Man Named 'Tiffany' Is Dominating Women's Pro Volleyball in Brazil

[CapnAwesome]

It's insane to call the advantages of being male in sports shaky. Like, bonkers insane.

If you say so, but I would suggest that you take another look, particularly in the context of m-f trans.  

Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357259/

Strangely, their male advantages..whatever those are supposed to be, seem to vanish even -before- surgery.

Taking performance decreasing drugs does not decrease to the level of a woman, who went through puberty without loads of testosterone in her body. I mean obviously.  But if you think being male isnt a proven advantage in sports. Even though the record in every single sport ever is held by men,  that holds objective records, then there is really no point in having a conversation about it.

If the levels of performance enhancing substances within a trans athletes body is too high, the ioc..for example, won't let them compete.  That fully transitioned athletes have lower levels of performance enhancing substances than their cisgendered peers is an effect of suppresants and surgery..and nothing about having gone through puberty as a male changes that.

---

-the same is true in the case of f-m trans, btw.  If their levels of performance enhancing substances are higher than the male limit (and hey, they're actively taking them as part of their transition..so it could happen) they would also be rejected...by and large, however, they are not. What we have, in sum, is no indication that there is any advantage to being a trans athlete at any point in process...with the terminus being a state in which they are flatly performance inferior compared to cisgendered peers...as far as we understand and regulate the underlying biology of performance in sports.

In counterpoint to this, people just keep repeating some version of that thing no one is saying.

How come you never see a f-m trans being competitive in any sport?

[The Grand Nudger]

Because I'm not looking? How come you don't you see m-f trans being uncompetitive?

Now that the questionably informative anecdotes have been dealt with...was there anything in my response, that you quoted..that you wanted to address....or are we going with the anecdotal questions about what either of us sees or doesn't?

[CapnAwesome]

Because I'm not looking? How come you don't you see m-f trans being uncompetitive?

Now that the questionably informative anecdotes have been dealt with...was there anything in my response, that you quoted..that you wanted to address....or are we going with the anecdotal questions about what either of us sees or doesn't?

What? I've already addressed everything in your response elsewhere in this thread. I don't know how you are expecting me to see someone not being able to compete. That's impossible, because they aren't competing.

I don't see them competing at a high level, because they aren't. because they are at a massive disadvantage. Unlike f to m competitors, I've already given examples of different records (And faces) broken in the very short time they've started to compete with women. I think I've said everything I can on this topic, and I certainly don't think I can have a meaningful discussion about it with someone who knows so little about sports that thinks that the advantage to being male is questionable (even though I respect your opinion on many other things). All of my relevant points are being ignored anyway, because they have to be in order to justify trans in women sports. Nobody wants to talk about added testosterone through puberty, or even attempted it. So I need to make an exit from this thread, enough tilting at windmills.

Captain Awesome out!!

[The Grand Nudger]

I only expected you to realize that you didn't see trans atheletes being uncompetetive, losing (or just not being into sports....)..because you aren't looking, lol.  

That's what trans athletes do, for the most part...since I'm guessing you didn't read that lit review I linked you - and that's limited to the small subset of trans females that actually compete.  Whether or not trans athletes outcompete their cisgendered peers in any given sport would largely appear to be an issue of the trans specific regs -in- that sport.  If they allow for a trans athlete to have stereotypically "male" levels of performance enhancing indicators.... than it's no more surprising that they win or set a record than if a roided up cisgendered female would.

[GrandizerII]

Love the exaggerations that continue to abound. Tiffany's record only surpassed the previous record holder by 2 points. And this wasnt her first time playing as a woman btw. She had been playing as a woman previously in some league in Europe, and it doesnt seem like she scored that many points in any of the matches there. She did great in her debut match in Brazil, which her team lost btw, but she wasnt legendary great either.

As for Fallon, like I said earlier, she lost a match of strength to a cisgendered woman. That must have been one weaaak cisgendered woman there.

So who else is there from the M-to-F gang smashing records in short amount of time?

[shadow]

It is the underlying assumption of people who oppose trans competing in their chosen genders on the basis of their birth sex.  No one has to -say- it.  The assumption is that somehow, being a man, even if you've transitioned, is broadly advantageous.  Shadow, there, just contended that every unspecified thing about the male body would have to be transformed or else the trans would have an unfair advantage.  That could only be true if males were somehow inherently better than females at sports on the basis of their sex alone.

The premise is silent (like so many of these sorts of premises are), but that doesn't mean that it's not there.

Yes, I am saying males are inherently better than females at sports based on their sex alone. Of course some women can become stronger than some men. Of course that's true. But as a baseline, the average man is better at sports than the average woman, just physiologically.

If you don't agree with this, that's completely disparate from reality.

---

The trouble, is that the above is not..at all, what any of the sparse trans data we have suggests.  Those "advantages to being male"..already shaky themselves...are the very things effected by transitioning.  Muscle mass is lost, bone density decreases, stamina goes into the shitter.  On top of that, M-f trans have -lower- levels of what we understand to be performance enhancing hormones than their cisgendered peers.

You're telling us, in effect, that you consider taking performance -decreasing- substances as a way to cheat.  How does that make any kind of sense?

So you can fall into an easier category!

For example, I think this comes up in chess competitions sometimes. If you are rated 1605, say, in chess, and you want to enter a tournament with an under 1600 rate and under 2000 rate category. If you enter the under 2000 rated category, you're going to get destroyed. However, if you intentionally lose a couple of games beforehand and get your rating down to 1595, you'll dominate the under 1600 category. You can farm prize money like this is you really want, but in no way is that fun or fair competition! Basically in anything with tiered competition, if you can choose to move tiers based on a personally decided measurement, you can take advantage of the system.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes, I am saying males are inherently better than females at sports based on their sex alone. Of course some women can become stronger than some men. Of course that's true. But as a baseline, the average man is better at sports than the average woman, just physiologically.

If you don't agree with this, that's completely disparate from reality.

Males are not inherently better at sports than females based upon their sex alone, nor is the average man any better at sports than the average woman..physiologically.   Both of those statements are completely vacuous even if we -do- consider some sex based difference in outliers.   Saying it over and over, and demanding that it be considered "reality" will never change that.  The average man and the average woman, both, in the us..are tubbies who aint good at no sportsball....but one has to wonder why we're even discussing the average man or woman if the subject is pro athletes. Not a single one of them are average. Trans or cis.

So you can fall into an easier category!

For example, I think this comes up in chess competitions sometimes. If you are rated 1605, say, in chess, and you want to enter a tournament with an under 1600 rate and under 2000 rate category. If you enter the under 2000 rated category, you're going to get destroyed. However, if you intentionally lose a couple of games beforehand and get your rating down to 1595, you'll dominate the under 1600 category. You can farm prize money like this is you really want, but in no way is that fun or fair competition! Basically in anything with tiered competition, if you can choose to move tiers based on a personally decided measurement, you can take advantage of the system.

What easier category are trans supposed to be falling into..................and is there anyone in particular "farming prize money" you'd like to discuss? Is dropping a weight class also cheating, by dropping into an easier category..in your estimation?

I;m trying to find some middle ground here, because it's easy to point out that some guy, for example, is stronger than some girl. The explanation for that, however, is not penis. That's what makes these blanket declarations about the presence of penis being the deciding factor so pointless. If you have two athletes, both in the same weight class, both with similar performance metrics, and similar levels of perfomance enhancers coursing through their blood..you expect a close competition..right? That was the whole point of segregating competition and regulating enhancers in the first place, before any of these gender re-assignments became possible. Why would you expect otherwise when one of the athletes was trans and the other cis?

I think you're imagining a man in a dress competing with women, rather than a person who has completed their gender reassignment. I can't stress enough that there's no real indication that trans athletes have an advantage over anyone else at -any- point of the process...but supposing they did just for giggles and because so many people believe it so very..very hard......does it matter after completion? If there is a Male Advantage™.... they've explicitly sought to destroy it.

[shadow]

Yes, I am saying males are inherently better than females at sports based on their sex alone. Of course some women can become stronger than some men. Of course that's true. But as a baseline, the average man is better at sports than the average woman, just physiologically.

If you don't agree with this, that's completely disparate from reality.

Males are not inherently better at sports than females based upon their sex alone, nor is the average man any better at sports than the average woman..physiologically.   Both of those statements are completely vacuous even if we -do- consider some sex based difference in outliers.   Saying it over and over, and demanding that it be considered "reality" will never change that.  The average man and the average woman, both,  in the us..are tubbies who aint good at no sportsball....but one has to wonder why we're even discussing the average man or woman if the subject is pro athletes.  Not a single one of them are average.  Trans or cis. 

Lol. You're usually better at debating than this, Khem. Didn't you say you were a track athlete? Have you never seen a track meet? Just google the times for any race at the olympics, the men's heats will always be faster than the women's.

[The Grand Nudger]

Is the trans womens heat always faster than the cis womens?  Because that would be the only relevant stat to our discussion..don't you think? Or are we still doing the "man in a dress" bit? This is what I was cautioning about when you started talking averages, you're now trying to buttress it by reference to athletes..but you still aren't actually considering the athletes in question in the first place.

It's a giant pernicious ball of confused propositions. I really can understand why a person would be leary that bad regs regarding trans athletes could lead to an advantage that can be gamed or cheated. I really do, and we understand why that may be the case. It's just that the path you take to get there is a soup sandwich, imo. None of those ridiculously broad statements need to be true for your conclusion to be true, you realize?

[shadow]

Is the trans womens heat always faster than the cis womens?  Because that would be the only relevant stat to our discussion..don't you think?  This is what I was cautioning about when you started talking averages, you're now trying to buttress it by reference to athletes..but you still aren't actually considering the athletes in question in the first place.

It's a giant pernicious ball of confused propositions.  I really can understand why a person would be leary that bad regs regarding trans athletes could lead to an advantage that can be gamed or cheated.  I really do, and we understand why that may be the case.  It;s just that the path you take to get there is a soup sandwich, imo.

You just said:

Males are not inherently better at sports than females based upon their sex alone, nor is the average man any better at sports than the average woman..physiologically

If you believe that, you've let political correctness supplant reason, and there's no point going any further in the discussion. I'd be glad to discuss the specifics of how much of this benefit is present in trans athletes, but without accepting this premise, we have nothing to discuss.