Is this fair?

[Babybluejeans]

No, not fair.  This is about competition. Those young ladies that trained hard, sacrificed, entered a GIRLS competition  - no sympathy for them apparently.  It's a competition, which should be about XX and XY chromosomes.  This isn't about how someone identifies, it is 100% physiology. 

If we're going to use how someone chooses to identify, than why can't a 15 year old boy identify as a 12 year old boy and play at that level?  If birth certificates don't matter any longer for gender, how can they legally mean anything for age either?  It's all about how one identifies?

Do not understand the Lebon comparison. Lebron is a male, you are a male. He got a better roll of the dice for body type for now (he may die at age 39 and you may live to age 99).  That's completely different than this example.

Feel badly for those young ladies who did it right.

What if someone is born a Chicos but self-identifies as a Hoopaloop or 4or5years? Should that person be allowed to post on Scoop?

[Jockey]

as unbelievably dickishly condescending as you are about all things recruiting, at least you back that up by being knowledgeable and being able to cite facts.

on this subject you only add 'woefully ignorant' to being dickishly condescending.  either cite facts or explicit personal experience - anything else is simply showing that you are afraid of something you don't understand.

I'm betting there are no women beating down his door.

And what's with "broads"? I used that term when I was 12 and thought I was cool.

[B. McBannerson]

Age identity is not a thing. Gender identity is. Gender and sex are two different things. The question in this case is whether someone's gender or someone's sex be used when deciding where they compete. Some states (like CT) use gender. Some states us sex. Some states (like TX) use sex assigned at birth (even if you've gone under the knife you aren't allowed to compete with the gender you identify with). I honestly don't know which is right. I see both sides of the argument.

I would think to be fair, one would use the biological definition.  If XX, then female.  If XY, then male.  There is a physical advantage of being XY and it is unfair to XX participants if XY are allowed to participate.

Gender identity wasn't a thing that long ago either.  I have met transgender people, mit changes one's viewpoints to know people that may not nearly fit into assigned categories.  I don't think it is a scam, but it is also unfair in athletics for those that are competing with other biological consistent people.  Somehow those girls are lost in this conversation. 

[ATL MU Warrior]

What if someone is born a Chicos but self-identifies as a Hoopaloop or 4or5years? Should that person be allowed to post on Scoop?

No, they should be locked up in a mental asylum.

[mu03eng]

Here's the question I guess I still have, and I'm willing to admit I'm pretty ignorant in all of the steps involved transitioning from one sex to another, shouldn't all of this be based on where you are on the sex spectrum? If you have initiated the process to transition (hormone therapy, operations, etc) then I think you compete in the classification of the sex you are moving to.

Categorizing on gender for sports feels like an anachronism that existed when society treated gender and sex as synonyms. Clearly they have become two different things, and for competitive reasons I'd think Gender is no longer the appropriate distinction.

Dunno, maybe I'm a neanderthal, but just trying to figure this out.

[ATL MU Warrior]

oh, and no woman will ever ever ever play in the NBA.  When I lived in Miami I scrimmaged against the WNBA team in AA Arena with a bunch of guys I had never met or played with before.  The guys absolutely crushed them, not even competitive.  And we were hardly NBA level athletes. 

This is not to say that some of the women weren't very skilled and better at some things than us dudes because they absolutely were.  But, our collective size, speed and especially strength were way too much for them to deal with. 

[muwarrior69]

Depending on the state they will change the driver's license if they go through sex reassignment surgery. I'm not sure if any change it based on gender identity without the surgery.

I don't know what someone who thinks they are dog has to do with anything. That person is mentally ill. Everyone has both a gender and a sex. Most people its the same. For some people, its different.

The way I see it you can't have it both ways as you yourself have said everyone has a gender and a sex, yet Obama expanded the definition of sex to include gender when it came to Title IX, rather than have the language of Title IX changed to include gender. When we conflate the two as inter changeable or as you say they are different we run into all kinds of trouble. I can see a lawyer getting their trangendered client off because the only evidence is the DNA of someone of the opposite sex even though the DNA is a 100% match.

[StillAWarrior]

oh, and no woman will ever ever ever play in the NBA.  When I lived in Miami I scrimmaged against the WNBA team in AA Arena with a bunch of guys I had never met or played with before.  The guys absolutely crushed them, not even competitive.  And we were hardly NBA level athletes. 

This is not to say that some of the women weren't very skilled and better at some things than us dudes because they absolutely were.  But, our collective size, speed and especially strength were way too much for them to deal with.

And my perspective on this is in the context of volleyball.  My son is a pretty good volleyball player who played on some better than average volleyball teams (for Ohio -- almost certainly below average on a national scale).  A couple of them ended up playing at an in-state college that started a new D3 program (and two of them weren't even able to compete at that level).  My daughter also is pretty good and played on one of the top age-level teams in the country (i.e., peaking in top 10, but consistently top 20-30; finishing 5th at Nationals in highest division of competition).  Every single girl on my daughter's club team will be playing NCAA volleyball next year (nine at the D1 level; one on full scholarship at the D2 level).  In short, my daughter's team is leaps and bounds ahead of my son's team in terms of talent and accomplishment.  However, if they played, it would be an absolute bloodbath in the boys' favor.  As a general matter, girls volleyball teams/players are light years ahead of the boys in terms of talent/skill, but simply can't compete with them on the court.  They are overpowered.

Regarding the issue at hand, I tend to agree that the kid in the article played by the rules.  Those are the rules, so that's that.  But I think it's a stupid rule.  I think females (sex) are simply unable to compete with males (sex) in most sports and it's completely unfair to require them to do so.  I'd hope that people supporting the rules in this case would be just as open minded about supporting the rules in states where biological sex is the determining factor. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The way I see it you can't have it both ways as you yourself have said everyone has a gender and a sex, yet Obama expanded the definition of sex to include gender when it came to Title IX, rather than have the language of Title IX changed to include gender. When we conflate the two as inter changeable or as you say they are different we run into all kinds of trouble. I can see a lawyer getting their trangendered client off because the only evidence is the DNA of someone of the opposite sex even though the DNA is a 100% match.

Can you please show me where Obama expanded the definition of sex to include gender under Title IX? I am very familiar with all the DCLs that have come out about Title IX and none of them have rolled gender and sex together. In fact, in the 2010 letter on harassment and bullying they very clearly define that there is a difference between gender based and sex based harassment and both are prevented by Title IX. In the 2016 letter they actually start the letter by giving a definition of gender identity and a definition of sex.

I'm admittedly ignorant on some of this, but I don't think someone's DNA changes when they go through sex reassignment surgery. So I'm not sure how a lawyer could get a transgendered client off that way.

[Lennys Tap]

Easy Lenny, I don't know why you would think I would call you a knuckle dragger. We are on the same side of the argument so If I think you're a knuckle dragger, than I must think of myself as one too.

I said "maybe a dozen" as an off the top of my head guess without even thinking about it. "Maybe" meaning 12 as the absolute max with the more likely possibility of 0-11. I have no idea what the number would be. To be honest, it doesn't matter because it wasn't the point I was making.

We agree on the larger point, integration would hurt women's sports. I don't know that I agree that it would completely eliminate them. I think there is a possibility that there are women who could compete in several sports with men. But they would be the massive minority, effectively eliminating women from the ranks of professional sports.

Sorry if I overreacted, TAMU. We agree in principle - equality of opportunity, separate, distinct teams/leagues. But for me anyway, ridiculous assertions that there are WNBA players who are NBA ready or Steve Novak equivalents in the WNBA only serve to blur very clear and obvious lines.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I would think to be fair, one would use the biological definition.  If XX, then female.  If XY, then male.  There is a physical advantage of being XY and it is unfair to XX participants if XY are allowed to participate.

Gender identity wasn't a thing that long ago either.  I have met transgender people, mit changes one's viewpoints to know people that may not nearly fit into assigned categories.  I don't think it is a scam, but it is also unfair in athletics for those that are competing with other biological consistent people.  Somehow those girls are lost in this conversation.

So what happens when a transgender man (female to male) who is already taking hormones or had sex reassignment surgery? Their chromosome is still XX but they have extra testosterone and mass muscle that would allow them to dominate in the women's league. Happened in Texas recently.

Regarding the issue at hand, I tend to agree that the kid in the article played by the rules.  Those are the rules, so that's that.  But I think it's a stupid rule.  I think females (sex) are simply unable to compete with males (sex) in most sports and it's completely unfair to require them to do so.  I'd hope that people supporting the rules in this case would be just as open minded about supporting the rules in states where biological sex is the determining factor. 

Personally, I am. I see from a fairness standpoint why it would be good to use sex in these situation. I can also see why from a safety and social justice standpoint it would be good to use gender. In cases where hormone treatments or surgery has happened I think you satisfy both by letting them compete where they identify. I honestly don't feel strongly about this either way because I honestly don't care if some girl in Connecticut got 2nd place instead of first place in a high school track meet. She will be fine. As will the one who got 3rd instead of 2nd and the one who didn't place instead of getting 3rd. The transgendered athlete will probably be ok too if they have to race based on their sex instead of their gender. Though that's my perspective, not being transgendered maybe there's more importance and impact than I realize. These cases are so rare and have such low stakes in the grand scheme of things that I just don't have the energy to get upset about it.
 

[GGGG]

wait a second, now i'm struggling-if someone is born a male, but i.d.'s as a female, the license says female?  but they aren't a female. you aren't what you think you are or want to be.  just ask rachel dolezal how that's working out for her. what if they think they are a dog?  does that mean they are a dog? 

This is the same bullsh*t rationale that people have used against gay marriage.

Let last I checked, no one has legally tried to marry their dog yet.

[GGGG]

I would think to be fair, one would use the biological definition.  If XX, then female.  If XY, then male.  There is a physical advantage of being XY and it is unfair to XX participants if XY are allowed to participate.

Gender identity wasn't a thing that long ago either.  I have met transgender people, mit changes one's viewpoints to know people that may not nearly fit into assigned categories.  I don't think it is a scam, but it is also unfair in athletics for those that are competing with other biological consistent people.  Somehow those girls are lost in this conversation. 

Mostly because this doesn't happen very often.  Sorry but I am more sympathetic to those who struggle with gender identity than those who finish second at the state track meet. 

[GGGG]

No, not fair.  This is about competition. Those young ladies that trained hard, sacrificed, entered a GIRLS competition  - no sympathy for them apparently.  It's a competition, which should be about XX and XY chromosomes.  This isn't about how someone identifies, it is 100% physiology. 

If we're going to use how someone chooses to identify, than why can't a 15 year old boy identify as a 12 year old boy and play at that level?  If birth certificates don't matter any longer for gender, how can they legally mean anything for age either?  It's all about how one identifies?

Do not understand the Lebon comparison. Lebron is a male, you are a male. He got a better roll of the dice for body type for now (he may die at age 39 and you may live to age 99).  That's completely different than this example.

Feel badly for those young ladies who did it right.

No one did it wrong.  This wasn't a ruse so someone could win a track meet.  Everyone did it within the rules that were present at the time.

Should those rules change to require that someone needs to undertake hormone therapy first?  That's a debate. 

[Lennys Tap]

I honestly don't care if some girl in Connecticut got 2nd place instead of first place in a high school track meet. She will be fine.

I wonder if you'll be so blasé when your daughter gets cheated out of something she's given her all to because of an unfair playing field.

[GGGG]

I wonder if you'll be so blasé when your daughter gets cheated out of something she's given her all to because of an unfair playing field.

Believe me, I had two kids that participated fully in high school sports.  I was excited for them, rooted for them, but never wanted to hear excuses.  It's just high school sports. 

Life's going to give them a bunch of situations that may not seem fair.  Learning how to deal with them is a greater life lesson than winning a track meet is.

[muwarrior69]

Can you please show me where Obama expanded the definition of sex to include gender under Title IX? I am very familiar with all the DCLs that have come out about Title IX and none of them have rolled gender and sex together. In fact, in the 2010 letter on harassment and bullying they very clearly define that there is a difference between gender based and sex based harassment and both are prevented by Title IX. In the 2016 letter they actually start the letter by giving a definition of gender identity and a definition of sex.

I'm admittedly ignorant on some of this, but I don't think someone's DNA changes when they go through sex reassignment surgery. So I'm not sure how a lawyer could get a transgendered client off that way.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/tix_dis.html

Title IX states that:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

The definition of sex: either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions: adults of both sexes.

It says absolutely nothing about gender or gender identity.

[GGGG]

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/tix_dis.html

Title IX states that:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

The definition of sex: either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions: adults of both sexes.

It says absolutely nothing about gender or gender identity.

First, TAMU is a Title IX officer.  He knows what Title IX says.

Second, it is a manner of how Title IX is applied and interpreted.  Not simply what a law written 50 years ago states.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/tix_dis.html

Title IX states that:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

The definition of sex: either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and many other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions: adults of both sexes.

It says absolutely nothing about gender or gender identity.

Title IX has been updated regularly by use of "Dear Colleague Letters." These letters don't change the actual verbage of the law but they do change the interpretation and for all intents and purposes are enforceable as law. When Title IX was written almost 50 years ago, we didn't have an understanding of the difference between sex and gender. In 2010, a DCL  came out that helped define some of the differences between gender and sex and establish that Title IX protects from discrimination based on both. They were further defined in by another DCL in 2016. Though some of the 2016 letter has been walked back by a DCL that came out in 2017 from the Trump administration. First time in history that a DCL was used to cancel out provisions from a previous DCL (at least for Title IX....maybe its been done elsewhere).

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I wonder if you'll be so blasé when your daughter gets cheated out of something she's given her all to because of an unfair playing field.

Who cheated? Everyone involved followed the rules. As you recently said in the grad transfer thread rules are rules, even if you think the rules are dumb.

I would only be proud of my daughter for doing as best she could. And if she was disappointed I would of course empathize. But I would also recognize that in the grand scheme of things that getting 2nd vs. 1st in a high school track meet is not a big deal. There are so many outrages in this world that need to be addressed. One can't possibly have energy for all of them. On the scale of 0 to World Hunger, this registers as a .00000001 IMHO.

I can understand why those directly involved would be more upset, that's natural. But a stranger hundreds of miles away on the internet? I think being blase is justified.

[Pakuni]

I wonder if you'll be so blasé when your daughter gets cheated out of something she's given her all to because of an unfair playing field.

Who cheated?

[Lennys Tap]

Believe me, I had two kids that participated fully in high school sports.  I was excited for them, rooted for them, but never wanted to hear excuses.  It's just high school sports. 

Life's going to give them a bunch of situations that may not seem fair.  Learning how to deal with them is a greater life lesson than winning a track meet is.

So if your daughter was denied a state championship by a boy who hadn't undergone any treatment (hormone or otherwise) to transition to his/her gender of identification your response to your daughter would be "no big deal, it's just high school sports?"

I think there are conflicting life lessons here. On one hand, acceptance of people who are different. I'm all for acceptance and celebrating our differences. But another life lesson is that on the playing field everyone is equal - you earn what you get. When the field is tipped and allows someone whose sex is male to compete against one whose sex is female that's the antithesis of the lessons of sports/fair play.

[GGGG]

So if your daughter was denied a state championship by a boy who hadn't undergone any treatment (hormone or otherwise) to transition to his/her gender of identification your response to your daughter would be "no big deal, it's just high school sports?"

If that participant played within the rules, I would be disappointed but yeah, my response would be basically "You did great.  Second place is awesome."

[Lennys Tap]

Who cheated?

To the rules regulating high school sports in Connecticut, nobody.

To the basic rules of fair play, the athlete whose sex is 100% male and chose to compete against people who's sex is 100% female.

[Lennys Tap]

If that participant played within the rules, I would be disappointed but yeah, my response would be basically "You did great.  Second place is awesome."

I think that's a good and healthy response - but it's a bit different from "no big deal, it's just high school sports".