IfSC and USAC trans competitor policies

What I wonder is if one of the top female comp climbers decided to start competing as a man and won a bunch of comps would there be as much complaining?

M Mwrote:

What I wonder is if one of the top female comp climbers decided to start competing as a man and won a bunch of comps would there be as much complaining?

No, because she would be winning over inherent advantages. She'd be 'punching up'.

That's the whole point. Your inherent advantages should disqualify you from competing against those without them. Punching down as the kids like to say.

It's an ethics issue. We collectively avoid registering for Special Olympics and raking in all the medals because it inherently isn't fair. Dual chromosome, testosterone enabled people who compete against those without such advantage are unethical people. Seeking happiness and validation by itself doesn't grant immunity from essentially committing an act of aggression.

The idea of "categorizing based off of performance" sounds like it would destroy elite women's sports across the board. I remember Serena Williams losing 2 matches to the world 137th ranked man. Unless I am misunderstanding the concept which is likely. Probably not in climbing though, where gender just barely effects the elites, if at all. 

Also, I am don't know if someone else brought it up, but there are about a billion other factors other than testosterone that makes men have better athletic performance than women, which alot of the T rules do not account for. Still unfair for the women even if T levels are identical. 

Daniel Cwrote:

. . . .Probably not in climbing though, where gender just barely effects the elites, if at all. 

. . . .

That is definitely not true in speed climbing:  the women's record time is 6.84s, the men's is 5.21.  If anything, this seems like a greater differential than in things like running (or swimming), where there is very clear separation.   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed…

I don't know about bouldering or lead:  I looked up speed climbing just because we have an objective comparison, not because I have any particular interest in it.  I'd imagine a recent elite competitor would have insight as to how close elite men and women are by comparing how they do in training.  I suppose route setters could alter setting to, on average, either favor women or favor men if they wanted.  (E.g., if they made widely spaced but bigger holds, would favor men; tiny crimp fests would favor women.)

Outside climbing is another matter:  different body types can excel on different routes.  Women have already established routes that maybe didn't have the absolute highest grade at the time, but which were tried by elite men and not repeated for some time (I'm thinking Lynn Hill on the Nose and Beth Rodden on Meltdown).

I think everyone who has climbed a lot for a long time will have seen super impressive women and men and I don't have an agenda here, I just bothered to look up the speed climbing times as an idea to get an objective comparison between elite men and women in one climbing discipline.

I am absolutely  all for giving lgbt folks as much respect and support as possible but it should not come at the expense of cheating at sports.  Until there are enough trans athletes to compete in their own category its probably just going to suck for them. life is hard and its not always fair. 

I simply don't get how it is not  doping?

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

I simply don't get how it is not  doping?

Because they aren't doing it just to win. These people are looking to make sense of their entire lives, sports is just secondary.

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

I simply don't get how it is not  doping?

You really do not understand what you’re talking about then. 

Splain it to me  then.  There's athletes who get  suspended for taking  supplements that have  stuff in them that they  didn't even  know was there.

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

Splain it to me  then.  There's athletes who get  suspended for taking  supplements that have  stuff in them that they  didn't even  know was there.

Men becoming women are going on testosterone suppressors. They are effectively trying to prohibit the advantage that their body naturally produces. Women taking testosterone that their body does not naturally make is doping, but they are only caught if it is above a certain amount. With cis-women there is a great amount of variance in the testosterone they naturally produce. If we are going to set transsexuals at a testosterone  amount, what amount should they be set at? The lowest woman, average, or high? 

The issue is the threshold could be unfair, there is no perfect way to set it, it also might not encompass the full advantage that men tend to have over women. The fact is that many transwomen could be under the threshold but be in competition against women who have not been tested. 

Essentially a transwoman could have a testosterone level of 5.1 for a year and be declared ineligible with regular testing.
A cis-woman could take testosterone and get their level to 25 for six months during the offseason.  They probably would not be tested, and get the majority of the benefits. They then lower it again in the offseason. 

I doubt it really matters with climbing but combat sports and track and field etc I  don't see how it can be  fair?

They’ve had testosterone use exemption in sports for years. 

Tradibanwrote:

Because they aren't doing it just to win. These people are looking to make sense of their entire lives, sports is just secondary.

Sports is never just secondary to anyone that trains constantly, it is life.

M Mwrote:

Sports is never just secondary to anyone that trains constantly, it is life.

So it's all a grand scheme to win the Olympics and take over the world?

Princess Puppy Lovrwrote:

Men becoming women are going on testosterone suppressors. They are effectively trying to prohibit the advantage that their body naturally produces. Women taking testosterone that their body does not naturally make is doping, but they are only caught if it is above a certain amount. With cis-women there is a great amount of variance in the testosterone they naturally produce. If we are going to set transsexuals at a testosterone  amount, what amount should they be set at? The lowest woman, average, or high? 

The issue is the threshold could be unfair, there is no perfect way to set it, it also might not encompass the full advantage that men tend to have over women. The fact is that many transwomen could be under the threshold but be in competition against women who have not been tested. 

Essentially a transwoman could have a testosterone level of 5.1 for a year and be declared ineligible with regular testing.
A cis-woman could take testosterone and get their level to 25 for six months during the offseason.  They probably would not be tested, and get the majority of the benefits. They then lower it again in the offseason. 

This is probably the best explanation as to why it is often not deemed "cheating" by many organizations...however, with many events/sports you could argue that testosterone levels aren't the biggest factor leading to a perceived unfair advantage. For example, bone structure and bone density, amongst other factors, could also be used as an argument as to why Male to Female individuals may have an unfair advantage depending on the sport. 

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

I am absolutely  all for giving lgbt folks as much respect and support as possible but it should not come at the expense of cheating at sports.  Until there are enough trans athletes to compete in their own category its probably just going to suck for them. life is hard and its not always fair. 

Princess Puppy Lovrwrote:

They are effectively trying to prohibit the advantage that their body naturally produces.

Keyword "trying". Trying but not succeeding. Taking testosterone suppressors will never suppress the natural advantage that biological males  have over biological females. The testosterone level over the past several months is not the only thing that gives biological males an advantage over biological females in sports; it is also the higher amount of muscle they have from years of having higher testosterone levels, different bone structure, height, etc. Temporarily lowering testosterone will never fully remove that advantage. That's why there are multiple examples of biological males that were mediocre athletes in the men's division suddenly becoming winning athletes in the women's division.

Lia Thomas just won the NCAA Division 1 title by a full second. In swimming, that's a lot.

Beta Slavewrote:

Lia Thomas just won the NCAA Division 1 title by a full second. In swimming, that's a lot.

I don’t think 1 second is really all that abnormal a difference in a women’s 500. Here just a few  examples from the first couple years I looked up.

In 2018 and 2019, for example, the difference between 1st and 2nd was also more than 1 second...in 2018 it was more than 6 seconds and more than 2 seconds in 2015.

This community is fucked. If you find yourself on the same side as Tradiban, you should do some self reflection