Ledecky's NCAA record at risk. Should it be? Too Controversial of a Topic? (merged) - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Ledecky's NCAA record at risk. Should it be? Too Controversial of a Topic? (merged) (/thread-21846.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Ledecky's NCAA record at risk. Should it be? Too Controversial of a Topic? (merged) (/thread-21846.html)
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - martyup - 04-14-2021
(04-14-2021, 12:43 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: I think I've been pretty clear that HS sports should be inclusive. What would you propose for a transgender athlete who wants to play HS sports? Tough shit? I'm sure they'd appreciate your quote about the sting and clash of battle.
These are real, living children, and they won't stop existing just because some people don't like it.
Sure winning is important, but at the high school level, it's pretty gross to say winning is more important than just being decent to a kid who wants to play sports. Or do you think these trans kids are putting themselves at great risk for harm (even murder) and derision by a a cruel society, just so they can do better in high school sports?
I would tell them to play the sport of their biological sex. Nobody is saying that they cannot play sports. It is they that are saying that they must be allowed to compete against biological women, even though they are biologically male.
There have been many polls of biological female athletes on this subject and they overwhelmingly oppose allowing biological male athletes to compete in their sports. I support biological female athletes.
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - cardcrimson - 04-15-2021
(04-14-2021, 05:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I meant it as a figure of speech; sorry for singling you out. I do appreciate the way you have approached this thread, which I think has generally allowed a more civil engagement than what one would expect for the controversy of this subject. To the extent that I undermined that, I am sorry.
I still wonder why a theoretical possibility that your daughter hasn't encountered would prompt you to "come down on the side that competitions should be held on a biological basis" while an actual disadvantage that your daughter deals with everyday merits a shrug (and, if I am reading between the lines, I detect a little pride in the fact that she is out-competing older girls). Is this a bit fear of the unknown? Like, if there were a couple of transgender girls on your daughter's team or the teams she plays against, and she were still doing well, would your opposition be the same? Or are the sex advantages in her chosen sports so profound, and the rewards for success in those sports so great, that you are concerned about the proverbial floodgates opening. Is it a safety issue (as was the case for the World Rugby League)?
There may be ways that the unfairness of sex at birth is qualitatively different than the unfairness that is the result of age or money. If that's the case, I'm wondering what those differences are.
By the way, I am surprised GR hasn't weighed in here. In another forum, he discussed a different approach to the issue of sex and transgender, which is to do away with dividing sports by sex per se, and have two divisions: an open division that has no restrictions, and a restricted division where there might be age, gender, hormone, etc. restrictions to keep the competition a bit more balanced. Hopefully I conveyed his plan accurately. It is an interesting concept.
BC
Geez BC, no worries. Really appreciate your caring, though. I'm quite accustomed to argument, as I'm the token conservative at many functions I attend, where most at least appreciate my willingness to share my perspective. Surprisingly perhaps, most of my friends, and the parents of my daughter's friends, lean pretty far left.
Anyway, regarding not being chapped by parents redshirting their kids. Most of my daughter's sports, at least so far, have all been age based. Redshirting is irrelevant. In fact, surprisingly, it is a detriment early on. In a normal year, my daughter, a young freshman, would have a full year of high school training behind her while competing against 14Us who are in 8th grade. Even this year without much of the normal training, she's a heck of a lot stronger than she would be if we held her back. As for high school performance in the later years, surely it will catch up and be a little more difficult to be on the young side.
As for fear of the unknown regarding transgender competition, I simply try to understand how I would feel if I were a parent of the Connecticut girls who were beaten by a transgender. I would struggle to find the words to assuage their disappointment.
And for sports safety, how about this? Biological boys throw a lot harder than biological girls. My daughter, a water polo goalie, has already had her first concussion because a talented girl back handed a shot that my daughter blocked with her forehead. Shots from a biological boy playing hole set could be much more devastating. Sports safety is irrelevant to some here, I guess.
Now for the opinion that really matters, I spoke with my 14 year old daughter about this topic as I drove her to practice. Quick sidelight, the best thing resulting from the pandemic, is that my daughter and I now take regular drives through the East Bay countryside and backroads where we talk about anything and everything, it's been fantastic for both of us.
Though she's become fairly liberal with her politics and has several transgender friends, she would prefer a mitigated approach to transgender girls competing against cisgender girls. What surprised me was the depth of her knowledge on the subject. She quoted studies way beyond what was discussed here. I guess tik tok goes beyond mindless videos. Anyway, she favored a reasoned approach with certain levels of hormone therapy and / or with puberty suppression as a minimum course of action. Importantly, some course of therapy needed to have happened, and at least for an extended period of time in her opinion. That way, it can be fair to both the cisgender and transgender folks. As for girls with boys bodies, her comment was that everybody has a different body, and has to use it as best they can, an issue, but a small one. . . .
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - BostonCard - 04-15-2021
(04-14-2021, 10:48 PM)martyup Wrote: I would tell them to play the sport of their biological sex. Nobody is saying that they cannot play sports. It is they that are saying that they must be allowed to compete against biological women, even though they are biologically male.
There have been many polls of biological female athletes on this subject and they overwhelmingly oppose allowing biological male athletes to compete in their sports. I support biological female athletes.
Would you tell a 17-year-old transgender male who has been on estrogen blockers since age 12 and on testosterone since age 15, who has facial hair and other secondary male characteristics that he has to play the sport of his sex assigned at birth?
BC
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - ColoradoTree - 04-15-2021
This is a tough question, and with any tough question, I find it helpful to approach it with grace and an open heart.
With high school sports, I start from the premise that these are kids, and that being a kid in high school can be an absolute crucible at the best of times. Kids want to belong so desperately. I remember the pain of gay classmates in high school. How ostracized they often felt. How afraid they were of admitting to who they were. Having grown up in a somewhat conservative, religious area in the 1980s and 1990s, there was a background debate about whether this was a choice. Well, seeing that pain ended that debate for me as a kid. Who would choose that much pain?
Just as that identity was not a choice, neither is being transgender. It can take time to come to grips with one's identity, to be sure, particularly when one faces such consistent pressure to conform to the behavioral norms associated with your biological sex at birth. But it is who they are. A thought experiment for the men in the room: imagine how you would feel if everyone started calling you a woman, referring to you as "her" or "she," and mocking you if you claimed you were a man? Imagine how frustrating that would be. How painful. How wrong it would feel.
So, that's where I start. When, say, a 16-year-old transgender girl wants to play soccer and she is told she has to play with the boys or not at all, my heart hurts for her. She should be able to experience the highs and lows of athletic competition like the rest of us. There has to be a way to make it work. (And I say girl intentionally. The rationales I have heard in favor of requiring athletes to compete against others of their sex assigned at birth have solely addressed the perceived unfairness of transgender girls/women competing against cisgender girls/women. Just as the so-called "bathroom bills" were designed to keep transgender girls/women from using restrooms with cisgender girls/women, it smacks of a paternalistic attempt to protect girls from "non-girls," not to protect boys from "non-boys," though I obviously recognize physical differences between men and women.)
And then I consider cisgender girls competing in high school sports who want fair competition. I want them to have fair competition, too. Now, for the vast majority of high school athletes in the country, this is a non-issue. The vast majority of teams and athletes in individual sports haven't been faced with this issue, meaning the heated debate in some corners of the media is not a good faith attempt to solve a problem, but an opportunity to gin up division and emotion, along with the eyeballs that those things bring. And the examples of transgender girls beating cisgender girls at big tournaments are vanishingly small. And I think we all recognize that no high school student is transitioning from male to female solely to do better in sports. That's just not a thing.
This is mostly a hypothetical problem. Painfully, it leads some cable news programs not as an effort to come to a good faith solution that works for both transgender and cisgender athletes, but as yet another front in the culture war. A "bathroom bill" by another name. And heartbreakingly, one thing that would diminish this problem--earlier hormone treatments, surgeries, and other treatments to prevent going through the puberty associated with your sex assigned at birth, leading to transgender girls who lack mature male traits, for example--is being outlawed in an increasing number of states. That certainly calls the motivation of the legislators proposing these solutions to "protect girls' sports" into question.
And the issue is very much here for someone like Caster Semenya, who is intersex but was assigned female at birth, who competes as a woman but who nonetheless has natural testosterone levels exceeding those considered acceptable for women's competitions. She's competing with the body God gave her, and in order to continue to compete as a woman, she must take hormones to decrease her natural levels of testosterone to a level deemed sufficiently female by the IAAF. Imagine identifying as a woman and having female sex organs, competing and training and being an Olympic Gold medalist, and being told you're not female enough to compete as a woman.
But we are problem-solvers here on this board, so even if this argument is mostly a hypothetical one, it's reasonable to expect that it might not remain so hypothetical forever, as acceptance of transgender identities increases and we recognize the physical and psychological benefits to transitioning earlier. So, whatever the answer is for high school, I hope people approach it from the perspective that all of these kids are kids. In a difficult environment. Who all deserve to feel the rush of athletic competition while living truly as themselves.
Interestingly, I don't sense a lot of opposition to the NCAA policy, which is what kicked off this topic and presumably made it germane for discussion here. If the NCAA policy were adopted by state high school associations, would that satisfy those who argue for requiring athletes to compete against others of their sex assigned at birth? Would you like to see earlier transitions so that a transgender girl hasn't gone through puberty as a male and thus potentially acquired what might be a durable physical advantage? Recognizing the psychological damage that results to transgender girls who are forced to compete as boys or use boys' bathrooms, what is your proposed solution to stop that damage from occurring?
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - pefloresjr - 04-15-2021
Colorado Tree, thank you for that thoughtful response. Around last year's election, a family member sent a note to everyone my large mostly religious but very politically divided family about entering all discussions from a position of showing grace and tolerance. It isn't always easy, but it is important if we want to be productive and gain understanding.
Your post at the end was pretty close to my feelings about this. At the college and international level, I am completely comfortable with there being a testing threshold for determining the group an athlete competes in. I have no trust in some authoritarian governments to not force some of their citizens to alter their natural levels. However, I think we need to be as inclusive as possible at all levels but definitely at the high school and below level because k-12 education is mandatory and because all are basically not yet adults. I also approach this with the goal of attempting to achieve equal treatment for all whenever possible.
Maybe that means that as many sports as possible should just be unisex. However, I fear that the unintentional result of that would be to lessen the opportunities for, and participation by, girls in sports. Some more physical sports will likely need to have separate competition by gender. Since that is the case, I think there will need to be a testosterone (and/or other hormone) cut off between boys and girls sports as they have in college. That will, by definition, be somewhat arbitrary, but if determined with thoughtfulness and with the best available scientific support about expected hormonal ranges, it should be manageable. I fear the intrusiveness of testing high school kids but in many states they are already randomly drug tested and the courts have upheld that testing. This testing could simply be included in the existing drug tests.
I think it will still cause some potential issues with intersex children but, if competition is divided along an established criteria, the intersex kid would simply have to compete in the group they ended up in just like all the other kids. That might help or hurt their chances for winning, but that is the same issue faced by all kids in all sports. I think it would also avoid charges of discrimination against one sex or against intersex kids. I think having a standard would not only promote the public policy of equal treatment, it would help everyone know that no particular group of kids is being singled out.
I haven't worked through all the details and I'm sure that whatever decisions are made in this area, some will vigorously object. I also agree that it is particularly unhelpful for politicians and media outlets to use these issues as wedge issues in political culture wars.
Cheers,
Pete F.
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - martyup - 04-15-2021
(04-15-2021, 09:22 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(04-14-2021, 10:48 PM)martyup Wrote: I would tell them to play the sport of their biological sex. Nobody is saying that they cannot play sports. It is they that are saying that they must be allowed to compete against biological women, even though they are biologically male.
There have been many polls of biological female athletes on this subject and they overwhelmingly oppose allowing biological male athletes to compete in their sports. I support biological female athletes.
Would you tell a 17-year-old transgender male who has been on estrogen blockers since age 12 and on testosterone since age 15, who has facial hair and other secondary male characteristics that he has to play the sport of his sex assigned at birth?
BC
First of all, if a biological girl transitions to a boy and takes testosterone, I don't think they could compete because of the rules against steroid use. If that was not an impediment, if he wants to play competitive sports, yes. Absolutely, athletes should compete against opponents of their biological sex.
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - BostonCard - 04-16-2021
The IOC allows trans male athletes to compete without restriction on hormones.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-sports/chris-mosier-on-making-history-as-first-trans-member-of-team-usa-250971/
Quote:For transgender men, the practical target for hormone therapy is to increase testosterone levels to the normal male physiological range (300–1000 ng/dl) by administering testosterone.
BC
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - fullmetal - 04-16-2021
If the argument is that trans women in HS have "the body of a biological male," then I expect I will be hearing more support for earlier childhood transitions before puberty sets in.
No?
Guess this isn't about fairness then.
ColoradoTree and pefloresjr, thank you both, as always, for your voices of reason. cardcrimson, the multi-step approach described by your daughter seems to be the preeminently favored approach.
Except for a lucky, genetically gifted few who also train hard, losing is a natural part of athletics participation. As OutsiderFan said, there will always be someone bigger and stronger. And as BostonCard said, there are so many ways in which athletes can have unearned privilege: rich parents paying for trainers, extra practice time, family connections, professional mentoring, etc. Sometimes these factors matter, and sometimes they don't. And how many times have we seen a taller, bigger athlete lose out to someone smaller but who works twice as hard?
Reducing athletic performance to biological determinism completely ignores core values of athletics: resilience, perseverance, and discipline. Athletics makes us better people because it instills in us those important values that we carry on to everyday life. We are not better people just because we win at athletics.
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - Goose - 04-16-2021
(04-16-2021, 01:16 PM)fullmetal Wrote: Reducing athletic performance to biological determinism completely ignores core values of athletics: resilience, perseverance, and discipline. Athletics makes us better people because it instills in us those important values that we carry on to everyday life. We are not better people just because we win at athletics.And Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton. I do not believe that participating in athletics necessarily has much to do with the core values referenced by the OP. It can instill those values, but the behavior of many very successful athletes demonstrates that it often does not do so, specifically with respect to discipline. Undoubtedly the core values of many people benefit from participating in athletics, but it is equally obvious that many do not. The biological determinism of some great athletes is so overpowering that they just don't need to acquire resilience, perseverance, and discipline. They do just fine without them.
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - fullmetal - 04-16-2021
(04-16-2021, 02:43 PM)Goose Wrote: The biological determinism of some great athletes is so overpowering that they just don't need to acquire resilience, perseverance, and discipline. They do just fine without them.
Okay good luck with that one LOL
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - BostonCard - 04-16-2021
(04-16-2021, 02:43 PM)Goose Wrote:(04-16-2021, 01:16 PM)fullmetal Wrote: Reducing athletic performance to biological determinism completely ignores core values of athletics: resilience, perseverance, and discipline. Athletics makes us better people because it instills in us those important values that we carry on to everyday life. We are not better people just because we win at athletics.And Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton. I do not believe that participating in athletics necessarily has much to do with the core values referenced by the OP. It can instill those values, but the behavior of many very successful athletes demonstrates that it often does not do so, specifically with respect to discipline. Undoubtedly the core values of many people benefit from participating in athletics, but it is equally obvious that many do not. The biological determinism of some great athletes is so overpowering that they just don't need to acquire resilience, perseverance, and discipline. They do just fine without them.
Ryan Leaf and Todd Marinovich say hi.
BC
lex24 - lex24 - 04-17-2021
(04-14-2021, 02:37 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Why are we all of a sudden talking about High School sports? The topic was allowed under the guise of discussion about college sports.
Getting into High School discussion is a purely political exercise because Republican controlled states are making it into one. That being said, and if we are going to discuss this, I have a very simple question for anyone who thinks government even getting involved in this issue makes any sense at all.
Do you think there are any born males who want to become females in part because doing so will make them better sports performers against those born as and participating as girls?
Personally, I can't even imagine the horror of having a body that contradicts what you feel you are. And I am dead certain that being able to play sports is a great psychological release that makes such kids feel some sense of peace in their lives. Character is displayed by how we treat the least among us. That can be the poor, the disabled, the elderly, the mentally challenged, and it can mean the small number of trans people in society.
I agree 100% with dabivg13. There will always be someone bigger and faster. And High School in particular is a place to encourage participating and development. It seems there should just be standards for what classifies as trans girl athlete. Like, if you are just a guy who wears dresses and makeup, that's not enough to participate in girls sports. But, if you have started hormone treatment and have a doctor's certification, then I don't see the problem with allowing trans girl participation in High School sports. I mean just this requirement of a doctor's confirmation would probably lend itself to assessing hormone level just like the NCAA. And, each state can set a threshold for what minimum testosterone level qualifies a trans girl to participate in girls sports.
Again, politicians and governments have ZERO place in this matter and they are ONLY using it as a wedge issue to divide people. Disgusting.
If you think only Republicans politicize this issue, you are fooling yourself. It’s a tough issue. It’s also a very small percentage of the population. There are arguments on both sides. One can certainly take the “biological” position and still have empathy for those very few that are chemically/hormonally transitioning.
I don’t know the “solution”. But attacking one side is every bit as “divisive “ as the side you are attacking. I’ll end there as the Terry Rule looms. Although it didn’t stop your political comment....
(04-16-2021, 05:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(04-16-2021, 02:43 PM)Goose Wrote:(04-16-2021, 01:16 PM)fullmetal Wrote: Reducing athletic performance to biological determinism completely ignores core values of athletics: resilience, perseverance, and discipline. Athletics makes us better people because it instills in us those important values that we carry on to everyday life. We are not better people just because we win at athletics.And Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton. I do not believe that participating in athletics necessarily has much to do with the core values referenced by the OP. It can instill those values, but the behavior of many very successful athletes demonstrates that it often does not do so, specifically with respect to discipline. Undoubtedly the core values of many people benefit from participating in athletics, but it is equally obvious that many do not. The biological determinism of some great athletes is so overpowering that they just don't need to acquire resilience, perseverance, and discipline. They do just fine without them.
Ryan Leaf and Todd Marinovich say hi.
BC
As do athletes from the former Eastern bloc, Russia and China.....
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - cardcrimson - 04-17-2021
(04-14-2021, 01:53 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: Answer my questions and I'll answer yours.I've answered. And I shared my 14 year old daughter's answer as well. Still waiting for yours. . . .
RE: Too Controversial of a Topic? - dabigv13 - 04-17-2021
Scroll back to post #37....
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=21846&pid=314255#pid314255
Ledecky's NCAA record is at risk. Should it be? - cardcrimson - 12-10-2021
Lia Thomas is currently shattering Ivy League records and has a chance to break Ledecky's 500 Free and Missy Franklin's 200 Free NCAA records in the spring.
At issue, is that Lia is transitioning from a male to a female, and has had the NCAA's required one year of hormone therapy to qualify as female. She spent three years on Penn's men's team, and is now swimming on Penn's women's team. Below are two articles I stumbled upon regarding the situation.
https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/lia-thomas-racing-at-the-ncaa-womens-championships-would-be-unfair/
https://swimswam.com/anonymous-penn-swimmer-speaks-out-on-lia-thomas-presence-on-the-womens-team/
Though it clearly impacts college sports and a Stanford star, the topic may be too controversial and/or political to discuss here. If so, please delete the thread. Otherwise, the opinions of the posters here, I think, will be very interesting, especially to me as the father of an aspiring D1 female water polo player.
RE: Ledecky's NCAA record is at risk. Should it be? - Phogge - 12-10-2021
Have three championships: Men, Women, Trans (either way). I guess you would have to have a fourth, non binary.
Eddie Izzard could enter all four.
RE: Ledecky's NCAA record is at risk. Should it be? - TrumpCard - 12-10-2021
Just have everyone compete against their own personal records. Job well done if you meet your potential. The current format for competition discriminates against short fat people.
RE: Ledecky's NCAA record is at risk. Should it be? - Farm93 - 12-10-2021
(12-10-2021, 05:33 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Lia Thomas is currently shattering Ivy League records and has a chance to break Ledecky's 500 Free and Missy Franklin's 200 Free NCAA records in the spring.Not that tough. You have one that is for individuals born female and one that is open to all, including those born female.
At issue, is that Lia is transitioning from a male to a female, and has had the NCAA's required one year of hormone therapy to qualify as female. She spent three years on Penn's men's team, and is now swimming on Penn's women's team. Below are two articles I stumbled upon regarding the situation.
https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/lia-thomas-racing-at-the-ncaa-womens-championships-would-be-unfair/
https://swimswam.com/anonymous-penn-swimmer-speaks-out-on-lia-thomas-presence-on-the-womens-team/
Though it clearly impacts college sports and a Stanford star, the topic may be too controversial and/or political to discuss here. If so, please delete the thread. Otherwise, the opinions of the posters here, I think, will be very interesting, especially to me as the father of an aspiring D1 female water polo player.
Easy.
In that world should Katie Ledecky want to compete in the Open division she could have done that. If someone is transgender either way they can compete in the open division. And if one is male they can compete in the open division.
However only those born and currently female can compete in the female program.
RE: Ledecky's NCAA record is at risk. Should it be? - M T - 12-11-2021
This topic had a good discussion a few months back (April 2021)
Too Controversial a Topic?
Issues were discussed. Individuals stated their opinions and viewpoints.
This new thread brings into focus one particular testosterone-advantaged individual versus one not-advantaged individual.
While it is a worthy topic, I would have encouraged it being a new post in that older thread, so we don't repeat the same discussions.
I have one comment: Should Lia Thomas compete against Katie Ledecky, win or lose, Katie will be gracious.
I started swimming as a kid in the late 1950s, so I was (remotely) aware of how the greats of the last 50 years of the sport have presented themselves as people. Most have seemed to have been really nice people. I don't recall -- I can't even imagine -- any nicer than Katie.
(And, it is sad to me that this is the first comment here in quite a while related to Stanford swimming. Anyone besides me follow the current and former swimmers in their recent meets? I was going to summarize a few days back, but got busy on other things.)
RE: Ledecky's NCAA record is at risk. Should it be? - 2006alum - 12-11-2021
(12-11-2021, 03:38 AM)M T Wrote: This topic had a good discussion a few months back (April 2021)
Too Controversial a Topic?
Issues were discussed. Individuals stated their opinions and viewpoints.
This new thread brings into focus one particular testosterone-advantaged individual versus one not-advantaged individual.
While it is a worthy topic, I would have encouraged it being a new post in that older thread, so we don't repeat the same discussions.
So merged! Cardcrimson, you can edit the title of your initial post if you'd like to update the title of this thread.