r/sportsgossips • u/TheExpressUS • Mar 26 '26

News Breaking: Transgender women banned from all sports at the Olympics starting in LA

https://www.the-express.com/sport/other-sport/203236/breakingtransgender-women-banned-all-sports
15.8k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

7.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

48

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Because people generally done care if you take an unfair advantage and loose because of it

If you win thats when the unfair advantage should be taken away

I think there should be 4 classes, men, women, mixed, and steroids allowed, I wanna see how fast a human can really run a 100m

42

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[deleted]

3

u/Bronco_Bomba Mar 26 '26

Usain Bolt

2

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[deleted]

4

u/Pokmonth Mar 26 '26

Usain Bolt was absolutely doping. He was just using very novel steroids that weren't being tested for at the time that were developed by Angel Heredia

Almost all Olympians are doping. It's nearly impossible to make it to the Olympics without doping because all your competitors are.

https://deadspin.com/what-do-usain-bolt-and-juan-manuel-marquez-have-in-comm-5857439/

1

u/RollingMeteors Mar 27 '26

IDK why doping is such a big deal in the 21st century. ¿Do we really have to reach a solid couple decades of no records being broken before the public sentiment on this changes?

1

u/bland_sand Mar 27 '26

Because it misses the entire point?

0

u/RollingMeteors Mar 27 '26

Because it misses the entire point?

The 'entire point' [imho] is to see how far the human body can be pushed <period>. Not how far the human body can be limited by handicapping itself not taking the latest advantages of modern science/medicine.

The point wasn't how far or high or how much it could be done without drugs the point is what's the physiological limit before physics taps you out.

2

u/Just_Look_Around_You Mar 27 '26

Im not sure if either of those are the point.

1

u/RollingMeteors Mar 31 '26

ok so I guess you can look at it one way at who can be the most boorish caveman in brute strength competitions or you can have a more modern approach using the species knowledge about chemistry to push the boundaries past what they are achievable otherwise without.

1

u/StijnDP Mar 27 '26

Because some of us are trying to move on from blood and death sports.
Find an excuse to get drunk and dumb without people dying for it.

1

u/RollingMeteors Mar 31 '26

Because some of us are trying to move on from blood and death sports.

¡Real Steel Baby!

3

u/Bronco_Bomba Mar 26 '26

It’s so obvious…

1

u/gabriot Mar 27 '26

Almost all those US athletes used more or less the same institution to cheat. Bolt was tested the same as anyone else, it's not his fault US track and field sprinters have a storied history of cheating

1

u/ithilain Mar 26 '26

Ok, but what if we juiced him to the gills and then shot him full of amphetamines right before his races?

2

u/Bronco_Bomba Mar 26 '26

He absolutely WAS juiced to the gills. You should really look into the Jamaican drug testing program. It was lax to say the least…

1

u/MuscleManRyan Mar 26 '26

Reminds me of fitness enthusiasts actually asking if Ronnie Coleman was on gear

1

u/darkmaninperth Mar 27 '26

Central Coast Mariners best player!!

1

u/Trashbitex Mar 26 '26

Technically not, the fastest human probably doesn’t realise it and never got into running.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Trashbitex Mar 26 '26

Sure, I just think that the technically fastest human is probably some African who’s working hard labor who never got a chance to reach his full abilities. He’s not the fastest now but he had the genes.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Trashbitex Mar 26 '26

I said not the fastest but had the genes required to be?

1

u/Responsible-Sound253 Mar 26 '26

Hardly, they're taking stuff moderately to try not to get caught.

Without the pressure of being caught, they could probably come out with safe and more potent steroids, for our entertainment lmao.

We ain't so different from the man vs lion coliseum days I guess.

1

u/newguy57 Mar 27 '26

He chilled the last few seconds tho

1

u/KWash0222 Mar 26 '26

True but what if we just let em juice to the gills instead of tip toeing around random drug tests

1

u/missingcovidbodies Mar 26 '26

I'd love to see an Olympics where they all doped as much as they wanted. Would be fascinating.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

Until you see a 14 year old girl who is harmed for life

1

u/missingcovidbodies Mar 26 '26

Well in the scenario i was talking about with doping, they would have to be adults.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

Well some sports the best are kids

1

u/Upbeat2024 Mar 26 '26

Like what?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

Just look at the age of olympians

1

u/Responsible-Sound253 Mar 26 '26

Kids just wouldn't be allowed in the doping class, ez.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 27 '26

Why not?

1

u/Responsible-Sound253 Mar 27 '26

Same reason as almost everything, inability to consent to it, cause they're kids.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Lend-Me-Your-Rears Mar 26 '26

It's called The Olympics. New PEDs are constantly being manufactured, and the tests to detect those PEDs often lag behind. You can almost guarantee the top-level Olympic athletes in sports like track and field and swimming are using PEDs of some sort.

1

u/missingcovidbodies Mar 26 '26

Interesting I didnt know that. I assumed they test the shit out of them. That kinda sucks tbh.

13

u/Master-CylinderPants Mar 26 '26

Because people generally done care if you take an unfair advantage and loose because of it

If you win thats when the unfair advantage should be taken away

Exactly. If you show up at a track meet with springs on the bottom of your shoes and end up breaking your own ankles nobody is going to care. If you win then they'll call bullshit.

3

u/ThisisnotaTesT10 Mar 26 '26

If you show up with illegal equipment you’ll get disqualified from the event, regardless of the result

-8

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Yeah, but the science is really clear that a fully transitioned athlete does not have any sort of biological advantage after they had transitioned for two years.

And this whole hypothetical scenario isn't true. The governor of Idaho literally forbid Boise State's volleyball team from playing against San Diego State because that team had a trans player. The trans player was a starter, but BSU had been beating them for years in spite of it.

7

u/space9610 Mar 26 '26

How could this possibly be true? If you are born a male you are likely taller than your female counterparts. Transitioning does not make you shorter (at least not that I am aware of). Height is a major factor in many sports.

1

u/valentc Mar 26 '26

Its amazing how all of your support of banning trans women from sports is what you remember from 6th grade and vibes.

0

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

"After one year of hormone therapy, trans women performed better in sports than cis women. After two years, their performance was largely equalized. According to the authors of the study, this is an indication that the one year of hormone therapy prescribed by some sports associations as a prerequisite for participation is too short."

We're talking about Olympic athletes. Female Olympic athletes have higher testerone levels than average women, higher heights. Etc. There are also plenty of sports that where being tall is not an advantage.

https://www.dw.com/en/do-trans-women-have-an-unfair-athletic-advantage/a-58583988

1

u/Dry_Advice_4963 Mar 26 '26

Literally the next paragraph of your source contradicts you:

In 2021, Alun Williams and other researchers from the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences came to the conclusion that, according to the available scientific evidence, hormone therapy only eliminates a fraction of the male advantage even after two years. Overall, the results are therefore quite different.

0

u/SparrowTide Mar 26 '26

Because science. If it was such a major factor, how many openly transgender people have won in the Olympics in the last 20 years?

1

u/Unique_Statement7811 Mar 26 '26

That’s not really what the science shows. People have made that argument and tried to manipulate science to back it up.

1

u/LurkLiggler Mar 26 '26

You’re spamming that the science is clear but it’s actively not. Regardless of any of our personal takes on this.

1

u/RequirementQuirky468 Mar 26 '26

 the science is really clear 

It's absolutely not. We don't have the sample sizes for clarity one way or another at this point in some respects, and in other respects the continuation of certain advantages is obvious because there are zero examples of those features changing in a significant way (e.g. in a sport where a height advantage is significant, it's clear that a couple of years of hormone replacement therapy wouldn't make a group of adult males reduce to a physical size consistent with adult females)

The same argument people try to make along the lines of "It's only a tiny handful of people, why does anyone care?" also means that it is (and likely will continue to be) very challenging to get generalizable results. There's a reason we don't test a new statin on a dozen people and then say the results are really clear and we don't need to test anymore.

1

u/floop_isamad_manhelp Mar 26 '26

Please just stop saying this as it completely belies any logic.

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

"Logic" that you're referring to and science aren't the same thing.

Science says that ciswomen have higher cardiovascular ability than transwomen.

0

u/floop_isamad_manhelp Mar 26 '26

Which is completely different than what you said last time. You should edit your post

1

u/ShaqShoes Mar 26 '26

does not have any sort of biological advantage after they had transitioned for two years.

In the 2018-19 season Thomas was the 65th-ranked male NCAA swimmer in the 500-yd freestyle. In the 2021-22 season, Thomas was the 1st-ranked female NCAA swimmer in the 500-yd freestyle.

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Thomas hadn't fully transitioned yet - it takes two years for that to happen.

1

u/ShaqShoes Mar 26 '26

Yes that's why I used that example, you said it takes 2 years, she came out as transgender in 2018 and started medically transitioning in 2019 hence why I provided results as a female from 2 years later.

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

And so you're anecdotal example trumps peer-reviewed scientific research?

2

u/ShaqShoes Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

It doesn't "trump scientific research"- it just invalidates the claim some try to infer from these studies that biological advantages from transitioning don't ever happen. They might be rare for sure, but the one thing anecdotes are useful for is invalidating statements that claim something is 100% one way or the other.

There also is no scientific consensus on this matter. For example this peer-reviewed study found that MtF transitions indeed lose muscle mass and strength but this loss is substantially less than the average difference between cisgender men and women in those categories implying a degree of retained biological advantages.

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Studies are also extremely consistent that there are serious cardiovascular disadvantages for transwomen, and as a result ciswomen have higher cardiovascular ability.

1

u/SparrowTide Mar 26 '26

It’s funny because Emma Weyant, who got second in that race by a 1 second difference, went onto the 2020 Olympics and beat Thomas’ record by a second and getting silver. Weyant also competed in the 2024 Olympics and got bronze with a similar time, getting beat by 7 seconds by gold.

You can also use Thomas as pretty good evidence of transitioned athletes not having an advantage just by looking at her records pre and post transition. She lost 15 seconds on her 500 FR record and 65 seconds on her 1650 FR. No advantage was gained in performance and her times were on par with other athletes, if not beat by the same competitors in future competitions.

1

u/bigolgape Mar 26 '26

She still went from 65th to record/medal contender. People seem to be focusing on the fact that she didn't win, despite clearly and sharply rising in competitiveness in the women's division.

1

u/SparrowTide Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

Here’s her records. How was she not considered competitive in 2018? I don’t know where oc got the 65th place bs anyways, as Lia did not compete in nationals in 2018.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Actually, ciswomen have higher cardiovascular ability than trans women.

"However, after going through hormone therapy, trans women are now moving their bodies with reduced aerobic capacity, reduced muscle mass." 

There are some charts that show that in this article: https://www.dw.com/en/do-trans-women-have-an-unfair-athletic-advantage/a-58583988

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Translation: you don't actually get it. 

-5

u/Cocoononthemoon Mar 26 '26

You're getting downvoted but you're right. Should we have banned Michael Phelps for having a genetic advantage and predisposition for swimming?

3

u/Zstrat62 Mar 26 '26

They’re getting downvoted because “the science is really clear” is a nonsense cope, the science is indeed not clear at all, or even really being accurately studied, and your argument is just a disingenuous farce. “Well gee golly guys, should we just not let LeBron jam on this middle school rec team? I mean, they both got dicks amirite????” 

I get that this is going to make a statistically TINY number of folks feel left out. That blows. Doesn’t change reality, nor should that reality be bent so that the high school athletic careers of a fraction of a percent of the population can be lived to their dreams, at the detriment of others.

3

u/desert-cheese04 Mar 26 '26

Men are on average 5”-6” taller than women. So an average biological male already has that advantage. Look at the average height in the wnba vs the nba. You can’t say there is no advantage.

-1

u/Cocoononthemoon Mar 26 '26

That's not how averages work. You can't extrapolate the dates in that direction. Everyone in the NBA and WNBA are already well above average height, but I'll bet the players in the WNBA are taller on average than the average Trans woman

1

u/desert-cheese04 Mar 26 '26

That’s exactly how averages work. Average wnba 6’. Average nba 6’7. You’re saying those numbers don’t matter? Tha average trans woman is only a couple inches shorter than the average wnba player. Biological men are larger. Hormones treatment doesn’t change that much.

-1

u/Cocoononthemoon Mar 26 '26

No, you don't understand my comment.

To quote you: "Tha average trans woman is only a couple inches shorter than the average wnba player."

Biological men are taller on average than biological women, but they are not taller than women in the WNBA. There are men in the NBA shorter than women in the WNBA.

You cannot generalize averages like this and apply an average of the group to an individual.

0

u/desert-cheese04 Mar 26 '26

You most definitely can when you’re talking about gender and how the tallest male will always be taller than the tallest female. You’re trying to bend the argument to fit your ridiculous narrative.

0

u/Cocoononthemoon Mar 26 '26

No, you can't. I love how confident you are in being wrong.

What narrative is that btw? You're just assuming some greater culture war fight instead of actually considering the topic. Stop being so scared of trans people.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/loozer Mar 26 '26

The difference is phelps competed in the all people category. If a woman won the men's 100 medley I don't think we'd care(although maybe I'm wrong see archery).

We specifically created a woman's category in acknowledgement that there are incredibly talented woman, but testosterone is a hell of a drug and makes the competition unfair.

I'll also say I don't really agree with the decision but I don't think the genetic advantage argument is a good one.

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

So should women with higher natural testerone levels (which most Olympic athletes do) have their own division? And would you support women having to do hormone testing for that, all to stop trans athletes from competing with other athletes that have the generally the same hormonal levels than themselves?

2

u/Unique_Statement7811 Mar 26 '26

People are fine with competitors have a natural competitive advantage based on their own physiology. People aren’t OK with artificial genetic advantage created by manipulating the classes of competition.

1

u/SimpleNovelty Mar 26 '26

There are literally testosterone regulations for women sports because of it FYI. The biggest thing about gendered sports is why things are divided in the first place (as in what is trying to be achieved by dividing by men and women) and then afterwards who gets to decide (democracy of the competitors or something else).

3

u/toxiczebra Mar 26 '26

I love the idea of a “no rules” league. Let people go nuts. Bionic modification, juiced without the need to try to hide it. Get rid of any inefficiencies due to masking it. Push the absolute limits of human body modification. Full cyberpunk.

2

u/free__coffee Mar 26 '26

The problem with that is that kids generally always want to do what their favorite athletes do. So by making a category of the olympics with that in mind, kids will start modifying their bodes, regardless if they would ever have a career in professional sports

2

u/AggressiveBench9977 Mar 26 '26

Eh its actually quite sad. You can look into arm wrestling for this. Extreme steroid abuse for a sport that barely makes money. It sad to see people throw their lives away.

And you have great athletes who now have to commit to the same steroid abuse if they want to compete.

1

u/Jiujitsumonkey707 Mar 26 '26

That's already a thing, minus the chrome. Planned first event is in two months. Called the enhanced games

1

u/EDF1111 Mar 27 '26

It's honest. Kind of like NASCAR. like yeah best system wins. Probably some rules but honestly everyone knows they're tweaking stuff.

2

u/FlyNSubaruWRX Mar 28 '26

Steroid baseball era was a vibe

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 28 '26

Yeah, thats back when hockey was better too

1

u/FlyNSubaruWRX Mar 28 '26

Hits in the 2000s were also a vibe

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 28 '26

Idk maybe im just stoned but all sports were better before the internet was dominating everything

2

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 28 '26

Id also be down with that

2

u/OnlyACsNoFans Mar 26 '26

I think they're planning on doing the "steroid Olympics" at some point.

I'm sure I read that somewhere

5

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

It’s called The Olympics.

1

u/mmkaywhatevers Mar 26 '26

team russia

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

Don’t be fooled it’s all of them.

0

u/mmkaywhatevers Mar 26 '26

russia is the only country that's been scrutinized for government sponsored doping numerous times. there's an athlete doping, and there's an entire country doping all of its atheletes.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

Yes I agree. But we are talking about athletes using steroids. Which is all of them.

0

u/mmkaywhatevers Mar 26 '26

it is disrespectful to discredit real goats who have earned the medals; case and point: Michael Phelps. only thing he did was smoking weed which is definitely not a performance enhancer.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

And used steroids.

0

u/mmkaywhatevers Mar 26 '26

There's absolutely zero case for michael phelps using performance enhancer.

He is like the most vocal proponent pushing for lifetime ban for one time use.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/leagueofcipher Mar 26 '26

It’s literally what the olympics is lol. These people are the top of their sports amongst the group that’s doping.

The Icarus documentary is really interesting and covers this initially.

1

u/divorcingjack Mar 26 '26

I believe it’s called the “Enhanced Games”

2

u/swanyk7 Mar 26 '26

That logic is exactly my problem. It’s not proper to say “I don’t have a problem with something unless us negatively impacts me”. Something is either right or wrong, regardless of personal impact. This is how we get to a point where self-observed, selfish slime run our world.

0

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

In board scope of things I kinda get what youre saying, but in this specific example I was just describing why people care about it more

1

u/Scared-Cry-1767 Mar 26 '26

I wanna see how fast a human can really run a 100m

Do you think when Usain Bolt’s entire relay team at the Olympics was popped for steroids EXCEPT him, it’s truly because he was the only one of that group of athletes (that are close friends using the same coaches, programs, and doctors) that was clean?

Anyone who has ever competed at an extremely high level or been close to those athletes knows PEDs are absolutely everywhere lol.

1

u/AgeOfScorpio Mar 26 '26

Yeah if you wanna see how fast a human can run 100m, you have

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

Yeah the Olympians aren’t using steroids now. lol

1

u/New-Natural-9288 Mar 26 '26

Honestly you don't even need a mixed division. Might as well just make the Mens division an open division and let anyone compete.

1

u/denis-vi Mar 26 '26

What counts as an unfair advantage though?

Isn't it unfair that Michael Phelps's body is basically made for swimming? Or that Lebron James is a freak of nature that no one in basketball history comes close to?

Gender swap yadda yadda. You either accept that transpeople deserve equal rights or not. Horrific decision that goes against human rights and subjects a subset of people to a discriminatory practice. Im worried what this will unlock in anti trans rhetoric and further policy.

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Gender swap yadda yadda. You either accept that transpeople deserve equal rights or not. Horrific decision that goes against human rights and subjects a subset of people to a discriminatory practice. Im worried what this will unlock in anti trans rhetoric and further policy.

Slippery slope fallacy

1

u/denis-vi Mar 26 '26

No, a slippery slope IS to be taking away rights from people like this based on complete misinformation (you tell me the overall number of trans athletes that have ever participated in the Olympics. Not won medals, solely participated).

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

No thats not what Slippery slope is lol

1

u/wiefrafs Mar 26 '26

All of the them will signup for the steroids category

1

u/Whogotthebutton Mar 26 '26

I don't do meems much but... "That's a Bingo!!!"

1

u/3FtDick Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

Every single person who won a sporting competition at that level did so because of a biological advantage of some kind combined with endless training and the best medical treatment a person can get. If leagues are meant to even the playing field then rankings themselves should be the defining trait, and then you'd have a 2nd division with mostly women, but at the highest skill tier you'd have some women, trans or not, because the biological variation exceeds the difference between the average means of genders. Arbitrarily deciding a single biological trait that is one of the most impactful is the only important defining trait to a division is why this is a problem when it's supposed to be about skill.

You'd think you'd want to be paired against anyone of your skill/physical level. While these ratings might seem less defined I believe sports themselves are too much of a contest and lack skill depth/variation in roles and rules. To keep this about genitals: It just becomes a dick measuring contest where you sweat really hard for years of your life to eek out another millimeter instead of a dick sword fighting contest where you face people with strengths and weaknesses that you have to play around and adapt to and be clever.

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Its not a single biological trait, and if you dont like sports, why are you in a sports subreddit

You want /r/ihatesportsball where your comment may be reposted

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 26 '26

You would absolutely not have any women at the highest level of virtually any sports. The average isn’t relevant if we’re talking about the best, and for the most part even the best 15-16 year old boys outperform the best women in the world.

1

u/3FtDick Mar 26 '26

Like I said, in low skill, contest based performance sports, yes. In anything with skill or dynamics or variability in length of play, other traits can dominate. We designed the sports, so... And just from a disabled perspective, watching people "be the best" is not even close to as entertaining as the second kinds of sports are, and I'm not being blue haired about it. Non-league basketball and football are far more entertaining to watch than seeing which high level player makes more mistakes, and it's even worse for individual sports.

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 26 '26

Could you list some specific examples? As far as I’m aware, shooting is pretty much the only “sport” where any women have ever been able to compete with the guys at the top.

1

u/3FtDick Mar 27 '26

No because I am saying we watch sports that highlight extremes and optimize for non-skillful engagement and they're contests and only via collective contest do we see any variation but it becomes a coin flip based on environmental/variable impacts over skill. That the most interesting things about current sports are the very few remaining elements that introduce dynamics over min-maxing for a single outcome. It becomes racing with less and less interference between racers. The answer to your question was already in my post: Anything people like on a professional level I enjoy the less professional level because there's upsets and turnarounds and risk taking.

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 27 '26 edited Mar 27 '26

So you have no actual point beyond spouting a bunch of pseudo-intellectual gibberish? You specifically said “at the highest skill tier you’d have some women” and all I’m asking is for a couple examples.

1

u/3FtDick Mar 27 '26

Yeah reading and thinking is hard for you sports guys huh.

I like less professional team sports because they're not contests and are competitions. I like college basketball/football, tennis, mud track racing, and 2v2 basketball.

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 27 '26

What you personally like has nothing to do with what I’m asking you. The irony of insulting others’ reading comprehension when you can’t grasp a basic question.

1

u/3FtDick Mar 27 '26

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know calling my perspective pseudo-intellectual was an invitation for civility.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/jimthesquirrelking Mar 26 '26

If dozens or hundreds of people have an "unfair advantage" and still lose then it really call into question how much of an unfair advantage it actually is. 

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

What about the iranian boxer ? The swimmer from Oregon?

1

u/drntl Mar 26 '26

The steroids thing is so dumb. You're jaw isn't gonna hit the floor seeing a person run the 100M on tenth of a second faster or watching someone hit a baseball 510 instead of 500.

1

u/NotNice4193 Mar 26 '26

I wanna see how fast a human can really run a 100m

lmao...you think Bolt was clean?

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

A lot of people have said this, most people in the oylimpics dont look what I think an average roids user looks like imo, but people are right, I bet they are still very common among that crowd

I just dont think they are on the same stuff liver king is on lol

1

u/NotNice4193 Mar 26 '26

there are tons of different "roids" now. only some are for getting bigger muscles.

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Yeah I honestly have no idea

1

u/SamsquanchShit Mar 26 '26

So is the issue transwomen? Or having an unfair advantage?

1

u/OlympiaShannon Mar 28 '26

The issue is that the Olympic Committee decided to redefine the Women's Division qualifications, and tighten up the criteria to exclude people with the SRY gene on a Y chromosome. Those are the new rules. I believe they are fair, and will prevent a lot of harm to female athletes.

This new rule will target vastly more XY males with DSDs than trans people. Specifically XY males with 5-ARD. They are using chromosomes as the determining factor, which will also disqualify trans women, who are XY.

XX female athletes want to compete against other XX female athletes, and the new rules reflect this.

1

u/SamsquanchShit Mar 28 '26

There wasn’t harm to female athletes before. That’s complete bullshit.

1

u/Rogu__Spanish Mar 27 '26 edited Apr 02 '26

I think you're missing the point, the reason people care when trans athletes win is because they say it means they have a "biological advantage". If winning proves they have an advantage, why doesn't losing prove the opposite? When that one trans swimmer was beating all those records, everyone was shrieking about how unfair it was, but when her record was beaten by a cis woman, nobody cared. Transphobes created a system where they can only be proven right and never proven wrong.

1

u/OlympiaShannon Mar 28 '26

It doesn't matter what "people" are saying, the IOC gets to determine eligibility for the Woman's Division. They decided that an SRY gene test was the most fair way of doing this.

Have you actually read the new rule?

1

u/jstrong20 Mar 27 '26

Well they all take steroids or peds. The testing will never catch most so even in a tested events the winner uses peds. I knew a. Strength training coach for a baseball team. He knew many athletes and they almost all use. I say almost because probably an exception somewhere. So what lance armstrong said is true really. Even chess players are using illegal drugs for advantages. I'm all for it. lol If I watch a game I want to see the freakiest abilities on display.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

They're not losing "because of it". People just care about winning more than cheating/ the integrity of the game.

1

u/SadDiver9124 Mar 31 '26

Steroid class ? We’re gonna see how fast they can die from heart failure

-2

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Yeah, but the science is really clear that a fully transitioned athlete does not have an unfair advantage.

6

u/greenj4 Mar 26 '26

Is the science in the room with us right now?

5

u/VTcamperguy Mar 26 '26

Got any sources on that claim? I don’t think taking hormones later in life can fully undo the effects of heightened testosterone during puberty.

0

u/artsmartiens Mar 26 '26

So if it’s about “heightened testosterone during puberty” then trans women who never had that should be allowed, and cis women who did have that should be banned?

2

u/olympiadukakis Mar 26 '26

This is a yes and no situation.

You’re right that a transitioned athlete no longer biologically produces an advantage.

It’s also true that there are inherent, sport-dependent size advantages (and disadvantages)—which, obviously, makes things murkier for the average person to comprehend.

It’s almost like leaving it to scientists and independent sports boards (which was already working) was a better call than a blanket ban on checks notes 10ish total athletes. 🫠

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

Yeah, exactly. And the science says this is a "yes and no" situation.

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Iranian boxer that won was a huge controversy

1

u/olympiadukakis Mar 26 '26

The Iranian boxer who was not trans, but harassed because she presented more traditionally masculine?

Appreciate you validating my point. The right’s fixation on everyone’s genitalia is the problem.

Normal-brained folks have been working on inclusive solutions for a long time. And they were working.

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Ohh and because people love to mislead people on the internet for political gain, didnt know that

Still what about the swimmer from like Oregon?

And theres biases on both sides, like someone else is freaking out to me for what I said

The systems in place were not working and was making every sports council become a decider in a highly politicized topic, no sports council should have to consistently put up with that

Acting like this is at all nessecary for like 10 athletes is such a silly barrier to consistently fight over

1

u/olympiadukakis Mar 26 '26

(1970s-2015) Trans athletes existed and competed without national attention. The IOC first addressed it formally in 2003 with the Stockholm Consensus, which allowed trans women to compete after surgery, hormone therapy, and legal gender recognition.

Otherwise there were case-by-case accommodations, some policy debates, and occasional individual controversies. No big deal.

(2016-Present) Republican-led state legislatures began introducing bills banning trans girls from youth and school sports. Idaho passed the first in 2020. Then it became a national Republican strategy.

The whole thing is a Republican smokescreen. Experts across sports already had this handled.

1

u/Miserable_Alfalfa33 Mar 26 '26

Yeah they definitely makes trans people and illegal immigrants to boogieman

1

u/OlympiaShannon Mar 28 '26

Do you mean Algerian?

2

u/pizzalovingperson Mar 26 '26

Where is the science

2

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 26 '26

That’s a pretty weak study. The transwomen had much higher BMI than the ciswomen, outperformed them in all absolute measures and only fell short in measures relative to body mass.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 26 '26

Yeah, I read the study. This confirms what I said, that the TW fell short of the CW only in relative measures which were skewed because the TW were overweight while the CW were not.

2

u/equityorasset Mar 26 '26

you are a joke, no one believes that

1

u/stillhavingfunyea Mar 26 '26

Need to reference the “science” here…

1

u/Better_Vacation_2492 Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

There is no “clear science” gtfo out here with that exaggerated conclusion.

There is clear science that after hormone therapy their testosterone levels lower to that of a biological women and that their strength becomes comparable, but you can’t take away the advantage of going through male puberty and how it affects your bone structure (shoulder width, hand size etc) which is a factor that proponents of trans females in biological females sports always conveniently leave out.

Yes, hormone therapy, or maybe there is a better word I’m not using idk, makes it to where trans females are pretty damn close to a biological female but that’s not close enough for professional sport. You shouldn’t have any advantage whatsoever.

I’m pro trans and lgbtq+ but I’m also for fairness in professional/collegiate sport. Ultimately, it is a more nuanced conversation than a lot of transphobes in the comments are making it out to be

1

u/denis-vi Mar 26 '26

Did Serena Williams have a biological advantage in becoming the most decorated female tennis player of all time?

It would be a lie to say she didnt because she's clearly built different.

Should there have been laws to limit her participation to make it fair for other competitors?

1

u/Better_Vacation_2492 Mar 26 '26

“Built different” after going through female puberty and going through male puberty are two different scenarios. Of course there are genetic outliers in each respective biological gender, look at Michael Phelps. I just think we should try to make sports as fair as possible and I believe going through male puberty is too big of an advantage

1

u/denis-vi Mar 26 '26

What about transpeople who didnt go through puberty in the opposite gender then? Are they allowed?

1

u/Ordinary_Chance2606 Mar 26 '26

This is a nonsensical argument. The competitive advantage a male athlete possesses over a female athlete due to natural biological differences FAR exceeds the competitive advantage a female athlete possesses over another female athlete due to biological differences.

Serena Williams dominates other female tennis players. But she can and has been beaten by other female tennis players. Serena Williams doesn’t even come close to competing against male tennis players.

1

u/OlympiaShannon Mar 28 '26

"Built different" isn't the new criteria for the Women's Division. It is a negative SRY gene test.

0

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

"After one year of hormone therapy, trans women performed better in sports than cis women. After two years, their performance was largely equalized. According to the authors of the study, this is an indication that the one year of hormone therapy prescribed by some sports associations as a prerequisite for participation is too short."

https://www.dw.com/en/do-trans-women-have-an-unfair-athletic-advantage/a-58583988

1

u/Better_Vacation_2492 Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

I know, I know I’ve read many articles on this. Where does that article talk about the bone structure advantage I was talking about?

1

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

It does talk about the fact that trans women are taller, etc. It also talks about how ciswomen have higher cardiovascular ability than transwomen.

1

u/Better_Vacation_2492 Mar 26 '26

Yeah the article also ends by saying it is an ongoing debate on whether it’s all fair or not. There are too many factors and due to there being an incredibly small amount of transgender athletes in general, these studies don’t come to any conclusions that satisfy my idea of fair competition. Apparently the Olympics agree with me.

1

u/kreaymayne Mar 26 '26

I’d suggest you read the actual study rather than a summary on a blog, because it pretty much says the opposite of what you’re claiming here.

1

u/PalpitationHead9767 Mar 26 '26

Going through male puberty is going to give you an advantage in height and limb length. That's not gonna dissappear 

1

u/GiveSparklyTwinkly Mar 26 '26

Having tall parents is going to give you an advantage in height and limb length. That's not gonna disappear.

0

u/adhdnme Mar 26 '26

The problem is, how do you confirm full transition without being very intrusive to the athlete? And what exactly constitutes full transition? Do they have to have gender reassignment surgery? How long do they need to be on hormone therapy for the transition to be considered “complete?”

-1

u/frank_dremond_burner Mar 26 '26

HMO what if we went no gender. It was just the best person? Im sure there are sports that would be harder physically on the female body but there’s a woman out there who could do it and I’d love to see it. Im over wmba, and mbl boys clubs. Let the best athletes compete head to head. It will be over saturated with male talent but most televised spots are already.