• 'Actually a male': Transgender weightlifter stripped of world records
    136 replies, posted
No no no bro dont you see if you questioned this or even asked to maybe review current practices of allowing this then are are just a huge transphobic end of discussion. Anything that doesnt allow an transgender people to do as they please regardless of real life repercussions is just wrong. Transgender MMA Fighter Breaks Skull of Her Female Opponent. Are.. https://twt-thumbs.washtimes.com/media/image/2018/02/20/Texas-Transgender_Wrestler_85092.jpg-b115d_c0-135-3154-1973_s885x516.jpg?417aa877f50d7869996cc422133910533a9dc0d0 Woah looks at that people being hurt and breaking their skulls because the are being paired with people completely outclass them in biological differences. Maybe people are worried that folks are getting hurt and competitions being actually fair not transphobia. But no the snow flakes in this thread cant comprehend any logical reason why regular non transphobic folk would be cautious of a very debated subject. Nope they just think we actually mad about that fact that they switched pee pee parts or not.
Dude you probably shouldn't say FP isn't transphobic in a thread made by a transphobe who makes these kinds of threads to concern troll.
you know the picture you posted is of a transman who was forced against his will into fighting female opponents when he had a unfair advantage with his transition. He lobby'd to fight against men but was denied, and then people complain that he curbstomps all the women in high school wrestling that he didn't want to fight.
imagine being so transphobic you don't even read the fucking story you post and end up owning yourself THIS hard
Muscle atrophy begins at 3 months.
Yeah that's cute and it takes a long long time for it to reach the level of a regular girl. Look at much more ripped these transgender people look in comparisons to the top cis female lifters.
how can I be racist, i have a BLACK fRiENd1!
Could you please elaborate what kind of categorization are you talking about? As in, how would you want to see people being spread out, based on which metrics?
Woah one guy. Hold the fucking presses Let's pretty the over whelming majority of facepunch is leftist and all for LBGT sav befor a few trolls. Are we we pretending this place is /pol/ now because of one guy? Nevertheless this article has a discussion worth having, if you whiny little babies stop shouting "transphobe" and just have a fucking conversation. I just came here to have a respectful conversation and listen to each other viewpoints but instead I get called an transphobe by people who dont know a damn thing about me all because I suggest maybe we should be wary about the physical aspects of it. Make sure things are fair for everybody. I didnt even say she SHOULDNT play either. nope just express concern that the transgenders are being lumped with contenders that they conpletely outclass regardless if they are playing against females or guys, even if they dont want to.
could you be any more of a corn cob if you actively tried
All I asked why am I wrong? I just want to hear your perspectives and learn. That's the main reason why I've been coming to these forums because I actually learned alot coming here. I had my views of life change alot in my years growing on this site. I keep a open mind and want to see different views of things from you guys(well not you specifically as you seem to crawled out of the dumpster behind the abortion clinic) but instead you guys are acting like im out here saying all transgender wrestler should be burned on a cross lol. All I pointed out was that the much weaker peers could get hurt as outclassing is a thing which is why boxing and other sports separate from weight and even skills and not just sex. Theres much more viables to being classes in sports then just a penis and vagina you obtuse button pusher.
>she I'm not looking to immerse myself in this argument but I'm just gonna say; homie if you want to convince the crowd that you're not transphobic, repeatedly and knowingly misgendering someone several times in one post isn't a great look
Theres several different transgender folks being discuss, here mistakes happen mate. Mispronouncing an foreigner's name doesnt automatically make me racists, sometimes mixing up pronouns dont make me transphobic. A lot of you guys are throwing around and over using the term transphobic as if it's some magic word that let's you win arguments. I dont hate trans and supports trans right, if I didnt I would say so.
So not enough testosterone for a year completely destroys your gains? I'm not buying it TBH. Sure, it may inhibit the building of additional muscle mass, but I find it difficult to believe that it would remove existing mass in a significant manner. And even someone who's been on HRT for over a year is not on a level playing feel with her female competitors if they retain muscle mass they much more easily acquired pre-transition.
Better ban ciswomen with higher then average testosterone levels too. Ban people with a significant genetic advantage too. All athletes must have the exact same build, genetics, and body chemistry for maximal fairness. Anyone who doesnt see the transphobia behind this is a fool. If they gave a shit about "unfair" advantages then they'd be banning a lot more than transwomen. Hell black people usually do better in running sports, should we segregate them into their own league too? Should we have a "mutant" league for people with genetic quirks that confer athletic ability as well? This ban is shite, and the "advantage" that transwomen have is largely negated within a year of HRT. All that muscle (if you had any to begin with) turns to flop.
Presumably, on the same metrics currently used to disqualify somebody from entering a certain gender bracket - testosterone levels, bone density, muscle mass, etc. If those criteria are good enough to disqualify someone they should be good enough to serve as a basis for a bracket that is not arbitrarily tied to a gender. Maybe even have more than just two brackets? I really see no strong reason to stay with gender segregation now that our tools are better at analyzing a person's inherent physical "hardware".
That's fair, but yeah constant exercise generally hinders atrophy of any kind a great deal. Furthermore, lost muscle mass can generally be gained back much more easily. Besides, just looking at pics of this competitor suggests she maintains somewhat of an edge due to her past training and growth: women who can get as bulky as that naturally are one in a million, so given how much of a tiny minority trans athletes are, I find it difficult to believe that this specific athlete happens to be such a woman.
You cant tell that from a photograph. Do you have any statistics about the portion of women who are capable of "getting bulky like that"? Your argument is based on overinterpreting a photograph and a statement with no supporting citation.
I mean I also had two other arguments preceding that one, but OK. I don't have stats about this RN but getting bulky is generally a fear that puts some women off of working out, yet nothing short of intense training coupled with high testosterone will need to such a thing. If your personal experience is any indication high testosterone post-transition doesn't factor in the case of this athlete.
See herein lies the issue. We can eithet categorize for everybody or nobody. If we do everybody we have leagues where theres one qualifying participant who wins gold every time. If we do nobody then ciswomen will probably never see a gold medal outside of very extreme edge cases. It's all a tricky hoo haa and I'm not sure of a solution that doesn't result in someone getting upset for being unfaily judged.
On mobile so the old quote won't delete Can you cite some research showing that? I linked multiple things evidencing that low testosterone does destroy your gains, and that within a year their performance is in line with what you'd expect of a cis woman of a similar calibre. "I'm not buying it" isn't a valid counter argument to scientific research.
...the solution i proposed would require minimal changes and in fact solve the entire problem of gender identity in itself playing a role. we can categorize, just as we do now, only instead it will be based on relevant characteristics (that merely happen to be sexually dimorphic in humans), sidestepping both this problem and other potential problems, and making impossible a selective treatment where trans people have such situations happen to them in the first place, when other biologically gifted people do not. as most biological females will fall into the same category, they will still win medals even in this new system. however, this all would require certain organizations to admit there is a problem and that they made some mistakes - instead of blaming certain individuals for daring to differ from the arbitrary standard. it isnt an all-or-nothing dichotomy as you present here.
1) Cardiovascular exercises like running do not have the same effects on your body as strength exercises. When you exercise, your energy has to come from somewhere. People think that if you're burning more calories than you take in, the rest comes from just fat. But that's not true. Your body will also start eating away at your lean muscle mass. This is how people can lose weight, but not change their body shape, becoming "skinny fat". Strength training preserves this lean muscle mass, and even helps it grow, leaving mostly the fat to burn. You can easily dig deeper into the science behind it and learn about cut and bulk stages, but the premise is the same. If all you're doing is cardio, and you're not purposefully training to retain and build your lean muscle mass, you're going to lose it no matter if you're on HRT or not. So runners, who mainly focus on cardio and endurance, not on retaining/building lean muscle mass, will naturally lose that muscle mass as they would during a normal transition. Strength athletes however, DO train to build and retain muscle. So that will change how/how much/when they lose muscle mass during their transition. 2) In the second research, this line: For example, T'Sjoen et al(14), in a cross-sectional study with 50 individuals who made the transition from MTF with SRS, assessed the anti-androgen hormone therapy supplied to MTF individuals and reported a loss of muscle mass, an increase in fat mass, and a decrease in bone mineral density. Significant changes in the MTF transgender are apparent in the first phase of HRT (from month 6 to month 12).  References a study that says nothing about transgender individuals who train to retain and/or build lean muscle mass and strength as is the case with lifters. The source you quoted in fact states: Such findings provide some support for the recent recommendations by the IOC to allow transgender women to compete assuming that “normalising” the levels of these hormones removes the vast majority of the advantage of having been male. Unfortunately, none of these studies assess performance and therefore this important assumption could not be verified directly. And goes on to say: In the only study to assess performance in athletes who have transitioned from MTF, Harper(8) compared race times in eight non-elite MTF transgender runners who had competed in distance races in both genders and found their age-and-gender graded performances had not changed once their bodies had adjusted to the transition.  So your sources do not debunk anything that has to do with weight lifting.
Which brings me back to my original post, which is that if someone can present research which suggests that peformance in weight lifting does in fact significantly differ from the other two in terms of the time frames for lower testosterone levels to bring trans women to a level playing field with cis women, then there can be a reasonable conversation about rule changes. So far you've presented a hypothesis: muscle mass changes in weight builders differs from track events, and some evidence as to why that's a hypothesis worth investigating, but no actual studies of the affects of hrt on muscle mass in weight lifting. If those studies don't exist, then they should be done but until someone can prove that there is good reason to discriminate here, the default should be to not do so.
or MMA, and two women literally got their heads caved in by an equal weight competitor they could not adequately defend against despite having superior skills and more experience to prove it. That is the default behavior already and has been for at least four years, and in certain sports there is obvious reason why more objective scrutiny needs to take place, and more objective does not nor ever will mean personal anecdotal opinion.
Tbh, this isn't even JUST a benefit for cis females either. It benefits men quite significantly too. pls do it
If no study on the effects of HRT regarding performance in weightlifting has been done, why should the default hypothesis be that it levels the playing field after a year? Wouldn't the actual default hypothesis be that it has no effect until evidence suggests otherwise?
It's been demonstrated that lowering testosterone levels lowers muscle mass, the argument being made here is that weight lifting is different because of training specifics. I don't think that's necessarily an invalid argument, but it's not currently an evidenced one. I'm also aware that the extrapolation isn't ideal, it's just the only data we currently have - I would be happy to see more specific information. If this is the case at the top of this page, it's about a trans man who was denied access to male leagues so forced to participate in women's leagues. That's an argument for trans people being able to compete in their gender's category, not against.
Has it been demonstrated that lowering testosterone levels through HRT lowers muscle mass to a level that is equivalent to that of a female athlete of a similar category and age, in a variety of fields that includes weightlifting? I don't think anybody here will argue that low testosterone doesn't inhibit muscle growth or lower muscle mass to some extent, but the question is by how much? So far we have no specific data on that front, because the only study that we've seen so far evaluates amateur track times, in a discipline where muscle mass doesn't directly correlate with performance. When faced with such a complete lack of data, the reasonable conclusion to reach is that it hasn't been shown at this point that HRT affects muscle loss to a degree that would consistently puts MtF trans athletes on a level playing field with ciswomen a year into transition. Making a conclusion based on an extrapolation of a single study isn't proper scientific method, and when it's widely established within the scientific community that men have biological advantages that gives them an edge in disciplines that require strength, the burden of proof remains on you to show that a single year of HRT consistently changes that paradigm regardless of training and past performances.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.