http://www.cbc.ca/olympics/story/200...tenworley.html
DISCUSS.
Printable View
No!!
I'm not familiar enough with the science/biology of a trans person to comment but if someone else is I have a question; does an individual who has transitioned MtF retain the muscle mass they had before the transition?
This issue has come up before in Canada:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Dumaresq
I would be very surprised if the Olympics were convinced into allowing transgendered people to compete.
Sounds like she didn't make the requisite and if that's what everyone who qualifies has to do then that's that.
Otherwise, if she's the same as any other woman performance wise-and while we've had this same discussion awhile back I'm not familiar with the mechanics of transgenderizing- then why shouldn't she?
Seriously, this is just like the issue surrounding athletes with prosthetics who wanted to compete in the Olympics. In this case, rather then it being a technological advantage, it's a biological advantage. "Kristen" lived as a male for 20+ years before undergoing surgery. "She" was even married.
irregardless---"SHE" did NOT compete in any of the qualifying races. sorry, but just on that alone she should not be allowed an advantage or sympathy vote just because "she" went and had surgery to become a woman.
If there really is an issue, there should be another organization or event set up to accommodate those who fall into this gray area.
Can you site a source that explains the biological advantage?Quote:
Originally Posted by bicyclulz
Ah, this is what I was remembering...
http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showt...ht=transgender
You need a source to show that men and women have different physical makeups?Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen
The burden rests with proving there is no difference.
I asked for a source to learn and become a more educated person on the subject. Why the hostile response?Quote:
Originally Posted by kenshinvt
Just in case you want reading material: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...&dopt=CitationQuote:
Originally Posted by Queen
It's just something that cannot be denied....
Sorry, I just misread you as being sarcastic in your original post when you asked for a citation on something that is common sense. If there was no biological advantage/difference between the sexes, we wouldn't have gender-separated competitive sports to begin with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen
That was pretty technical but I couldn't see where it talked about transgendered folks? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by bicyclulz
My guess would be Yes, to some degree. I read something recently that folks that use steroids to increase muscle mass above what they'd normally have/build retain extra muscle long after the steroids have been used. In my mind, that should mean a person that is busted for using steroids should get a lifetime ban.
My gut says Kristen Worley is substantially different than a woman that's had a hysterectomy, as far as competitive advantage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen
Because of the lack of testosterone, she won't have a biological advantage. In fact, females with complete sex organs will actually produce small amounts of testosterone, which, hypothetically, could give them a biological advantage over a transgender or hysterectomized female.
However, if you don't complete the qualifying races, it's a moot point.
This is a photo of Tammy Thomas, who is not transgender, but has been charged with doping. http://velonews.com/article/11333Quote:
Originally Posted by kenshinvt
+1..Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrea
+1. THE POINT IS MOOT. SHE DIDN'T RACE IN THE QUALIFIERS. Wanna go to the inviational, you have to qualify first. My sister missed the Boston Marathon by two minutes in her qualifiers. two years in a row. Bummed yes but she's not making a stink over it. This season because of 20+MPH headwind on the back stretch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrea
Far as transgender person goes, if they say I'm a woman by cross dressing for only a week or two, I have a big problem. If they say I'm a woman and had the surgery, would it change the persons athletic ability?? muscle mass with testosterone. shape of our bones, women versus men's pelvic bone, arm length, leg length, VO2 capacity. From what I read, it sounds like they would have more of disadvantage then regular women. As long as there are no advantages, I say bring them on. Go ahead. Just move up in the rank like everyone else.
Just read spazzdogs' gender and pro cycling thread. And the canadian girl's photo. If the racers had no problem as an amatuer then why the problem as a pro?
And the photo of Tammy Thomas. Why would she do this to herself? Why is she so desperate for a win so much so that she would resort to this. She needs psychiatric help. It's a sport and you don't make much money. WHY?? I could sort of see if you were going to make so much money that you become independently wealthy (not having to make a living).
smilingcat
The article seems to have quite a slant towards allowing her to compete, and I don't really understand why. It's great that she's bringing the science to the governing bodies, but she seems to have forgotten that there are only so many athletes that are allowed to go, and if they gave her a spot without qualifying properly they'd be taking a spot away from someone who did follow the rules. If she wants to prove she doesn't have an advantage, she needs to stop asking for an advantage.
As far as advantages go: I read an article in Runners' World (I think) a couple years ago about a MTF long distance runner. She found her times in the same races as a woman to be much slower than they had been as a man, yet she felt like she was pouring even more effort into the races now.
From her experience (and she was a very serious runner) I'm guessing any advantage fades pretty quickly after complete transition.
ETA: This is it, in a different format than the magazine, but the words are the same. http://www.pfc.org.uk/files/A_Six_Minute_Difference.pdf
That's my feeling. If she wants to compete I'll support her as any racer. If I raced (which I don't 'cause I'm slow :o) after suffering race after race towards a final goal only to find the slot I'd earned filled by someone I never got the chance to beat .... I'd be a little mad :mad: :mad: :mad: No cuts to the font of the line (pun intended)Quote:
Originally Posted by Flur
She could have transitioned earlier and earned the spot. That was poor planning. Now, race and earn your spot.
When she does I'll cheer her on! *\o/* *\o/* *\o/* and would welcome her to TE. If you're lurking, c'mon down.
Well, getting into the Olympics *before* the 2 year mark after transition would be of some benefit. According to Janet Furman Bowman, her first race as a female was her fastest one as a female. Ever. There was still a bit of advantage so soon after transition, but it was fading away.
Which is why there is a 2 year requirement for the Olympics. If you've been transitioned for 2 years AND qualified, you are fine for the Olympics.
(I'm still in shock over the picture of Tammy Thomas. How long was she doping? Since she was a teenager?)