T girls competing against genetic girls.

A word from our sponsor:

The Breast Form Store Halloween Sale Banner Ad (Save up to 60% off)
Printer-friendly version

Author: 

Blog About: 

We all know the realities here. At 72, I'm still stronger than a genetic woman my age or younger. Please don't do this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIlq85dL0C4

Comments

Not always the case!

This is not always the case....ad has been argued about often, in fact there is a rule/law in athletics that adult transgender females, must be on MTF-HRT for a minimum of 3 years, sometimes as long as 10 years before they are labelled medically as physiologically compatible as cisgender females.
Those that matured, within their 'natural' biology aka a female identified, male matured into adulthood or even as a senior will most likely maintain to some degree heavy parts of the 'natural' biology & at least in theory HRT will not work on them, they same that it does for those of us girls that are younger when on HRT.
Puberty blockers, will keep the child' prepubescent until they are legally and medically permitted to begin MTF-HRT.
That means that unlike peers their own age, a 15 year old MTF on puberty blockers, will have the prepubescant physilogy of a peer at the age in which they blocked puberty in almost all cases thats the strength-aka physiology of a child instead of a teenager.
There is also to take in consideration that MTF-HRT does change the mass majority of the male physiology to that mirrored of a female physiology.
Muscular atrophy, especially in biceps & penile, greatly decrease to almost nonexistance.
Building muscle will be much more difficult for the MTF then the cisgender female, due to the HRT counteracting those physiologically inclined male characteristics.
MTF-HRT works in two important parts. Oestrogene & or progesterone...and an anti androgene...the anti androgene blocks the production of testosterone, more often then not, less measure then a cisfemale in order to transition physically and change without testosterone battling the estrogene, which if left without an antiandrogene would almost completely overmeasure, thus prohibiting any transitional effect more then moodswings.
Alot of thus, will undergo an orchiectomy so they will not need to use antiandrogenes, as then testosterone production is cut even bioligcally to almost nothing.
Though many especially those that know this...will keep their scrotum for the SRS which the skin is used in/for Labialplasty (creation of the labials) in the standard form of SRS.
An orchiectomy even then increases and quickens physical transition....so its technically a scale issue in decision making.
There are also other instances in which change this capability'.
Bioligcal, medical, postoperative etc abnormalities; can and or will void those opinions.
Many if not all transgender females intentionally do not work on gaining muscle...after puberty this in turn can make it almost as difficult gaining muscles like that of their own bioligcally inclined cisgender males.
Myself....I spent mass majority of my teen years in and out of hospital.
Life saving operations, allergies, postoperative complications etc.
This in turn left me frail, I have almost NO immune system, I am almost always ill.
I am physically weaker then my bestfriends' 10 year old nonathletic daughter.
The real reason that transgender females, are argued about in sports is because cisgender females do nt have to prove their womanhood, thus transgender females work harder around the clock to prove to society especially peers and family that they are without a doubt female.
For some like myself, I prefer the nonathletic girly girl way of life, I have no problems asking for help from men when it is beyond my capabilities...like mass majority of cisgender females.
Others, especially if athletic, will do all they can to prove their femininity to be the best woman for the job...thus work harder at it....woman/girl power, feminism at its best.
So as you can see there are many variables that discredit that hypothosis given as fact, regardless of medicaly proven research.

Amelia Rosewood Year two.png

With Love and Light, and Smiles so Bright!

Erin Amelia Fletcher

Keeping it real?

I am Post op, and have been on hormones since 2003. I do notice that I am not as strong as I once was, perhaps by half, but I did not transition until I was 57. At the time, most people thought I was in my mid 40s because my genetics are very good, and I never drank or smoked. Though my employment ruined my lungs and joints. I'm still very youthful looking. With my XXY minimally AIS, non-kleinfelter's physiology my body really liked getting rid of testosterone and getting estrogen. But I still think that I perhaps maintain an edge on a genetic female.

Those who transition very early may not maintain a physiological edge as much as I worry about? It depends on genetics and so many other factors.

On The Other Hand, it is possible that the link is just another radical Christian right fake story. I had not thought of that, so I will do some research on the origin of the link.

This is not a simple topic

bobbie-c's picture

This is not a simple topic, especially if transgender people are involved in the conversation.

The idea of "transgender" is a compromise - it is the closest for those with GID to come to being the gender that they identify with, but it is not something that they want to be. In the final analysis, a transgender woman craves to be a "true" woman, whatever "true" means, and likewise a transgender man craves to be a true man. No one wants to be transgender. That may sound politically incorrect, and if it is, I apologize to those that are offended. But to my mind, those who wish to be the opposite gender - being "transgender" is a compromise, at best.

But that's all it can ever be for now. So we unfortunate ones live with this compromise.

Also, to my mind, those that think of transitioning as an "optional thing" - that it is something that they "want" and not something that they desperately "need" (in fact need it so much that many are suicidal because of it) - they are not not really transgender.

For example, those that are transvestites do not necessarily want become one of the opposite gender: they dress only as the opposite sex but don't really want to be the opposite sex.

There are many that believe that it is the accoutrements of the opposite sex are what transgenders crave - things like being able to dress up as the opposite sex, or going to places that one usually cannot, or do things that one usually cannot. Many of these find their drive to dress up etc. more like a fetish, but those that think of transitioning as a deeper need than just a fetish - that it is a more visceral need - that is the "real" transgender person.

The "accoutrements" are just the surface of it - the shallow, superficial part of it. The heart of a transgender's pain is that she wants to fundamentally be of the opposite gender - to live and breathe and and be acknowledged as one, and to be allowed to dream and aspire for the same things that a "real" female (or male) would be.

The reason I say all of this is because what you said - your plea of "please don't do this" will not have much traction with "real" transgender people. To be truly be of the opposite gender, one needs to be accepted as such. To be excluded from her "fellow females" or their "fellow males" just adds to their not being of that gender.

But the heart of the issue is that being "transgender" is a compromise - it is not a perfect fit, and will never be, and though it is the closest fit atm, then there will be problems.

In that video you shared, the genetic female athlete is right to complain that, from a physical level, she has less a chance to win against her transgender competitors, but it is not a simple thing. Those of the transgender community want their needs to be acknowledged and addressed. But I suppose the rights of the non-transgender community cannot be ignored, too.

For now, I might agree that there transgender girls will dominate women's sports because of an unfair physical advantage. But then that is the heart of the thing - being "transgender" is only a "best fit" and not a perfect fit:" there will always be problems.

But it is not simply a case of saying "please don't do this," as I hope I've shown, otherwise, it just means that we've given up: the current solution is probably not it, but there is probably a real solution out there - it just hasn't been found yet.

I guess what I'm saying is, instead of saying "please don't do this," I think it's better to say "please find another way."

 

"Another" Reason For Transgender ?

In speaking with a close Genetic Female friend, the idea has come up and the question asked that puzzles me. Now I have to think through the idea that perhaps I hated my childhood abuse so much, and was so demeaned by a man hating wife of 39 years, that I 'killed' my male self to prevent myself from ever having to grow old and die male?

I really like my female self and not having to face the bull shit that males put out and have to live with. My life is mostly easy and mild now and I am mostly happy if the homophobes just stay in their holes in the ground. I'm not sexually active, no boy friend because frankly males are too chickenshit to face what associating with a 'false female' might do to their precious male image.

Pondering, pondering.

Gwen

You are still valid

Even if the original reason was to "not be a man" you are nowm, by your own words, happy (more happy) being female than you were / have been / could imagine yourself to be as a male.
That alone makes it valid.

The only thing a psychological evaluation is looking for is persistence.

And I am with you in "thank God I don't have to do all that male bullshit anymore".

I have dared to utter the words to my psychologist that I am now gender euphoric as a woman.

Anne Margarete

It appears that the linked video is highly biased

"The Daily Signal" obviously is a Christian right wing channel and viewpoint if you look at the other videos on the channel.

The video appears to be a highly edited and overdubbed video of clips from many different sources. The dark haired athlete that describes her plight of not having a chance against the transgender athlete appears to be fake. Her video performance from a start position was not competitive. Her form was terrible and she mostly stood up before she started to run. She lied when she said no one thinks it's fair because there is much support for these transgender athletes. Nor do they always win the events that they enter, like she said they did. They lost many events they have competed in to cis-gender girls.

As far as fairness, as other articles have written, there are many types of different advantages athletes may have. Wealthy families can afford special training programs for their children that are not available to the average athlete. Taller children may have a genetic advantage in certain events. Girls with a naturally higher testosterone production may have a genetic advantage in certain events. Girls that live in higher elevations may have an advantage in certain endurance events. Why is it the advantage the transgender kids may have are singled out vs. the advantages of the wealthy, the genetically advantaged, or some other advantaged child?

This is not nearly a cut and dried issue as the video presented.

"Christian" flim flam ???

I had started to wonder that but had not really looked into it much. I did write to the station calling them on their shit. I was a devout Christian for 33 years, and the moment I had trouble they did me like a bunch of Paranas. I'm so pissed that I might not sleep tonight!!!

Maybe two sleeping pills? Not more, being safe?

Gwen

I have

Maddy Bell's picture

A friend - well I guess long standing work colleague more accurately. She is quite vocal on this subject, in fact downright hateful not just against TG sports people but even homosexual women!
She isn't interested in science or actual facts, instead she has a huge chip on her shoulder as a TG rider beat her once in a race over 20 years ago. The fact she's about five four and built like a twig clearly doesn't come into it - she's quite happy to beat or be beaten by men and cis women twice her size but she just has this hate of TG sports people because of this one result. There is no arguing with her so in the spirit of peace and friendship I don't.

Why should the community not take part in sport?


image7.1.jpg    

Madeline Anafrid Bell

I'm not sure

I find this discussion interestng. My sport was always softball - 8", fast-pitch. Mine was the 'hot corner.' I hit for average, never for power - choke up and slap it.
My second was ten-pin bowling. I was never good at it. My average was in the low 160s.

I found I'd lost some strength, but not a lot. Since both a softball field and a bowling alley are the same for men and women, I had a good comparison.

My hitting didn't change a lot. Women softball pitchers can fire the ball about as well as men. And, it doesn't matter a lot whether the ball is traveling 45 feet at fifty or sixty miles per hour. It's on you so fast (about half a second!) you don't have time to think. You react, and if your reaction speed is high, you have a chance at contacting the ball.

Running was much the same. Base to base is only 60 feet, so the time differential is almost nonexistent. There is some difference in running down the ball as an outfielder, but I seldom played in the grass.

Throwing from deep behind the bag was a little harder, but not much. Regardless, it's a long throw that must get across the diamond before the runner can race 60 feet. Again, if women run more slowly, then I had a fraction of a second longer, but it's not much over those distances.

In bowling, the problems were those of conditioning and position. By the tenth frame of a three game match, hurling a 16-pound ball with pace and accuraccy is difficult. I found I had to drop down to a 14-pound ball to maintain my game. However, that weight is more than sufficient if the ball is buried into the pocket. And, it's easier to pick up the lone 10-pin because the lighter weight is easier to control.

So, from my experience, I can make two statements. First, I was not as strong nor did I have the endurance I once had. However, I was stronger and with more endurance than most women. The best were better than I was and still were. But, I was never a big, strong athlete, either.

So, do I feel there is an argument to be made regarding post-ops vs GGs. IMHO, a good post-op will beat an excellent GG more times than not.

Again, just my opinion, but it is based upon my observations.

Red MacDonald

you do know that is a hate group, right?

Teresa L.'s picture

part of the daily wire, etc group.

as to your statement, when did you transition? I did at 43, started HRT at 44 and I am now 49 and I am NOT as strong as I was.

science has shown that even OLDER transitioners on HRT will lose muscle mass and bone density, the reason we are recommended to take vitamin D. muscle growth AND retention both require T. so unless you are pre-op and not on T blockers, you really shouldn't be, but we are NOT clones, we all vary. same reason that women, such as the recent case of Caster S. from South Africa I believe, who born with a NATURALLY higher level of T than other natal women. not trans, not intersex, 100% natal, cis female. now will have to take BLOCKERs because its "unfair".

again science has shown that with a minimum of 6 months, maximum of 12, the trans female's body will be LESS than a natal female as HRT tends to lower the T below natal female levels, especially at that age. now I have seen a few, and think this was ONE of the states, that do NOT require the minimum time before competing. if that IS the case, and they haven't done that time I can see it. there was another case in Washington I believe, where they used that she won ONE race in the whole meet, 3rd, and 4th in the other two races she competed in as an example of "how unfair it was" cause no natal/cis female EVER won one race and placed 3rd and 4th ever in history, lol.

or how about this one. a Texas teen trans male who was REQUIRED to compete ONLY in the women's division. as normal carefully monitored T and E levels, so they have regular tests showing that for a MALE his T is "normal" but it DOES give him an unfair advantage, but no matter what happened, how much he tried, sued, etc, he was NOT allowed to compete against males. so this argument is completely specious in my opinion.

PS just in case you missed it the complaining girl is like an eighth-place competitor. she would NEVER have won based on her previous performance, but hate groups LOVE this kind of comment, at least they likely won't see it

Teresa L.

Testosterone and athletics

0.25tspgirl's picture

I think some of this recalls the East German Women’s Olympic teams. They dominated their events because of the use of anabolic steroids by their nation. (We’ll not mention the extreme health price those women are paying today.) Still we know how far the anti-Christian right will go to “prove” a point.

BAK 0.25tspgirl