Is this fair?

[reinko]

High school athletics doesn't have to define you sir.  That doesn't mean it cannot be special especially for certain communities and situations.  There is plenty of life to live after, but amazing memories made. 

Would the kids that won the Indiana high school championship be merely Al Bundy types in your world?  Texas football title?  Miracle hockey championship in Connecticut? 

No need to act like you are on this.  Life moves forward, but it doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile either, and in some cases an amazing accomplishment by young men and women.

You talk like this is some kind of epidemic plaguing high school sports, throwing up strawmen like, but what if this happened, what if that happened... I mean as we speak this happened a handful of times across our country amongst HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS IF NOT MILLIONS of high school sporting events.

I have a daughter, too young to play competitive sports, but if the time arises where she loses to transgender athlete it will be an unbelievable learning opportunity for her about accepting and celebrating for those around her. 

[Jay Bee]

You talk like this is some kind of epidemic plaguing high school sports, throwing up strawmen like, but what if this happened, what if that happened... I mean as we speak this happened a handful of times across our country amongst HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS IF NOT MILLIONS of high school sporting events.

I have a daughter, too young to play competitive sports, but if the time arises where she loses to transgender athlete it will be an unbelievable learning opportunity for her about accepting and celebrating for those around her.

I'd teach her to deal with the hand you're given and work hard. Diff strokes for diff strikes, ainil

[GGGG]

Yes, but you also realize that some of these sporting opportunities come perhaps once in a lifetime.  I played in a state Final Four my junior year of high school.  Senior year did not even make the playoffs.  One of my children played in a state championship final. The other three years, didn't come close. 

It is about opportunities lost, too. 

If you are to ask the participants who lost those opportunities, will they all say it isn't substantive?  Is that not unique to the situation and the person?

I find it the greater mission of high school sports to be how it can build people up to be a member of a team, work hard to achieve goals, etc.  Winning a championship is something the vast, vast majority of kids won't do.  And the vast, vast majority of kids know that heading into it but do it anyway.

So I think it is more in line with that mission to include someone who is struggling with gender identity issues, even if she ends up winning a championship, than worrying about the girl who finishes in second.

[GGGG]

Or, if we wish to be PC about it.  Give two first place championship awards out.  The legitimate female finished in second place to a non female.  She won the true female championship in my opinion.

Wow.  "I know the rules of the competition say you are a female, but I don't think you are one.  She's the true champion."

You are exactly what is wrong with high school sports these days.  You don't understand one bit what it's about.

[forgetful]

Yes. The sexual organ isn't the reason they perform better.

These are competitions of physicality.  How high can you jump?  How fast can you run? How far can you throw?  How long can you jump?  How much weight can you lift?  How many goals can you score?  That is the essence of sports, physical competition.

Males are stronger, faster, have more endurance on average. This is science, not opinion.  Call it anatomy, kinisiology, biology, whatever you wish.  It is science.

You are disadvantaging females by allowing XY to compete.  Depriving females of opportunities.

No, but the sex organ is indicative of the way their body responds to hormones...estrogen or testosterone.  The person born XX, but with male anatomy will produce more testosterone, and in some cases, respond to it as if they are a male...meaning stronger, faster etc.  Equivalently, the person born XY, but with female anatomy, will not produce sufficient testosterone, or respond to it in a manner we typically ascribe to "masculine". 

So how do you propose to define gender for sporting competitions, is it XX vs. XY (but then what about XXY etc), is it penis vs. vagina, is it high testosterone (unfair to women with high natural testosterone, but not the receptors to benefit from it) vs. low testosterone?...how do we define it to be "fair". 

Bottom line, as others have noted, life isn't fair, everyone because of their unique genetic codes, and epigenetic regulation, has some advantages and disadvantages, there is no way to level the playing field.

[Lennys Tap]

I'd teach her to deal with the hand you're given and work hard. Diff strokes for diff strikes, ainil

Yeah, I agree. The idea that my daughter should celebrate the wonderful opportunity to lose her dream of a state championship to a person who is 100% male physiologically seems a little over the top to me.

The lessons I would want her to learn? Rules are rules, even when obviously unfair. There's more value to competition than simply results. Finally, before feeling too sorry for herself, I'd remind her that the person who had the unfair advantage that day had lived a life with unimaginable disadvantages. My guess is that her disappointment would be tempered by a good dose of perspective.

[reinko]

Yeah, I agree. The idea that my daughter should celebrate the wonderful opportunity to lose her dream of a state championship to a person who is 100% male physiologically seems a little over the top to me.

The lessons I would want her to learn? Rules are rules, even when obviously unfair. There's more value to competition than simply results. Finally, before feeling too sorry for herself, I'd remind her that the person who had the unfair advantage that day had lived a life with unimaginable disadvantages. My guess is that her disappointment would be tempered by a good dose of perspective.

My larger point, is we are all arguing about things that happen not only rarely, but astronomically rarely, but project like it's this huge deal.  My kid is more likely to get hit by lightning multiple times than lose a state championship because a transgender person beats them.  But hey, where is 10 page thread on the dangers of lightening strikes to kids.

[jutaw22mu]

I'm late to the conversation, but given that I am a woman who competed in high school sports in the state of CT back in the day (indoor but not outdoor track), I would like to add my two cents.  This would not have ended well if it had happened when I was in high school (early 2000s).

First of all, I would like to point out that if this was reversed and involved a woman who transitioned to a man who now competed in men's sports, and who somehow gained a huge competitive advantage over normal XY men in a sport by being born XX, this would not be tolerated. Imagine if people's sons got displaced from a hockey team by a girl who transitioned to a boy....there would be enormous outrage over something like this.  But since it is girl's sports, no one cares, because as much as people don't want to admit it, sexism is an ever-present issue.  I experience it as a female scientist on a daily basis, around men who are aware that it's an issue in science and genuinely don't think they are saying/doing sexist things (but they are). And what the heck does "compete nice" mean? No one would ever say to a boy: "do your best, life goes on if you lose to a girl in a boys sport" so why say that to a girl?? 

Lets just make 3 categories for sports. Mens, women and trans. The trans people (men transitioning to women and women transitioning to men) can compete against each other. (Actually that would be really interesting!!!!).

[GGGG]

I'm late to the conversation, but given that I am a woman who competed in high school sports in the state of CT back in the day (indoor but not outdoor track), I would like to add my two cents.  This would not have ended well if it had happened when I was in high school (early 2000s).

First of all, I would like to point out that if this was reversed and involved a woman who transitioned to a man who now competed in men's sports, and who somehow gained a huge competitive advantage over normal XY men in a sport by being born XX, this would not be tolerated. Imagine if people's sons got displaced from a hockey team by a girl who transitioned to a boy....there would be enormous outrage over something like this.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/high-school/2017/02/16/number-girls-playing-section-v-boys-hockey-rise/97966286/

Look!  Girls who are actually playing on boys hockey teams!  Including one who is actually starting in goal!
 And it's celebrated! Who is thinking about the poor boy who isn't getting his chance to play???

No one would ever say to a boy: "do your best, life goes on if you lose to a girl in a boys sport" so why say that to a girl??

I have two boys who played high school sports.  If the girls you mention qualified according to the rules of participation, I would most definitely have said that. 

Why do you think no one would say that to a boy?  I know a lot of parents who would have a similar mindset.  There is no shame in losing to a girl who is better than you.

[Jockey]

My larger point, is we are all arguing about things that happen not only rarely, but astronomically rarely, but project like it's this huge deal.  My kid is more likely to get hit by lightning multiple times than lose a state championship because a transgender person beats them.  But hey, where is 10 page thread on the dangers of lightening strikes to kids.

Exactly.

I have learned more about the posters here on Scoop in this thread than I did about the subject.

Some want to be inclusive. Some strive to separate and fight anyone different.

The vast tapestry is what makes life worth living.

[Jockey]

I'm late to the conversation, but given that I am a woman who competed in high school sports in the state of CT back in the day (indoor but not outdoor track), I would like to add my two cents.  This would not have ended well if it had happened when I was in high school (early 2000s).

First of all, I would like to point out that if this was reversed and involved a woman who transitioned to a man who now competed in men's sports, and who somehow gained a huge competitive advantage over normal XY men in a sport by being born XX, this would not be tolerated. Imagine if people's sons got displaced from a hockey team by a girl who transitioned to a boy....there would be enormous outrage over something like this.  But since it is girl's sports, no one cares, because as much as people don't want to admit it, sexism is an ever-present issue.  I experience it as a female scientist on a daily basis, around men who are aware that it's an issue in science and genuinely don't think they are saying/doing sexist things (but they are). And what the heck does "compete nice" mean? No one would ever say to a boy: "do your best, life goes on if you lose to a girl in a boys sport" so why say that to a girl?? 

Lets just make 3 categories for sports. Mens, women and trans. The trans people (men transitioning to women and women transitioning to men) can compete against each other. (Actually that would be really interesting!!!!).

As I said, some look to unite, and some just think how does it affect me. Put the different people in another group where I don't have to deal with them.

[jutaw22mu]

Why do you think no one would say that to a boy?  I know a lot of parents who would have a similar mindset.  There is no shame in losing to a girl who is better than you.
[/quote]


Maybe parents don't care, but a grown man refuses to play me 1-on-1 in basketball because as he puts it, it's "lose-lose" for him. If he beats me, well then he just beat a girl and he is supposed to, and if he loses to me, then he lost to a girl and he doesn't want to take that chance because of the 'shame.'

He walks around claiming he is better than me in basketball, but gives the lose-lose excuse when challenged.

[Jay Bee]

Amen. Do whatever you wish, just be honest about it. If it's a "feels like a girl" thing, the don't call it a girl's league

[rocket surgeon]

  "Maybe parents don't care, but a grown man refuses to play me 1-on-1 in basketball because as he puts it, it's "lose-lose" for him. If he beats me, well then he just beat a girl and he is supposed to, and if he loses to me, then he lost to a girl and he doesn't want to take that chance because of the 'shame.'

He walks around claiming he is better than me in basketball, but gives the lose-lose excuse when challenged"

 
kinda like why MU doesn't want to play UWM-bunch of girlie men, eyyn'a?

[Lennys Tap]

Exactly.

I have learned more about the posters here on Scoop in this thread than I did about the subject.

Some want to be inclusive. Some strive to separate and fight anyone different.

The vast tapestry is what makes life worth living.

Brandi - I love you, man, but this is not about "inclusion" or "fighting anybody who is different". I'm all for inclusion. Inclusion is good. I don't want anyone from any group bullied, put down or excluded. And I'm fierce about that. I'm also fierce about what constitutes fairness in competitive sports. And it is unquestionably not fair for a young woman to have to compete against someone who identifies female but is physiologically male and has done nothing to change that. Reinko (and maybe you?) think it's okay because it doesn't happen very frequently. Since when is an injustice or unfairness not one because it happens rarely. That's not what I was taught at MU.

[Jockey]

Brandi - I love you, man, but this is not about "inclusion" or "fighting anybody who is different". I'm all for inclusion. Inclusion is good. I don't want anyone from any group bullied, put down or excluded. And I'm fierce about that. I'm also fierce about what constitutes fairness in competitive sports. And it is unquestionably not fair for a young woman to have to compete against someone who identifies female but is physiologically male and has done nothing to change that. Reinko (and maybe you?) think it's okay because it doesn't happen very frequently. Since when is an injustice or unfairness not one because it happens rarely. That's not what I was taught at MU.

I don't wanna sound like I got the answer here Lenny. I don't.

Sports are inherently unfair. Different women produce different amounts of Testosterone and Estrogen. Do we test every girl/women before every event? Is it fair for a girl with lower levels of testosterone to have to compete with a girl with higher levels?

There was a S. African women who won easily in the last Olympics because her body produced higher than normal levels of testosterone. She was a women, but she had a distinct advantage. Do we not let her compete?

I understand where you are coming from and don't wanna tell you that you're wrong - I don't know that you are. But, there are some here who see these people as freaks and nothing else. That was what led to my comment about division. I apologize if any of my comments seemed directed at you. It was definitely not my intent.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

My personal opinion is 98%+ (maybe higher) have no choice.  Whether that is straight, gay, bisexual.  A thought provoking article from a gay man on the topic.  Feel free to disagree.

https://www.thenation.com/article/whats-wrong-choosing-be-gay/

It was an interesting read, thank you for sharing. Though the author, EJ Graff, is a woman and I have no idea if she is gay or straight. She defines being gay very differently from the mainstream scholars. Her argument is basically that it is a choice for 100% of people. She views it as up to the individual to define themselves and no one else can tell them otherwise. If someone feels desire for the same sex but says they are straight, then they are straight.

If you want that to be that definition of what makes a person gay you are free to do so. What I am talking about is the physical desires a person feels. No one has a choice in that. "The heart wants what the heart wants" to greatly oversimplify it. People can choose whether or not they act on it and they can choose how they label themselves. But the biological drive is beyond their control.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

people who are straight their whole lives, then go into prison...

   http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ben-carson-prison-gay-choice

tamu, i don't know how you define gay, but in my book, if one engages in "other" acitivity, that in my book is gay or homosexual or lesbianism or what have you.  there are no biological markers denoting gay that i'm aware of.  i have not seen a study showing different chromosomes(xx/xy) denoting gay.  there may be different reactions within the dna of the chromosomes denoting gayness or straightness, but i haven't seen nor looked that deep

Rocket, love you man. But that is nowhere near a scholarly article. It also has a lot more to do with the trauma of coping with a rape than it does with sexual orientation. And rape in prison has a lot more to do with dominating another person and removing their power and control than it does with sexual attraction.

You define sexual orientation by the action of engaging in same sex intercourse. Sexual orientation is actually defined by who a person is sexually attracted to. It is possible for someone to have sex with someone they are not attracted to. So a straight man could choose to have sex with another man. Just as a gay man could choose to have sex with a woman. The person in the first example is still straight, they just engaged in gay sex. We can choose who we engage in sexual activity with but not who we are sexually attracted to. Unless you really think that if you tried really hard you could make yourself get all hot and bothered for Channing Tatum.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Brandi - I love you, man, but this is not about "inclusion" or "fighting anybody who is different". I'm all for inclusion. Inclusion is good. I don't want anyone from any group bullied, put down or excluded. And I'm fierce about that. I'm also fierce about what constitutes fairness in competitive sports. And it is unquestionably not fair for a young woman to have to compete against someone who identifies female but is physiologically male and has done nothing to change that. Reinko (and maybe you?) think it's okay because it doesn't happen very frequently. Since when is an injustice or unfairness not one because it happens rarely. That's not what I was taught at MU.

I would say there is an element of inclusion here. This individual will feel safer, more comfortable, and respected if they get to compete with the gender they identify with. But I think its also fair to say that its not fair to the other competitors. What's the best way to balance the two? I honestly am not sure. I see both sides of the argument.

If the individual had undergone surgery or taken hormone treatments, than I think the right decision is to let them compete with the gender they identify with. Though not terribly familiar with the process, my understanding is that they would lose a majority of the advantage they have over the other competitors. If someone else knows better, I would love to know more.

[rocket surgeon]

Rocket, love you man. But that is nowhere near a scholarly article. It also has a lot more to do with the trauma of coping with a rape than it does with sexual orientation. And rape in prison has a lot more to do with dominating another person and removing their power and control than it does with sexual attraction.

You define sexual orientation by the action of engaging in same sex intercourse. Sexual orientation is actually defined by who a person is sexually attracted to. It is possible for someone to have sex with someone they are not attracted to. So a straight man could choose to have sex with another man. Just as a gay man could choose to have sex with a woman. The person in the first example is still straight, they just engaged in gay sex. We can choose who we engage in sexual activity with but not who we are sexually attracted to. Unless you really think that if you tried really hard you could make yourself get all hot and bothered for Channing Tatum.

great points!  and thank you for posting them sans the snide, condescending attacks some on here seem to only know.  i guess without much research, the article caught my eye not just because of the title, but also the source(ben carson).  dr carson's political persuasions aside, he is a very bright, learned man.  all in all, it wasn't a very strong exihibit i'll admit. 

    there have been more examples(that i am aware of) of women switching there sexual allegiances than men.  ann heche and amber heard would be a couple of examples of switching.  bisexuality as i stated previously, is a whole different situation that i have my own opinions on, scientific or not, but sure is convenient, enn'a so?  with men, it seems more of them start out straight(or trying to be) then "come out of the closet" so to say, when they just can't fake it anymore.  i personally know of at least 2 husband-wife relationships where if you were to meet and talk to the men not knowing they were married with x kids, you would swear they were gay.  i don't really care-none of my business. 

  the rape culture in prison should not have been  one of my examples of someone switching over.  prison, of all places, the sex act is either one out of fulfilling a need or one of exercising a dominance over someone-o.k, maybe a small percentage use the opportunity to switch for whatever reason-convenience/curiosity to  fulfill a  life-long, deep seated or inherent thought.  you know, the i wonder if i really am gay crowd.  BUT, in my book, and it's a short one, if you one engages in gay or bisexual sex, they are gay and many probably have scott dissick disease to go with it.  but if one can contort themselves emotionally enough to switch hit without batting(no pun) an eye, that is gay-whatever floats their boat

just throwing this out there-is transgenderism more than the physical/emotional conflict it appears to be at the surface, or is it also another way for people to exert control over another, hmmmm-think about this while you are feeling sorry for the inner deamons they have to slay.  i'm not making a judgement as i haven't walked even 2 steps in their moccasins, but let's see how much attention the new kid in town gets


   

[dgies9156]

I find it the greater mission of high school sports to be how it can build people up to be a member of a team, work hard to achieve goals, etc.

Huh? You have been hanging around coaches too long.

While I am sure there is some of this, the greater mission of high school sports is superiority. To demonstrate that the Hometown High Raiders are vastly superior to the Nearby High Plunderers, thus assuring bragging rights for an entire year and creating such a good buzz among the good people that they complain not when the school board raises property taxes.

A couple of points I've seen in this discussion: For those of you concerned about transgendered roommates, have you been to a public college campus lately? My two children attend a school in Illinois and while we do not have XX to XY roommates yet, we're close. Men and women students live on the same floors and indeed, are next door neighbors. If you think there is no hanky panky, well, my children would tell you otherwise based on their roommates' experiences. The same was true when I was at MU, for the record.

Secondly, dorms are communal living, one step removed from old-fashioned Army barracks. The notion of safe space and privacy in dorms is well, misguided. Perhaps that is the reason McCormick is being consigned to the building materials scrap heap -- and undoubtedly Schroeder will follow -- but a person has next to no privacy in a dorm.

Finally, I strongly agree with the poster who noted colleges are about getting people out of their comfort zone. While I'm an old fart now, I do recall a moment when I was at MU in the 1970s and a student wrote a series of letters to the editor condemning the idea of community service at MU and blasting away at many of the deeply held beliefs of the Jesuit community. While I doubt the Marquette Tribune would print those letters today, they did back then and the result was a vigorous debate on the concept of who the homeless and begging community at MU was and whether we should be involved in assisting them. You have to have this kind of debate because, frankly, it will happen in real life.

[Jay Bee]

It was an interesting read, thank you for sharing. Though the author, EJ Graff, is a woman and I have no idea if she is gay or straight.

She's been open about being a lesbian for decades.

There was a S. African women who won easily in the last Olympics because her body produced higher than normal levels of testosterone. She was a women, but she had a distinct advantage. Do we not let her compete?

Different issue. That person is intersex. That person has no womb or ovaries, but does have nuts.

[B. McBannerson]

Wow.  "I know the rules of the competition say you are a female, but I don't think you are one.  She's the true champion."

You are exactly what is wrong with high school sports these days.  You don't understand one bit what it's about.

I haven't attached anyone and didn't make it personal.  Shame you weren't able to

[B. McBannerson]

Yeah, I agree. The idea that my daughter should celebrate the wonderful opportunity to lose her dream of a state championship to a person who is 100% male physiologically seems a little over the top to me.

The lessons I would want her to learn? Rules are rules, even when obviously unfair. There's more value to competition than simply results. Finally, before feeling too sorry for herself, I'd remind her that the person who had the unfair advantage that day had lived a life with unimaginable disadvantages. My guess is that her disappointment would be tempered by a good dose of perspective.

Nicely said

[B. McBannerson]

My larger point, is we are all arguing about things that happen not only rarely, but astronomically rarely, but project like it's this huge deal.  My kid is more likely to get hit by lightning multiple times than lose a state championship because a transgender person beats them.  But hey, where is 10 page thread on the dangers of lightening strikes to kids.

Competing for a state championship is also a once in a lifetime opportunity.

A lightning strike isn't about a sports opportunity, it is a random event.  Nothing random about this.  The rules of fairness are determined, not random.

TAMU said it well, this is a tough discussion and good points made by all sides, unfortunately a few have started to get personal which is unfortunate and not needed.