Connecticut Girl Track Athletes Fighting To Get Transgenders Off Their Track

Well, this sure got a lot of attention. It's a sensitive topic... even though the vast majority of us will probably never face this situation in real life. But it's not insignificant. About 0.6% of the population (in the US, that's ~2M out of ~340M) are transgender. The vast majority of them hide and stay away from activities as they are not welcomed by society. A subset of them do want to be included in sports activities like any typical child, teen, or adult and a much smaller subset go on to want to compete at the elite level in college, pro, or as an Olympian. These are subsets of 0.6% of the population vs subsets of 50% of the population (as sports today are typically divided by biological sex).

I'll generally reply to all the good points above, in no particular order.

Let's separate out sports at different groups so as not to bucket them all together. This is of course still a generalization.

Group 1- ~12 and younger (some middle school and all elementary school). Prior to puberty, there isn't really much of an advantage for transgender women.

Group 2- ~>12, non-elite (later in middle school and onward). After puberty, the advantage starts. These advantages grow with age as the body grows differently between the sexes.

Group 3- Elite competition where every small difference counts.

For the early years, there does not need to be a separation of sports between the sexes. But there is as there are Girl sports and Boy sports in middle school that are elective classes. Transgender female (or male) has no advantages and should be allowed to be part of girl (or boy) sports. There is little to no biological sex-related unfairness here. Besides, at this level, sports are more about having fun than competition. Most of us like kids to be part of sports not because we value winning or losing, but we understand the benefits of physical activities, building skills, hard work, teamwork, enjoyment of being participants, and being part of a group or team. Excluding transgender (or anyone) at this age group can do damages emotionally that lasts for a lifetime.

For the early teen years, competition starts to count more and while there is some biological sex-related unfairness (in some sports), I think at this age group, it's still more about fun. The same set of benefits as above and similar harm for excluding transgender at this age group.

I don't think transgender women should be banned from Girl sports in the age groups above. The harm is far greater for them than the relatively none to some advantages they have. I see no real harm done to girls for allowing transgender females to be part of their group while I see advantages of being part of a society that is inclusive, understanding, and non-discriminatory.

As we get into more elite and real elite competition and as we reach adulthood, the biological sex unfairness is clear. I think we all already agreed that sport is an unlevel field and is not fair, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it to be even more unfair. The rest of the post is about this group.

Yes, differences in race (generalizing again) are smaller than differences in sex. Depending on the sports, we may be talking about 1-2% differences between races vs 10% differences between the sex. However, while the differences are smaller, the outcome is not. There are sports where West African athletes simply dominate. At this elite level, every small advantage counts to the outcome and we have allowed advantages to stand.

The advantages aren't simply just of body types, of genes, but also of sociopolitical and access to better training, coaches, and equipment. It is not all "nature". We would not exclude Lebron's son if he grows to be as elite, due to genes from his parent, access to the best training, coach, equipment, and time although clearly, he has all of those advantages.

Not all "nature" is the same, there are clear differences, as some grow taller, slimmer, muscular, but all compete together. Biological males and females have conditions that change their hormones level. Some biological female has testosterone that is 3x or higher than other females. It's rare, but it is within the gamut of biological females (and males). Because we traditionally draw a hard line at biological sexes, we do not differentiate between these nature-giving advantages for most sports (some sport, such as boxing, we do somewhat by having different weight classes - which is a product of both nature and nurture).

If we allow *abnormal* biological female (or male) and *normal* biological female (or male) in the same competition, and I wouldn't be surprised if Lebron fit in the *abnormal* biological male category, why shouldn't we allow *abnormal* biological brain structure (technically not abnormal, but there is "male" brain structure assigned to "female" sex and vise-versa and birth - a theory of causes of transsexuality) and *normal* biological brain structure in the same competition? Both cases of *abnormal* are rare, but in one case, they are part of the same competition while in the other case, there is a strong debate on if should.

Perhaps we should not allow this and have a fairer system, one based on hormone level or weight level or whatever else in certain sports? But then that might take the fun away from team sports such as basketball, where you have a different level of star players that makes the for great entertainment and enjoyment of the game.

Personally, I don't have as much a strong opinion at the elite level (I completely understand that every small advantage count in particular for solo competition), but I do have a much strong opinion at the non-elite and especially at the younger age groups level due to the great harm caused due to exclusion of these individuals.

 

As an evil moderate democratic, someone who does believe in equality AND is a pragmatist, this seems like the perfect wedge issue for conservatives with not much upside for liberals.