The national debate over transgender athletes, predictably, devolves into a binary fair/unfair debate and loses the evolving focus over the nuances of when trans competition is appropriate and when it is not. This is not surprising, given that political entities wish to capitalize on the controversy.
So let me say this outright and take the risk of being deemed inappropriate: some trans athletes compete fairly and some do not. It depends upon the SPORT and it depends upon the age of TRANSITION. Only experts in an individual sport can say whether a particular trans athlete has developed an unfair "edge" over the competition. In many cases, if the transition happens early, the impact is irrelevant to the sport. If the impact happens late, it might well be relevant.
Put this in the context of those who wish to deny kids the right to transition early, and you get into very controversial waters. The camp who want all transitions to be late can accurately say that such transitions often present an unfair advantage. Of course, they are the folks who insist on late transitions...early transitions often (depending on the sport) present no such advantage.
I say all this without pronouncing judgment on whether early or late transitions are better psychologically and physically for the trans person. But it is clear that early vs. later transitions have a major impact on sports.
And I might add that I teach at a Univesity with a very high profile trans athlete. But even I do not know the circumstances to the transition, and I feel I am in no way in a position to judge the fairness or unfairness of the situation. I do not know the age of transition, and even if I did, I am not an expert on the particular sport and am unable to judge whether the transition had an effect on the ability of the athlete to be competitive. I am content to allow the experts in that sport to make the judgement. I hardly think this is a matter that should be determined by a Presidential executive order, that (quite obviously) lacks all such analysis of nuance.
I was a proponent of the "no politics" rule when it was first instituted. I still am. I think my post is sufficiently sport-oriented to be left up. But I won't be offended if a moderator decides to take this down. The overall climate of this board is probably more important than the finer details of this debate.
So let me say this outright and take the risk of being deemed inappropriate: some trans athletes compete fairly and some do not. It depends upon the SPORT and it depends upon the age of TRANSITION. Only experts in an individual sport can say whether a particular trans athlete has developed an unfair "edge" over the competition. In many cases, if the transition happens early, the impact is irrelevant to the sport. If the impact happens late, it might well be relevant.
Put this in the context of those who wish to deny kids the right to transition early, and you get into very controversial waters. The camp who want all transitions to be late can accurately say that such transitions often present an unfair advantage. Of course, they are the folks who insist on late transitions...early transitions often (depending on the sport) present no such advantage.
I say all this without pronouncing judgment on whether early or late transitions are better psychologically and physically for the trans person. But it is clear that early vs. later transitions have a major impact on sports.
And I might add that I teach at a Univesity with a very high profile trans athlete. But even I do not know the circumstances to the transition, and I feel I am in no way in a position to judge the fairness or unfairness of the situation. I do not know the age of transition, and even if I did, I am not an expert on the particular sport and am unable to judge whether the transition had an effect on the ability of the athlete to be competitive. I am content to allow the experts in that sport to make the judgement. I hardly think this is a matter that should be determined by a Presidential executive order, that (quite obviously) lacks all such analysis of nuance.
I was a proponent of the "no politics" rule when it was first instituted. I still am. I think my post is sufficiently sport-oriented to be left up. But I won't be offended if a moderator decides to take this down. The overall climate of this board is probably more important than the finer details of this debate.