sporting events and educate the few that think it's unfair as to why there are bigger things at stake here than simply winning a game that ultimately means nothing.

Choose a side.
I mean if you want to intentionally misrepresent a side of an argument, sure.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
I mean if you want to intentionally misrepresent a side of an argument, sure.

That's the argument though!

Specifically, do you think it's appropriate to exclude trans women (an already incredibly excluded, victimized and marginalized group) from women's amateur sporting events, just to appease a small group of people who want to complain about 'competitive advantage'?

Yes or No?

What's more important? A possible slight competitive advantage in an amateur competition, or trans-women being excluded from participation in that completion?

I err on the side of inclusiveness. I'd have no problem if a cis-man wanted to line up with my side in an amateur competition, because it's more important to him to play, than it is for me to win.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Pretty silly analogy. As i said above, the jury is still out on whether there's an inherent advantage

The jury is not out on what the effects of being excluded and marginalized are on trans people though.

Take a guess where it leads?

Again, what's more important; getting around your teammates, or excluding one because of a possible biological advantage from their birth gender?
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
That's the argument though!

Specifically, do you think it's appropriate to exclude trans women (an already incredibly excluded, victimized and marginalized group) from women's amateur sporting events, just to appease a small group of people who want to complain about 'competitive advantage'?

Yes or No?

What's more important? A possible slight competitive advantage in an amateur competition, or trans-women being excluded from participation in that completion?

I err on the side of inclusiveness. I'd have no problem if a cis-man wanted to line up with my side in an amateur competition, because it's more important to him to play, than it is for me to win.
I can't stress this enough, there are still avenues of sport available (aka social sport) for trans women. How is this not sinking in

To answer the bolded:
A) It's not a small group. If you put a survey out asking "should competitive fairness be the overarching aim of your amateur sporting competition, or should inclusiveness", I'd wager the overwhelming number of participants would put the former.

B) Yes if it's in the interest of fairness. Because again, it's a voluntary activity that people undertake with certain expectations. It's there right to expect that and have those expectations met.

You're trying to moralise people and tell them how to play sport/who they have to associate with. I'm sorry but on this issue no one has that right
 

The Tilt

All Australian
Oct 12, 2020
686
1,001
AFL Club
Sydney
That's basically what it boils down to.

1) Exclude trans women from amateur sporting events, in favor of the opinions of the few who think it's unfair, or
2) Include trans women in amateur sporting events and educate the few that think it's unfair as to why there are bigger things at stake here than simply winning a game that ultimately means nothing.

Choose a side.
Yes, we need really smart men to explain to women how women's sport should be organsied. It's obvious.
 

MrKK

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 11, 2012
6,740
16,691
City of churches
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
And those people have to change their opinions, because the alternative position is to exclude trans-women (an already marginalized and victimized group) from participation in amateur and social sporting events.
They don't 'have' to do anything. It's their competition for which they've fought long and hard to achieve recognition against the equivalent men's sports. I'm not going to tell them how to organise or what should be important to them.
Personally, I'm not going to gripe or bitch to the coach or whatever if some obese spud is playing in my local Footy team, racking up 2 touches a game (both of them turnovers), especially if that 150 kilo spud belongs to not only a marginalized group in society, but also one with no other realistic avenues to play.
Weakening your own team for reasons of inclusiveness or otherwise = OK
Your opposition strengthening themselves with an artificial or unfair advantage = not OK
That is a near-universal view in amateur sport, male or female. You've had it explained to you repeatedly so I can only assume you're being deliberately obtuse by continuing to conflate the two.

I err on the side of inclusiveness. I'd have no problem if a cis-man wanted to line up with my side in an amateur competition, because it's more important to him to play, than it is for me to win.
Are you talking about yourself, in which case I assume near 100% of the competitors would be cis-men? Or are you saying that cis-men should be allowed to play in women's competitions if it's important to them?
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
If you put a survey out asking "should competitive fairness be the overarching aim of your amateur sporting competition, or should inclusiveness", I'd wager the overwhelming number of participants would put the former.

Here are 5 such surveys, asking a broader question (including trans-female participation in all sports, including elite sports):

Americans Are Split on Transgender Athletic Participation as Clash Between NCAA, Republicans Looms

Most people agree that women's sport should be for females only • Fair Play For Women

Note the bottom link is from an 'anti trans women in sport' website too, so before you accuse me of bias there's that.

Even with the question being framed broader than simply narrowing it to amateur sports, you see a pretty clear 50/50 division on the question.

I dare say (but have no data to prove it) if you limited the question to 'Should trans-women be allowed to participate in women's AMATEUR AND SOCIAL sporting events, but stricter rules on participation be applied to PROFESSIONAL events (to protect the competitive integrity of the womens professional competitions), you'd get even more in favor of voting 'Yes'.

Here is another one:

Results A total of 905 of 1199 youths (75%) responded to the survey. Respondents had a mean (SD) age of 20 (2) years; 482 (53%) identified as male, 29 (3%) identified as transgender, and 306 (34%) reported having participated in high school and/or collegiate athletics. Three themes emerged: (1) youths differed regarding the inclusion of transgender athletes based on gender identity vs sex assigned at birth, (2) many youths did not have personal experience related to the inclusion of transgender athletes, and (3) youths were uncertain about the impacts of gender identity–based participation on cisgender individuals but perceived positive impacts for transgender individuals. Nearly half of respondents (327 of 691 [47%]) thought that transgender athletes should participate based on their gender identity or personal preference, whereas 240 (35%) favored participation based on sex assigned at birth or in a transgender-only category. Respondents mentioned concern about the fairness of identity-based participation, specifically for cisgender women, but many (410 of 697 [59%]) also reported that it would be affirming for transgender athletes to participate based on gender identity.

Perspectives of US Youths on Participation of Transgender Individuals in Competitive Sports

59 percent of those surveyed reported it would be ''affirming for trans athletes to participate based on gender identity'', and 47% supported trans athlete participation, with 35 percent opposed.

Again, I'd bet London to a Brick if you narrowed the question to one of simply participation in amateur and social sports, the numbers would favor 'pro participation' significantly.
 
Last edited:

MrKK

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 11, 2012
6,740
16,691
City of churches
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
Here are 5 such surveys, asking a broader question (including trans-female participation in all sports, including elite sports):

Americans Are Split on Transgender Athletic Participation as Clash Between NCAA, Republicans Looms

Most people agree that women's sport should be for females only • Fair Play For Women

Note the bottom link is from an 'anti trans women in sport' website too, so before you accuse me of bias there's that.

Even with the question being framed broader than simply narrowing it to amateur sports, you see a pretty clear 50/50 division on the question.

I dare say (but have no data to prove it) if you limited the question to 'Should trans-women be allowed to participate in women's AMATEUR AND SOCIAL sporting events, but stricter rules on participation be applied to PROFESSIONAL events (to protect the competitive integrity of the womens professional competitions), you'd get even more in favor of voting 'Yes'.

Here is another one:



Perspectives of US Youths on Participation of Transgender Individuals in Competitive Sports

59 percent of those surveyed reported it would be ''affirming for trans athletes to participate based on gender identity'', and 47% supported trans athlete participation, with 35 percent opposed.

Again, I'd bet London to a Brick if you narrowed the question to one of simply participation in amateur and social sports, the numbers would favor 'pro participation' significantly.
Those are not studies of participants. The surveys in the first 2 links don't even ask if the respondents play competitive sports. The last link does ask the question but then doesn't do any overlay of that with responses to other questions.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Those are not studies of participants. The surveys in the first 2 links don't even ask if the respondents play competitive sports. The last link does ask the question but then doesn't do any overlay of that with responses to other questions.

Ok, then add to those 6 surveys:

In addition to targeted interviews, two surveys were distributed to the wider UK sporting community.. The initial survey was sent to publicly listed email addresses available through NGB websites. The survey was sent to staff and volunteers across a total of 543 people in 51 sports and sporting organisations across all domestic geographic jurisdictions.
On the inclusion of transgender women into female sport there was a considerable spread of responses – either positive or negative as well as a substantial number of respondents who indicated that they did not feel ‘qualified’ to comment on the science of the issue nor draw any conclusions or solutions. Interestingly there were more than twice as many words written in response to this question, relative to the question on the inclusion of transgender men. Nearly half (48%) of all respondents thought there should be a different policy in grassroots sport compared with higher level competitive sport

https://equalityinsport.org/docs/300921/Project Report on the Review of the Guidance for Transgender Inclusion in Domestic Sport 2021.pdf

So as I said above, around half of people surveyed consistently support trans-women inclusions in sport (and around half object), with around half of all people surveyed agreeing the line of demarcation being between grassroots (amateur) level and pro.

It seems fairly consistent don't you agree?

Pick a side. Do you want to exclude trans-women (an already marginalized group) from grassroots sports on the basis of some kind of potential 'competitive advantage' trumping inclusiveness, or do you go the other way, and think inclusiveness (and humanity) is more important than any potential competitive advantage?
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
Here are 5 such surveys, asking a broader question (including trans-female participation in all sports, including elite sports):

Americans Are Split on Transgender Athletic Participation as Clash Between NCAA, Republicans Looms

Most people agree that women's sport should be for females only • Fair Play For Women

Note the bottom link is from an 'anti trans women in sport' website too, so before you accuse me of bias there's that.

Even with the question being framed broader than simply narrowing it to amateur sports, you see a pretty clear 50/50 division on the question.

I dare say (but have no data to prove it) if you limited the question to 'Should trans-women be allowed to participate in women's AMATEUR AND SOCIAL sporting events, but stricter rules on participation be applied to PROFESSIONAL events (to protect the competitive integrity of the womens professional competitions), you'd get even more in favor of voting 'Yes'.

Here is another one:



Perspectives of US Youths on Participation of Transgender Individuals in Competitive Sports

59 percent of those surveyed reported it would be ''affirming for trans athletes to participate based on gender identity'', and 47% supported trans athlete participation, with 35 percent opposed.

Again, I'd bet London to a Brick if you narrowed the question to one of simply participation in amateur and social sports, the numbers would favor 'pro participation' significantly.
Interesting studies, thanks for posting. I think the main drawback of these is that they're focused on American college sports (where to my understanding there is already clear policy on transgender inclusion), which is very different from amateur Saturday sports in Australia. Interesting to read results nonetheless.
Ok, then add to those 6 surveys:




https://equalityinsport.org/docs/300921/Project Report on the Review of the Guidance for Transgender Inclusion in Domestic Sport 2021.pdf

So as I said above, around half of people surveyed consistently support trans-women inclusions in sport (and around half object), with around half of all people surveyed agreeing the line of demarcation being between grassroots (amateur) level and pro.

It seems fairly consistent don't you agree?

Pick a side. Do you want to exclude trans-women (an already marginalized group) from grassroots sports on the basis of some kind of potential 'competitive advantage' trumping inclusiveness, or do you go the other way, and think inclusiveness (and humanity) is more important than any potential competitive advantage?
I'm sorry but you're completely misrepresenting what this study is by trying to group it with other studies on whether transgender women should be able to participate in sport. This study has nothing to do with that, and is purely a qualitative study on perceptions on transgender policies in British sport.

Finally, it's extremely frustrating to discuss this with you when you're constantly trying to frame the opposing side as a group of bigots. Examples of this being:
  • You framing this as a case of two sides, with one being focused on inclusion and the other focused on exclusion.
  • You asking posters (aka me) irrelevant questions regarding the issue, such as whether we think transgender women should be allowed to use female bathrooms. This attempt to box posters in as anti-transgender bigots is so transparent it's painful. Stop it.

It's ultimately a debate centred on values and what people prioritise in the context of women's amateur sports. Fairness or inclusiveness, and that these values are incongruent in the context of female sports until more info is known (infact that last British study articulates this really well). My thoughts are that ultimately, the opinions that matter are those of the participants.
 
May 1, 2016
28,403
55,364
AFL Club
Carlton
Finally, it's extremely frustrating to discuss this with you when you're constantly trying to frame the opposing side as a group of bigots. Examples of this being:
  • You framing this as a case of two sides, with one being focused on inclusion and the other focused on exclusion.
In what way is this particular discussion not a case of two sides with one focused on inclusion and the other exclusion?
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
In what way is this particular discussion not a case of two sides with one focused on inclusion and the other exclusion?
One side is emphasising inclusion as the primary value to be considered, the other is emphasising fairness as the primary value to be considered. That's a very different way of explaining it then saying that one side is aiming to exclude people.

No side is focusing on excluding anyone, it just happens to be an unfortunate by-product whichever way you lean (someone is getting excluded either way).
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
I'm sorry but you're completely misrepresenting what this study is by trying to group it with other studies on whether transgender women should be able to participate in sport. This study has nothing to do with that, and is purely a qualitative study on perceptions on transgender policies in British sport.

Two of the questions asked in that study was directly relevant to the post in question.

In particular 'should there be different rules between the amateur and pro levels' which was asked of those surveyed.

Finally, it's extremely frustrating to discuss this with you when you're constantly trying to frame the opposing side as a group of bigots.

No, the other side are not necessarily bigots. They're people who place perceptions of 'competitive fairness' over and above inclusiveness in sports at grassroots level.

Specifically, they would be prepared to support a policy that excludes trans-women (an already marginalized and persecuted group) from competition at grassroots level on the grounds of some kind of perceived slight competitive advantage.

My side are prepared to place inclusiveness at grassroots level above that perception.

Like I said, pick a side.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
One side is emphasising inclusion as the primary value to be considered, the other is emphasising fairness as the primary value to be considered. That's a very different way of explaining it then saying that one side is aiming to exclude people.

One of those sides is expressly arguing to exclude people.

Specifically, they're advocating for a policy that denies and excludes trans-women from participating at grassroots level, and from affirming their gender identity.

They agree that (or have yet to come to understand that) 'competitive fairness' of an amateur grassroots game is more important than the effect the above exclusionary policy might have on actual human beings.

If 'competitive fairness' of amateur sports is worth persecuting and excluding an already persecuted and excluded minority then we're doing sports wrong.
 
May 1, 2016
28,403
55,364
AFL Club
Carlton
One side is emphasising inclusion as the primary value to be considered, the other is emphasising fairness as the primary value to be considered. That's a very different way of explaining it then saying that one side is aiming to exclude people.
But they're arguing that fairness is a more important priority than inclusion is. That's more or less the problem: it's not, and it shouldn't be.
No side is focusing on excluding anyone, it just happens to be an unfortunate by-product whichever way you lean (someone is getting excluded either way).
Gee, that looks an awful lot like you telling a lovely story to avoid looking at the consequences of your point of view...
 

Big Papa Ted

Team Captain
May 26, 2018
583
796
AFL Club
Collingwood
But they're arguing that fairness is a more important priority than inclusion is. That's more or less the problem: it's not, and it shouldn't be.
To you. In this context, inclusion is more important to you. People don't have to share your sentiment.

And I'd point out again, even if you go the way of inclusiveness, someone is getting squeezed out in this equation. There's a finite number of spots and playing time in a footy or netball club.
Gee, that looks an awful lot like you telling a lovely story to avoid looking at the consequences of your point of view...
Not really, simply explaining that people's aim/focus isn't to exclude. It's to promote fairness as the primary focus. It's a big difference.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,473
42,020
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
To you. In this context, inclusion is more important to you. People don't have to share your sentiment.

I agree people dont have to share my sentiment. I've repeatedly said as much (pick a side etc).

Im just saying its wrong to listen to those that dont share my sentiment, because if you do you're supporting excluding trans-women from grassroots sport.
 

MrKK

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 11, 2012
6,740
16,691
City of churches
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
In particular 'should there be different rules between the amateur and pro levels' which was asked of those surveyed.
You've created the amateur vs pro distinction; the survey used elite vs grass roots without any indication of where the demarcation is or in which category the vast breadth of competitive amateur sport sits.

The only examples given are Parkrun and mixed sports. Now the amateur club level I play could never be described as elite but is also not closely related to Parkrun or Tuesday night mixed netball.

Also the question is whether the two levels the survey creators have chosen should have different policies and gives no indication of what those policies should be. The paper repeatedly makes the point there is no easy solution for transgender participation in women's sport.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back