With the recent issues of transgender people in sports, why don’t we move some sports over to a weight-class system?
Obviously this won’t work for all sports, but things like football, track, soccer, it would allow for de-gendered team, even allowing athletes with the skills but not the genetically-endowed physical attributes to have a place to play.
Note: I know very little about sports and being on a sports team, so please point out anything that doesn’t make sense.
I think because guys are pound for pound stronger than girls. I've read stories on Reddit years ago by girls who are wrestlers or fighters and get into a playful tussle with some random guy and they describe it as terrifying.
Like, there are women out there with higher testorone than the average man, and crazy is a huge factor.
I played rugby in college and we hung out with the women's team and drunk coed wrestling was definitely a common thing.
Every once and a while a non rugby player would think it was just an excuse to roll around with a hot chick, and they would get absolutely demolished. Like I'm not talking about underestimating the woman and losing quickly due to technical skill. Just getting absolutely manhandled by a girl without the socially ingrained fear of violence and pain. Like, I was one of the biggest guys on the men's team and had wrestling experience, I still lost to some of them. Women almost a foot shorter and that I had more than 50 pounds on. Because they really wanted that W and kept trying till they got it.
Hell, for two years we had coed practice including full speed tackling and scrimmages. Top end speed was usually the only clear difference, and even then the fastest five players on the field was never all guys.
There was a story on Reddit from a soldier, his squad ended up in a fight with rugby players in a bar in Australia and after the fight they had a drink together and when a soldier told the players they were pretty brave to start fighting people in the army, they replied "the only people we fear is women who play rugby because they're completely crazy".
Like, there are women out there with higher testorone than the average man
No, that doesn't happen, the adrenal glands and ovaries do not produce enough t to reach even very low male levels, testosterone for the most part is produced in the testicules which cis women do not have.
that much testosterone would transition a woman into a man, they would grow beard and get a deeper voice, that's how HRT works for FtMs.
Every once and a while a non rugby player would think it was just an excuse to roll around with a hot chick, and they would get absolutely demolished. Just getting absolutely manhandled by a girl
I remember Serena Williams making a comment that the men can just hit harder and faster. So even a sport like tennis men just have an advantage.
Having watched some badass girls wrestle dudes and win it’s an up hill battle. Women are typically stronger then men at a young age like single digit age but one puberty hits it’s all off the table.
Now shooting(archery/firearms) I have seen girls out preform men and it’s a fair sport of accuracy. Also in motor sports women can be competitive there and also have an advantage of being smaller and lighter. Every 100 lbs is a 1/10th a second
Hot take: Sports are not that important, and it's not the end of the world if someone in the other team is "physically better" than you.
Sports should be just played for fun and for making exercise, not as a profession. And the whole sports industry should be taken down all together. Make all sports amateur and just for the fun of it and suddenly it really doesn't mather who is on your team or in the other team.
I think the harder question is how advertisers will convince underdeveloped schlubs that they call ball with Micheal Jordan if they just wear the right kind of shoes.
He addresses them with that statement. There are plenty of women that are in similar weight classes as men but you don't see any in male sports.
Even though male sports does not have a gender requirement. This is essentially an indirect way of saying that there are biological differences between male and female that go beyond weight.
There are various differences you could point out. Males have lower body fat %, which means more muscle. Their bones are shaped differently and are more dense. Men tend to be more aggressive and competitive. Men tend to have stronger bones, joints, tendons, and ligaments.
Men have more red blood cells, their hearts are bigger so they can pump more blood, and greater lung volume relative to body mass. So even a male and women same weight and height the man will be able to circulate oxygen more quickly.
There are many more examples if you go do some reading.
One of the differences may not be huge by themselves. But when you take the differences above and combine them, it creates a situation where in almost all sports, men play virtually unopposed by women.
Look up the Serena Williams interview. She's undoubtedly the best female player in the world. She doesn't stand a chance against a the 203rd best tennis male player.
This difference even applies to areas like chess. The highest ranking a woman ever got was 6th in the world, Judith Pulgar. Amazing player, but out of the 2500 or so grandmasters in the world, 42 are women.
Some of these differences can be explained by women around the world not being encouraged to play chess, but that does not explain all.
There are large biological differences when you look at the population in a statistical sense. And when you look at the most extreme samples from the edge of the normal distribution.. that's where the best athletes / chess players are going to come from.
Just make an "open class" where any identification, body mods, and performance enhancing drugs are unregulated. The best athletes that science can create.
Ah yes, the Enhanced Games brought to you be Peter Theil and a dozen of the worst tech bros you haven't heard of yet.
Part of the problem is that pro sports is already full of illicit doping. Another big part of the problem is that athletic exceptionalism is as much about winning the genetic lottery, getting lucky with no injuries at the peak of your career, and having the luxury of sponsorship/rich parents at an early age as it is doing lots of drugs.
The only real benefit you get out of an Enhanced Games exhibition is to sell dipshit frat bros the same promise Wheaties and Nike and GMC have been selling for decades - use our brand of steroid and you'll be a world champion, too. And frankly, that market is already kinda flooded.
I take your anti-corporate point. However, I believe pro-doping would totally work if it was a gladiatorial bloodbath decathalon within the olympics itself. And if you get caught doping in the non-doping sports, you're forced to compete in the decathalon with the juiced up killers. Jousting, Barenuckle boxing, Pride rules MMA, Hell in a Cell, no rules water polo, shit like that.
That has always been an excellent idea. Russia, China and the US&A - then maybe some weird shit comes out of India or Korea or somewhere, that would be nifty
What sports would it work in? Do you think people will care about the best tennis player that weighs 140 pounds? The best 240 pound soccer players? The fastest 130 pound swimmer? No one wants to watch any of that. It barely works for boxing.
All that aside from the fact that you're still pretty much ruining competitive sports for most cis women by doing it. The reason there's a female "insert sport here" competitive league to begin with is so many women have a reason to compete and can win. A 150 pound trained male athlete will still wipe the floor with a 150 pound female athlete. It's far, far, from just a weight thing. The Williams sisters were the best female tennis players the world knew, and they went out and proved they couldn't beat a man that was ranked over 200th. The world champion austrailian female soccer team couldn't beat a boys highschool team. The fastest woman to ever run the 1500m did it in 3:49. A 5' 9" guy did it in 3:26.
Weight and size is only a little portion of physical differences.
If there's so many Trans athletes, why don't they just have a category of their own?
It isn't that there's tons of trans athletes... It's that even at fairly low levels of sport there are currently more options available to people with disabilities to participate then there are of people of intersex and trans backgrounds. In a lot of cases tracking performances of trans athletes they aren't dominating. There's stories of transfem athletes who regularly sit around getting 15th place but after coming in first one time the entire sporting becomes hostile to trans people.
In civil rights discussions there's a concept of rights of participation. The concept being that being barred from social, political or recreational spheres creates outsized harms on the ability to make the advantageous connections others are given free access to and creates classes of segregation.
There's also a catch 22 situation. If someone opts to go through a trans puberty instead of a natal one there is no meaningful difference to speak of between the physicality of trans athletes and cis ones. If forced to stay inside their original sex segregated sport not only are trans people being being told in no uncertain terms that society does not accept their new status regardless of parity, they essentially become isolated inside the sporting body. Either you have someone whose body is feminine placed in a sport with only cis males to be compared to or you have a masculine body placed inside a group with all cis women and both will be framed out of being taken at all seriously inside the entire body of that sport. A lot of trans people can't participate in sport not because they aim to be picked for any of the social leg ups excellence in sport provides... But for any of the regular benefits of just participating.
It creates a fair sting to have a government force your choice of initial puberty that neither you or your doctors and parents thought was a good idea... and then sit back and watch the rest of society constantly punish and isolate you for going through that puberty by then treating you as a logistical social problem for the rest of your life.
or why don't we just keep everything as is because it's not a big fucking deal despite what bigots say
if you really wanted to "fix" or "save" womens sport, just start by fucking paying them the same as men and giving women's sport the same attention on tv
And for most people it is hard to acknowledge that there is a biological difference to the body of male and female.
Same rights to everyone doesnt imply same bodytype for everyone
Skill matters. But you get enormous leverage by simply being longer limbed and larger.
Practice a bit and you'll be beating up 16 year old girls in no time. But even at their peak, women martial artists will struggle with mid-level male peers because they lack the raw physical features that move another body.
It's the difference between a person firing a pistol and a rifle. Marksmanship only gets you so far. Then you really just need a longer barrel.
Castrato is just Italian for castrated or neutered, even used with animals albeit mostly used referring to males. Sometimes it's even used figuratively. It would still work perfectly with your example, I think
Yes, splitting teams by sex/gender has never made sense, instead it should be by physical attributes that may or may not happen to align with sex, but irrespective of if they do.
Below the elite level, relative skill differences can be large enough that a skilled cis women can outcompete a lesser skilled cis men. And that’s where 99% of sports are played so these rules/laws just serve to make cis men not feel threatened by potentially losing in a softball game to a woman.
At the more elite levels, though, the skill gaps are much smaller, and being faster or stronger are the difference. Most WNBA players can’t dunk, most NBA players can. Elite men run 100M a full second faster than elite women. At those levels, men have a distinct physical advantage.
But considering the laws currently being passed, they aren’t targeting elite athletes, and are instead targeting kids, and not out of the spirit of competition, but out of hate.
I grew up playing soccer on a coed team. At a certain age you could be picked or tryout for a more advanced league. Up until highschool we were devided by skill not gender and I have no problem admitting there were more than a few girls that were much more skilled than I was.
I want to say that because understanding of steroids and sports medicine they could be done in a way to prevent that for many sports. But o also know that would require rigorously enforced regulation which athletes would then try to game, which would probably lead to more deaths on the field.
I imagine it would be like The Fast and The Furious where he presses the nitrous button till the screws/bolts all come out and the car falls apart very quickly.
The recent issue with transgender people in sports is manufactured as a tool to spread trans hate. It's a non issue that preys on Americans's sense of fairness.
I feel like weight class doesn't do it. Women have higher body fat %. Is a welterweight woman athletically equivalent to a welterweight man? I don't think so.
I could see this working better than the current system and would undermine bigots argument about an unfair advantage. Though there are people that think being transgender gives people an advantage in chess somehow.
Women (and trans women) naturally carry a higher body fat percentage than men (Incl trans men) a "male" athlete can more safely and more easily carry a lower body fat % and therefore more muscle per kilo. So the weight classes wouldnt be able to be 1:1 if you wanted a level playing field.
There is still the inherent biological advantage in being born male and going through male puberty and developing a male muscular/skeletal system before transitioning. Very difficult to rule around every nuance of this though.
This is exactly right and what many people fail to understand. In studies, even after 3+ years of hormone therapy, trans-women still have significantly more muscle tissue than CIS women.
Its why trans women can compete at a decent level, they'll still rarely be at the absolute top of their sport.
They have to have their testosterone and other hormones monitored and held to average levels. That will always put them at a disadvantage at elite levels versus women who don't have the same requirement.
There is still the inherent biological advantage in being born male and going through male puberty and developing a male muscular/skeletal system before transitioning
Which is completely solved by access to puberty blockers before transitioning.
I did see some article claim that hip to knee ratio didn't translate to athletic performance, and it was so ridiculous I even downloaded the linked PDF that said it was a study, and it was just a pamphlet repeating the exact same claim with no further source.
I mean, there's a clear correlation already with women's sports already. Lots of runners peak early and have worse times by graduating highschool. But it's literally physics. Wider hips just means less efficient running.
Your last sentence made me search up women's chess... and it exists! That sound like a bold assumption or assertion that women are dumber in chess... Like what? I don't know why chess has to be gender divided. Maybe it exist to increase representation of women in it but the idea seems stupid. Maybe they have to split it for trans too if its already divided for cis women.
At a minimum men are born with more muscle fibres and process energy a little more effectively. Puberty is not a factor.
If we could wave a magic wand and make transitions change the multitude of differences it'd be great but the science isn't there yet. We're left with reality.
Unfortunately that’s just not true. There are a ton of people who use this as an excuse to oppress, and fuck them. But pound for pound, a person assigned male at birth is still going to have competitive advantage over someone assigned female at birth.
I don’t love the way this study words the problem, but I’ll quote it here: “Male physiology cannot be reformatted by estrogen therapy in transwoman athletes because testosterone has driven permanent effects through early life exposure.”[1]
I really wish it were as simple as it feels like it should be: trans men have the testosterone levels to compete with cis men, and the same for trans women and cis women. It’s really not that simple though, and pretending like the only barrier is hate won’t help things.
I could train as hard as possible, for years, and I promise you I couldn't beat a single woman in the WNBA on a 1 on 1 game. I think it is important to remember, that yes, statically, men have an advantage, but each individual is unique. I think it would make more sense 1. Remove the profit motive from sports. 2. Have leagues based on skill, not gender. Of course, that will never happen. Match making in video games is a clear example of how it can work. If I was really into any competitive game, every time I played I'd be playing against people that were roughly equal to me. I suppose that is harder to do in team sports though, especially when there is money involved for the players.
I think all athletes should be forced to use large amounts of testosterone to even the playing field. Let's see what the human body is really capable of
Weight is the wrong criteria to use. Why not just have it classed by skill level. Enforce equity in school sports by mandating that a meaningful distribution of skill-based leagues are funded. This seems like a very simple solution to me that would address gender-based inequities in general as well as improve sports overall.
Because even matching skill levels, males have greater strength, endurance, cardiovascular capacity, etc, ad nauseam. They have greater glycogen stores, which means they can perform longer, and they recover faster.
Growth plates are different, bone density is different. Muscle density and structure is different.
Just look at the high school boys soccer team that tromped an Olympic women's soccer team.
Women have faster reaction times. They have a different/higher pain threshold. They can bear young.
This is just fundamental biology. Frankly it's baffling to hear your nonsensical arguments.
I literally cannot understand the argument that you’re making. People with different physiological characteristics are not going to have the same skill levels. Nothing you listed argues against my proposal. All the physiological advantages that you listed are fine. Some females may be better than some males at some tasks and vice versa. Why not let them compete against each other. Seems like creating a larger pool of competitive athletes would improve any sport. Carving out leagues that cater to different capability levels would open opportunities for more people. I’m proposing that we have more, better, more competitive and exciting sports. What exactly are you objecting to?
Even then there will still be physical differences. Higher testosterone levels increase the strength of individual muscle fibers and cause the body to produce more red blood cells. Muscle in males is stronger per pound and fed more oxygen.
I don't care for competitive sports at all, so to me it's an overblown non issue.
All it does is that people form all sorts of stupid opinions over sports that don't matter. Like if i were a swimmer and would at some point realize that i need to be a woman to be complete, i would ditch fucking swimming. Or i would ask if i could compete with the same people as i did all my life. Or if it were that fucking important to me i would ask to compete but not as a real competitor.
I remember that story from this swimmer who became a lady, and completed with other ladies and absolutely crushed them. Isn't that perfect for anti LGBTQ people to get outraged? And again, i was reading what the LGBTQ community thought about it, and one of the most upvoted comments were that dudes have heavier bones or something and if anything it would be a handicap to him/her.
Which imo makes it even worse, because that just sounds like crap to me, and if you need to result to arguments like that it only makes you seem like you know it's wrong, you just make things up.
Sports simply aren't important enough.
I feel like it'd probably be better to group based on performance. I don't see why this wouldn't work for pretty much all 1v1/FFA/small-team sports/games.
There’s a big issue with using weight classes in team sports: player weights vary dramatically. Take the NFL for example. Setting aside the enormous differences in weight between linemen (offensive and defensive) and all other position players, there are also huge weight differences within a given position. For example, quarterback Jared Lorenzen was 6’4” and weighed 275 lbs whereas Russell Wilson is 5’11” and weighs 211 lbs. That’s a huge weight difference!
You can find similar weight differences across players in other leagues (NHL, NBA, and MLB). Weights don’t really correlate with overall skill level though they do somewhat correlate with position and skill set (and height of course).
How would you classify by weight in team sports? You might think to do it by position but none of the leagues require a player to remain at a single position for their career. Players can and do switch positions, and many even do so multiple times during a game. Sports like NBA basketball don’t even have any particular rules about what a player at any given position is allowed/not allowed to do, so the positions on team rosters are more like a suggestion than a requirement.
For team sports, don't all firefighters have to go through the some physical stress test to show they can all operate on the same basic level? Maybe there is that minimum physicality test and if you can pass it, male or female, you become NFL eligible - maybe it's a combine thing? You can then have since that are more of less fit and capable, as with firefighters, but they've all met that standardized minimum to start. How does that not solve this?
For broader need, maybe you could just start with the majority of the Olympics being co-ed and weight class?
In that scenario, I think people may need to be ready to accept that there could still be a "natural" separation in performance by sex to start as even strong athletes may still be socialized to play differently. Give it a generation or so though and I think the weight class thing could normalize competition level as birth-assigned boys and girls grow up playing with each other on the same fields.
All of this is fine when we're talking F > M transition. There would be no competitive advantage and I'm pretty sure, pretty much no-one would be able to make it professionally going this route.
The problem is M > F taking part in female sports. No amount of treatment or hormones would ever completely take away the massive physical advantage this person would have. It simply isn't fair to cis women.
Forget weight limits.....I think baseball is the perfect place to start.
I've watched baseball for 30 years. I don't like change. I understood the need for an automanic runner on 2nd during the covid years. It made sense for the context of it's time. That time has ended, and so should that rule. I hate the pitch clock. For me, baseball is sometimes not even about the game. Some men have a hard time admitting to others, or even to themselves that they enjoy the company of other men. But the truth is, we wouldn't hang out every weekend, get drunk, and watch sports together if we truely didn't care for each other. So even though you know your buddy cares about you, and you care about him, there still needs to be a game on. Now you're trying to make the game shorter? I am not a fan. I will happily watch a double header with the boys. We want MORE sports, not LESS.
I'm also not a fan of the sensitivity of how balks are called now. Balks used to be so rare, that I had to be explained at age 19 what just happened when I saw one. This after watching baseball for 9 year already. These days it seems like EVERY game has a balk. Sometimes it's just a twitch of the leg, with no pitching gesture. In NO WAY can some of these balks be realistically interpreted as an intentional fake out pitch movement.
As you can see, I'm a grumpy old set in my ways grey haired curmudgeon. However, even I wouldn't even mind at all if women played with men. If they can hit a 97 mph fastball, and beat out the throw to home, why WOULDN'T you want them on their team?
The first one to break that barrier would be just as iconic as Jackie Robinson. At least you would THINK so. The reality of the situation is, women HAVE played on official MLB teams. The fact that I don't remember their names or their decades that they played is only testiment to how unfairly they were viewed. If MLB wants to promote diversity, and progressive views, we get Jackie Robinson and Larry Dolby. When the MLB wants to kill the idea, you never hear a word about it officially from them. Instead you only hear about it on youtube videos about obscure MLB facts.
The point is, on a regular basis, I would still support competitive women playing on every team. There are some truely crappy players in the MLB (looking at you, Bartolo Colon), and if they get replaced with better playing women, then the MLB as a whole is stronger for it.
...........that being said, women and men should NOT play hockey together. It just wouldn't be right.
American ninja warrior has had more and more women making it farther and farther in the competition every year. There are still handicaps in place to make sure at least some women make it to the finals but after that there are no handicaps. At this point, even if they removed all the handicaps there would still be women that reach the finals, just not as many. It's been very interesting to watch.
The announcers still try to hype up the women's achievements but at this point most of the big barriers have been broken. They've had to resort to stuff like, "if she gets a buzzer here she'll be only the second mom to get a buzzer in qualifying!". It's kind of silly at this point.
I say fuck it and let everyone compete together. Ain't no reason men and women couldn't compete with each other in baseball, basketball, hockey, tennis, golf, etc. Even if you believed men are capable of being bigger and supporting more muscle, there's tons of sports where that isn't going to be the most useful thing to win.
How would you know this gender or that gender is better anyway unless you actually let everyone compete together, regardless of what's in their pants or their heart?
Male sports typically don't have a gender requirement. Women just can't compete. This is why women's leagues were created. So they can compete with people around similar physical potential.
Look at chess for example. Anyone can compete in the world open, but you'll see 98~99% men. So, they make a woman's league.
Women have the option of playing in both. This is the same for most sports.
Notably Judit Polgár, probably the strongest female chess player, never competed for the Women's World Championship and only rarely played in women-specific events.
Using chess as an example after saying women wouldn't be able to compete makes it seem like you believe men and women aren't even on even ground with intelligence and that's absolute fucking bullshit.
Ever left your computer and went out to play some sports?
I am a bit surprised that so many pro trans people seem to pick up the bait of the right and make these over the top suggestions like abolishing womens sports. Certainly proposing stuff like this will help the trans cause a lot and not make them look crazy at all.
I have played sports my whole life. Mostly in mixed gender leagues.
I am a bit surprised to see so much sexism in this thread from people who seriously think men and women can not compete at the same level in things where physical strength isn't the be all end all of the sport.
The classic kung fu paradox. We can't compete, because this technique is so powerful it would kill the opponent! That's why they perform so well in MMA. /s
Nah fuck that shit. MMA integrated weight classes and that's sucked. Sumo is the only true martial art, straight up, not even pulling your leg right now
Edit: Yeah, I mean, men are "stronger" pound for pound or whatever, but, we kind of, are idiots when it comes to thinking of sports, if we just suddenly think all sports are about explosive type 1 muscles, or muscular structure, or whatever. That's dumb, that's a brainlet comparison and a brainlet appeal, I would say. If you gain leverage in one direction, you lose it in another. If you gain a bunch of type one muscle fibers, you become a chimpanzee, but also, you gas really, really quickly, and humans are endurance predators that maximize that endurance with fine motor control even in what might be considered gross motor action. Everyone has this conception of sports as being these kinds of, oh, instant action gratification machines, where you just watch some guy get hit in the face really hard, or get tackled, and your monkey brain goes coco mode, and so obviously explosive strength is gonna be good for these displays, so, men are better at sports.
This is not the case. Or at least, not entirely. Sports is more like a long-form storytelling vehicle with many different characters and mindless teams to it. Women can fulfill that role just as easily as men can, in many of the same contexts. If we have sports that are bad for co-ed play, then I would say, we have sports that perhaps need refining.
Which everyone thinks is somehow like, a horrible thing to do, oh no, the sports, they're too sacred, we gotta find the best of the best, but sports have always been and remain subject to change and a ton of different shitty rulesets that everyone always hates. Basketball now, apparently, rewards a bunch of aggressive highlight-reel kinds of play, and apparently the older game used to be more defensive, I say apparently because I dunno. I know nascar has had the opposite trending for quite some time with limiter plates meant to protect drivers and the audience more at the cost of more spectacular crashes and pileups for which the sport might gain more casual viewership. And also not be boring as fuck driving in a circle for like three hours. That's not a sport getting better or worse, that's just some arbitrary cultural shift, a decision made, realistically, because of internal cost-benefit analysis at the behest of a corporation which runs the major league.
We might have the same capacity to integrate sports into a co-ed kind of a deal, if we had the will to do so, but I think the truth of the matter is just that nobody really gives a shit about equality, except for when you bring it up.
Me, I'm a fan of sumo, because fuck weight classes. I wanna see david beat goliath. To me, that's a more compelling casual narrative that can easily be built into a sport. Fairness is highly overrrated, and also doesn't exist, or else every match might as well just be random chance, or end in a draw. Michael phelps is some genetic freak or whatever. Go cry me a river, and then he can swim across it and back. Give me an abstract goal like "get ball through hope" or "throw guy out of ring" and then I don't need any more to it, I'm right there with you.
Sumo's actually a crock of shit, they predicted it in Freakonomics and it was revealed a few years later, I was living in Japan at the time and found it very trippy. I still like watching fat men in nappies with waxed hairstyles throwing salt around a clay circle then trying to push each other out of it though.
I still like watching fat men in nappies with waxed hairstyles throwing salt around a clay circle then trying to push each other out of it though.
Yeah see that's why I can't ever take anyone's opinion on it seriously, because they just say shit like this. It's like, only a step away from "oh Americans should be good at sumo because Americans are all fat right and you just need to be fat and they wear diapers right?". Which itself is about two steps away from just like, "Haha look at the funny fat men and how fat they are, what freaks for being fat.", which is an incredibly depressing sentiment. It's like calling baseball boring. I mean yeah, it is, but obviously, baseball fans will hate it if you say that, because it being boring as fuck is kind of the point of the sport. If you watch the matches you can tell pretty easily that most of them aren't faked.
Nah, man, it's a grappling art with a pretty large amount of universal applicability and no real weight classes, more similar to the conventional folk wrestling styles that many different cultures have. Mongolian jacket wrestling, mud wrestling, lots of European countries even have folk wrestling styles that they don't care about too much anymore. It's more similar to Judo, or something, and most people don't question the efficacy or reality of Judo. American folk wrestling became rough-and-tumble fighting, and also became carnie circus shit right after the civil war, and then spread around everywhere until the Japanese decided to just kind of make it real with shooto and basically start MMA as we know it today, arguably with some interference from Brazilian Vale Tudo guys. The UFC's involvement mostly being tenuous carnie shit. Go watch like the first three or four UFC's, it's basically garbage.
The more complicated download on the match fixing that came about in sumo is that 14 wrestlers were convicted, some stable masters. The sport as a whole, as with many sports in Japan, has a bunch of Yakuza involvement and toxic hazing and other bullshit. There's already a Wikipedia link on it. Hakusho just got massively demoted like last year because some jackass in his stable was found to be hazing newcomers and haranguing people for money. I dunno, somehow I'm not gonna call all boxing rigged just because every now and again they find out that some high profile match was rigged due to the nature of the sport's overarching regulatory structure.
Dunno, you might wanna just watch UFC 1. If you're really high level you might wanna watch nog vs sapp, though. Best one I've seen that's actually at that level, even though the weight disparity might not be so extreme as you desire outside of like, basically carnie shitfights like eddie hall fighting twins.
Having the same hormone levels now isn't the same as "grew up with testosterone all their lives so all their physical connective tissues were built in a different way, but that's okay because they've cut their testosterone levels recently."
There's longstanding structural differences in the human body if you've had Testosterone all your life.
The issue isn't gender. Gender is a social construct. The issue is sex. Female sports were always intended to be for female athletes. Female athletes who choose to play female sports to have a more level playing field and to play against other female athletes find it unfair to be forced to play against male athletes playing female sports. Trans women are women but they aren't female.
What's not true? That trans women aren't female? That's undeniably true. That female atheletes who choose to play female sports to have a more even playing field and to play against other female atheletes find being forced to play against male atheletes unfair? That's undeniably true as well. That female sports were intented for female atheletes? That's undeniably true. That gender is a social construct? I mean...that's a central pillar of the platform so we have to agree that that's true.
Your beliefs don't change reality and simply waving your hand in the air and declaring undeniable truths to be untrue does NOT make them untrue.
This post was reported for transphobia. Specifics weren't given. It seems like you use the term "female" to mean someone that was assigned female at birth. I'm not sure if language is changing in this area and I certainly don't know technical definitions. Female does seemed to be used as a gender identity as well. For example the opening paragraph here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_woman
I think many cultures are learning how to be more welcoming to people from all walks of life, which is great, and conversations like this one are good for discussing some of the nuance.
Please keep things civil and assume the best of other's intentions. We are all learning. We are all human.
I meant "female" in the context of biological sex as opposed to the social construct of gender as in, "woman" which may be a person who is either male or female. I am FAR from a transphobe and using the word and the reporting system on Lemmy as a bludgeon to try to silence anyone who doesn't buy into the extremist group think utterly devalues anything else that the extremists say. One of my oldest friends is a trans woman. She would VERY much disagree that I am a transphobe. My lesbian daughter whose trans and non-binary friends I interact with every day would also very much disagree.
I would like to counter report this as a false report by an extremist pushing a political agenda and trying to silence anyone who has different ideas than them.
Segregated sports based on a demographic like that isn't as trans affirming as you would think... My gut reaction as a trans person is about the same aversion I imagine a person of color would experience if a white person tried to put forward a "People of Color sport league".
Ditching us all into a new category like we're quarantined in sport away from other athletes because we're implicitly not cis... Isn't something I would appreciate.
The unfortunate reality is that men are much better at women at sports. This is why we have women leagues. There are pronounced biological differences that would essentially prevent women from competing if everything was one league.
MTF trans, because they were born male, have all of these advantages. They can take hormone blockers / estrogen pills and that reduces some of the advantage. But not all.
So it results in a MTF trans being a) weaker than males and b) stronger than females
What other solution except a trans league would be just to all parties involved?
because lots of (most?) trans people don't want to be "trans", they want to fit in with the gender they know they are, and being labeled as not a real man or woman in the normal sports leagues, but a trans man or woman in the trans league, is insulting.
When I was thinking about it, I came to the conclusion that sports that don't require confrontation should just evolve and give up on the competitiveness. Swimming, javelin, whatever shouldn't have the winner be the best out of every contestant, we should celebrate each and everyone's force of will to better themselves first. We already have that with high jumping, where individual performance is rated Vs their height goal.
Give up competitiveness in sports where it isn't needed, and you no longer have people melting down because someone has more muscular mass, or a different gender than expected.
Give up competitiveness in sports and you return to a celebration of the human body and it's physical prowess, instead of childishly fighting for who's best.
Obviously this doesn't work in football, or sports with direct confrontation, that i haven't found a solution yet, maybe during the next shower ?
Sports with direct confrontation, hell, even any sport, don't need fairness to be good. I'd say that fairness actually destroys enjoyment of a sport, a lot of the time. Now, sometimes that can not be the case, as a totally even set match can be impressive to watch just based on how the kind of, pachinko machine pays out, right. Depending on your definition of fairness, once we attain fairness, all that's keeping the match from becoming a draw every time is pure random chance. You have to define random chance as not being sort of, antithetical to fairness.
Watching the high-level pachinko machine can still be fascinating, can still be entertaining. But overall, the fairness is actually an inhibition to sport, a lot of the time. People want a david vs goliath moment, if you ask them. I would just as well give that to them, easily, right, like, no question in my mind. Obviously there's a balance to be had, but, that's the job of commissioners, to come up with that shit after the fact, or in relation to viewership numbers.