Nope I don't think so. They are likely to be stronger so there is an unfair advantage. Sport is a competition so it's only fair. I don't see how you can argue against that.

No it's not.

I can see what Alf is saying to be fair; it states that they can't compete "if they've been through any part of male puberty" ... which could (in theory) lead to more people pushing for the use of puberty blockers and other hormonal therapies etc. before the onset of puberty.

There is a LOT of push-back from trans rights activists on this one but the emerging medical and scientific data on this one is becoming increasingly clear: Puberty blockers and hormonal treatments on pre-adolescents can have drastic and permanent consequences. The ethics and informed consent issues surrounding puberty blockers are absolutely massive.

So it's a bit of a catch 22 on that one really.

No female sports for trans women who have been through male puberty, but no delay of puberty is currently possible without the risk of severe and life-altering side effects (ranging from stunted or abnormal growth to infertility, or even cancer).

Then you have the additional worry of people sourcing hormone treatments illegitimately when they're not approved by doctors... that, unfortunately, is not uncommon already. This could prompt more to do it.

I heard a doctor on tv explaining that many of the effects of taking hormones are reversible APART from the changes to the BRAIN !!!


That’s so scary if confused young people/teenagers are going down this route


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The problem is too many kids not understanding mental health issues and conflating them to reality

Fina stops transgender swimmers from competing in women's elite events
 

I personally don’t think the kids are the problem; there’s actually very few issues with kids and adolescents exploring gender issues etc. and much as with most things with young people … if you just leave them to it, they tend to figure it out on their own.

The problem comes when adults start sticking their oar in about what it all “means” (invariably applying far TOO MUCH meaning; it’s just kids figuring themselves and their role in the world out).

Gender dysphoria is a very real thing and for a small number, gender transition ends up being the best way for them to have the best mental health outcome. There’s absolutely no issue with that and it’s why I have great sympathy for genuine trans people who have been caught up in the mess of “new gender ideology” which is unscientific, dogmatic, can be damaging to both the physical and mental health of adolescents (especially girls, contrary to the popular narrative) and also comes wrapped up in this bubble of anti-intellectualism/aggression that states that no one SHOULD try to study the issue or develop any sort of psychological framework, or even carry out sociological studies into the wider knock on effects. It’s deemed offensive and results in people being threatened and harassed. It’s a total mess. Things like safeguarding guidelines are in complete disarray with it. Carefully worded documents and policies that have worked for decades are now useless because the language in them has been rendered meaningless. And all over the place official policies are being adopted based on ZERO evidence base. From an academic standpoint it’s unprecedented and really quite shocking.

As a final thought, NO ONE is going to get what they want until they let the grown ups do the actual work to figure out the best way to preserve everyone’s rights and dignity.

But that’s the world we’re in now. It’s controversial or “TERFy” to say “we need a solid evidence base for anything we start writing into official policy”. I can’t think of a much more reasonable statement… but it’s frequently branded “hateful” by people who have figured out that doing that is the quickest way to push an agenda.

That's not Fina's fault though. To say they're promoting it because they want equality I do not think is true. There's a good reason they have used age 12..... responsibility lies elsewhere... Like you say in 'theory' not practicality. ...what fina are promoting is equality through fair competition, offering an alternative and using an appropriate age range in which to enforce that equality.

but what about those who are born as women but don't look very feminine (in terms of more muscle strengths than most other sportswomen)

They're still women Nicky.

Well no I agree, Fina's responsibility is only to the sport they represent and that should be their focus, the issue of puberty blockers/hormones is one for the healthcare regulators and I suppose law enforcement (also customs I guess?) in cases where people are getting hold of hormone treatments illegitimately in the UK or importing. THough the bare facts about side effects and long-term consequences of puberty blockers needs to be pushed more widely, the idea that the process is 100% reversible and not harmful to children is quite widely believed. I suppose wishful thinking, to an extent.

Well yes... those are the women who are likely to excell and be at the top of women's sports. The whole point (and problem) is that even those women can't compete against male-bodied people.

Could they absolutely thrash the average bloke on the street? Yes. But against an averagely-skilled male bodied person who has put in practice and training ... no. They'd need to train 3x as hard to do half as well. That's the simple biological reality.

To put it in perspective, my brother is 41 years old, he took up running around 2 years ago, just completed his first marathon a couple of weeks ago. He told me going by his times in races he's done if he ran against the female competitors he'd be consistently a top 3 finisher. His time in the marathon placed him 296th against the men

I think it's seen as somehow offensive to women to point out that there's actually quite a vast difference between the TRAINED male and female body, after even a small amount of training. People point out that female athletes are clearly stronger/faster/more skilled than the average male-bodied trans woman ... well, yes ... but they're not competing against the average trans woman, they're competing against trans women who are athletes in training. It's a completely moot point to say that all of the women on an olympic swim team could easily outswim 99% of men. The point is that they can't compete against male-bodied swimmers, not that they couldn't compete against the average male.

To be fair, it'd be a bit less inflammatory to say "the voice of the majority", rather than "normal people". I would like to think that it's the people involved in the sport who have been listened to though. I don't put much stock in "the voice of the masses" but I would certainly listen to competitive women swimmers if they were saying that it's damaging to the sport - which many have been in recent months, much as there are those who like to brush that under the carpet.

If anything is to follow I really hope it's combat sports... ... ... because in swimming and weight lifting etc. women stand to lose medals etc, but in combat sports they're getting their skulls cracked open. There's unfair and then there's flat-out criminally negligent and dangerous.

That just means that they're physically stronger Nicky through hard work.

Tbh this discussion is an iffy one for me as I do get along with a trans member on this very Forum, but in all honesty transwomen are biologically at an advantage against cis women, so the verdict in this case unfortunately is the correct one imo.

Like TS I mean athletically trained, not the average person, because of course a born woman who's a professional Boxer would knock me out.:laugh:

There really should be a better way forward tbh. I swear that transgenderism is the only mental disorder which gets actively enabled - people with severe eating disorders aren't given ometics; people with delusions which constantly endanger themselves or others aren't encouraged to live out their fantasies.

Suicide rates before and after "transitioning" are hardly any different, which makes me wonder if a "transition" really is the best way forward.

That's because it's not a mental disorder.

Also re suicide rates;

Bailey, L., Ellis, S., & McNeil, J. (2014). Suicide risk in the UK trans population and the role of gender transitioning in decreasing suicidal ideation and suicide attempt. Mental Health Review Journal, 19(4), 209-220.

A survey of trans people in the UK found that a completed medical transition was shown to greatly reduce rates of suicidal ideation and attempts, in contrast to those at other stages of transition (imminently transitioning or beginning transition). 67% of transitioning people thought more about suicide before transitioning whereas only 3% thought about suicide more after their transition (Bailey et al., 2014).

Yes, it is. It's a form of body dysmorphia. An anorexic will think they're fat despite evidence to the contrary, a transwoman is a male whose brain is telling him he's a woman.

A more recent source, from 2018:

[The Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility], which conducts reviews of health care treatments for the [National Health Service], concludes that none of the studies provides conclusive evidence that gender reassignment is beneficial for patients. It found that most research was poorly designed, which skewed the results in favor of physically changing sex. There was no evaluation of whether other treatments, such as long-term counseling, might help transsexuals, or whether their gender confusion might lessen over time.

Hyde concluded: “The bottom line is that although it’s clear that some people do well with gender reassignment surgery, the available research does little to reassure about how many patients do badly and, if so, how badly.”

The facility conducted its review back in 2004, so perhaps things have changed in the past decade?

Not so. In 2014, a new review of the scientific literature was done by Hayes, Inc., a research and consulting firm that evaluates the safety and health outcomes of medical technologies. Hayes found that the evidence on long-term results of sex reassignment was too sparse to support meaningful conclusions and gave these studies its lowest rating for quality:
Statistically significant improvements have not been consistently demonstrated by multiple studies for most outcomes. … Evidence regarding quality of life and function in male-to-female adults was very sparse. Evidence for less comprehensive measures of well-being in adult recipients of cross-sex hormone therapy was directly applicable to [gender dysphoric] patients but was sparse and/or conflicting. The study designs do not permit conclusions of causality and studies generally had weaknesses associated with study execution as well. There are potentially long-term safety risks associated with hormone therapy but none have been proven or conclusively ruled out.

https://www.heritage.org/gender/comm...e-the-evidence

No it's not. Body dysmorphia is though and as such is listed on the DSM. 'Transgender' is not. It did use to be though, but was controversial and stigmatised

The overarchivong theme running through that is that the studies done are just not conclusive.

We're specifically talking about suicide rates before and after transition. More so it's about how beneficial the change is which will come down to the individual

It should be re-listed, especially if it's medicated by public money. As you say, it was only taken off due to controversy.

There are lot of ongoing studies that indicate that, unfortunately, the reduction of suicidal ideation after transition is often temporary and this is why it's essential that the background work is done to identify any root trauma that might be present before carrying out irreversible medical procedures. Doing anything other than that is entirely unethical. The idea and excitement of "a new life" can mitigate suicidal ideation for a while - several years, even - but once it settles into being "the new normal" many people find that underneath that, the underlying causes of their mental health issues are still present.

You can see that in other comparative examples; e.g. someone being suicidal in a long term relationship, breaking up, getting together with a new partner and feeling on top of the world for a time - "it must have been the bad relationship making me suicidal!" - that person might think ... but then once that new relationship settles back into day-to-day routine, turns out, not so much and the darkness creeps back in.

It's also difficult to look very far back for studies on this; the situation was completely different in 2004, the pathways to transition etc., the numbers transitioning... generally the people transitioning had been "living as" for many years and would have an extensive history with their health professionals exploring the possibility of transition. In recent years there's been a push for "automatic affirmation" that means transitioning younger, faster, and without the appropriate mental health groundwork in place... and it's resulted in some truly terrible outcomes for some young people (both physically and mentally).

I think in another decade or so, when the larger numbers of late teens/early-20's transitioning now start to hit their 30's and 40's and lawsuits start rolling in, we will see a shift back to providers insisting on robust mental health screening before offering surgical or hormonal transition options. As, obviously, should be the case.

I disagree. I'm glad the DSM has evolved so much as some of it has been truly shocking over the years, but that's ignorance and medical practice and knowledge has moved on.

Transgender is a word, it shouldn't be categorised as a mental disorder. It's just wrong imo and obvious why it's a stigma.... On the other hand, body dysmorphia actually is an impairment in mental cognition... It's a byproduct or result of being transgender... It's not to say everyone who is transgender is going to have body dysmorphia..... Body dysmorphia is also not restricted to people who are transgender.....it's an issue with how you view yourself and repetitive dislike, over analyzisation of a set feature or who you are.... This could be that you have a scar on your nose that no one else really noticed, but to the individual is huge, it could be your hair colour or how you walk. Your image of yourself is distorted to what the true reality actually is.

Edit; or rather gender dysphoria is caused by being transgender.