Doctors: "Banning trans athletes among women is fine." Trans women: "It's a transphobic view!"
Radicalisation of the LGBT+ community: those who don't go with us, go against us
I recently had an article in LUI about the International Athletic Association's (IAA) decision not to allow trans people who have gone through male puberty to play sports for women. I tried to look at the topic dispassionately, not through the almost obligatory and expected lens of the LGBT+ community, and in the end I concluded that it seemed like the right decision from a common sense perspective.
That's what I gave myself.
Unfortunately, we in the editorial team have noticed a radicalisation of opinion in the community recently. Often times, when we open up a controversial LGBT+ issue, if the opinion expressed does not fully correspond with that of the reader, we become arch enemies. "Those who are not 100% with us are against us".
In hindsight, I understand that in this case, it was like getting a taste of my own medicine. I'll digress briefly. As a gay man, I see it this way: even someone who opposes marriage for all (which is a major issue for me), for example, if he merely says that he doesn't like it historically, that he doesn't understand why we don't have improved registration, I don't automatically consider him a homophobe. He just can't empathise with our situation, he may not be sympathetic to our arguments, but that doesn't make him a homophobe. Yes, if he writes that we're creatures, we should just lie low and not bother, then he's a homophobe.
I feel the same way in this case. Unless a person is outright spreading hatred towards trans people, I don't consider them a transphobe. However, I have been immediately labeled by several trans women as a transphobic person who spreads disgusting narratives against trans women in sports.
(At LUI , we're downright loaded for a plurality of opinions, so we'll bring you a detailed critique of trans woman Alex's take on the IAA decision and our author's text shortly.)
A Higher Moral Principle
I guess it's good to see the other side of it, what and how it might affect someone (though I think sometimes we really overdo it with the name-calling and labeling as a society, automatically assuming the worst intentions in everyone). And how some of us are overcome with emotion when all it would take is a factual discussion.
I think I'm the last person in the world who would be phobic towards trans people. I will never say or write that I have anything against them, that I loathe them, that "they are freaks of nature" and similar nastiness. I'm basically a total liberal, even described by some people as a radical progressive, which of course is nonsense, everything in moderation applies to me.
But am I really showing a loss of respect for trans women because I disagree with one marginal aspect of their functioning in society at the moment?
(I'm currently writing because it's based on what I know today. And everything evolves, so even opinion can change over time under the weight of argument.)
But that I understand, from some higher moral principle, why biological women have the right to fair sport, that minority rights should not downright reduce majority rights, I don't consider myself transphobic because of that.
Sexologist Hana Fifkova: The decision of the Athletic Association is in order
But I turned to the experts to see if I was getting it all wrong. The first was sexologist Hana Fifkova.
"I think the (International Athletic Association) decision is fine. Even if, as part of transition, a trans woman permanently reaches the hormone levels that biological women have, the difference for many trans women is in physique and proportions. And transitioning won't do anything about those. Something else strikes me about this whole thing: I've always thought that athletes want to compete fairly, and that an unfair win can't make anyone happy. But I guess that's not the case," a respected doctor, who has extensive experience with trans people and wouldn't be accused of downplaying transgender issues, responded to LUI.
Another perspective: "According to previous studies on trans people, not directly athletic, it is not proven that they automatically have an advantage. In fact, because of a few people, there is a preventive decision by the athletics federation," said Zdeněk Sloboda, a sociologist of gender, media and sexuality at Palacký University in Olomouc, in a critical interview with iRozhlas.cz.
Sports doctor Jiří Dostal: The data is now clear
Based on what I've tried to study honestly, I am convinced that trans women who go through male puberty before transitioning actually have significant physical advantages over cis women due to the effects of various sex hormones, and no amount of testosterone suppression will ever fully counteract this.
However, I've been criticized that there are no studies that unequivocally demonstrate such advantages.
However, sports physician Jiri Dostal of the Center for Sports Medicine, who has long been involved in the issue, gives me the benefit of the doubt.
"There is nothing transphobic in your article, quite the opposite. Personally, I am very liberal and in favour of the maximum possible inclusion, but we have so much clear data that the result taken by the International Athletics Association as well as the World Swimming Federation is clear and unquestionable," he says. And LUI has promised a comprehensive interview on the aforementioned topic in the near future.
He spoke about the issue on DVTV two years ago. Even then, he stated that we now have clear data.
"We know by what percentage men are faster and stronger, on average they are stronger than women by 30 to 40%. And about 20% faster. Artificially lowering testosterone levels leads to some changes, some are immediate, but you certainly don't change things. For example, hemoglobin levels will decrease within a few weeks. Other parameters, in the strength part, for example, there the effect is only a quarter. There is already data on this, that lowering testosterone levels to the desired level has only a 25% effect out of 30-40% (of the male versus female difference)." He also added that it is a simplification for the public that other sex hormones have an effect, not just testosterone.
And from the perspective of a sports-oriented physician, he reminded us of other things.
"The women's categories (used to be) created in the Olympics because women were weaker and couldn't compete with men in the same events. The whole history of sport is built on biological sex."
According to him, the main problem is in speed and strength sports.
The decision-making dilemma
However, he understood that the question of how to solve it was complex.
"On the one hand is equity, on the other is inclusion, individual and majority rights. In the beginning, the shooter was on the inclusion side until we had the data. It's a medical issue, but it's also a political issue. It's never going to be solved in a way that satisfies all groups.
One solution being discussed is to have a female category and then Men and Other. That's one way to approach allowing people who are transgender to play sports fairly. Yes, they would clearly be at a disadvantage," he acknowledged on the show.
And I, in turn, acknowledge that in my first article I may have missed the ending where I suggested a special transgender category. Some may find that demeaning, but the debates are still going on and we'll see where they take us.
On the other hand, I find the "argument" from the debate whether we want similar separate categories for Jews or homosexuals to be completely misguided (let's call a spade a spade). As far as I know, they are neither faster nor slower than others because of their faith or sexuality.
But let's get back to George Dostal, MD. How does he think this will work out?
"The way the future should go is that there should be a professional, non-emotional discussion about how we define the different sports categories," the doctor added on DVTV.
Other differences between men and women
There may be more differences between men and women. For example, regarding VO2max, which is the maximum amount of oxygen that can be delivered to working muscles during exercise. And it is generally much higher in men than in women.
"I would be cautious at first with the claim that a higher VO2max automatically means a better endurance runner, but rest assured that a marathon runner with VO2max = 80 ml/kg/min will 'outrun' a runner with VO2max = 50 ml/kg/min without much effort. But keep in mind that more factors than just VO2max alone speak into the final performance," says the Aktin website.
In the discussion below the first article, there were also claims about men's higher lung volumes, on the other hand, and that even in male sports some individuals have undeniable physical strengths and no one "disqualifies" them.
The whole situation is simply extremely complex and sensitive. It is not just a matter of some scientific evidence, which, at least from what I have been able to study so far, speaks rather against trans athletes in women's sport, so it is not just the medical side of the matter, but also the social and societal aspects, the ethics and even the politics. And the question is which of these perspectives will ultimately prevail.
Trans people must be protected
The trans community should be protected in every possible way. That's the right thing to do. Because it's being blasted from all sides by real phobics, insulted, humiliated. Particularly in the US, it's being bashed by various extremist groups and the media, often so-called MAGA (short for Trump), deliberately referring to trans women athletes in the masculine. These women in general are the target of all kinds of hate, more for example in this very interesting article. On the other side too, emotion, in this case negative and hateful, wins out over the ability to calmly discuss the topic. And that is a pity.
I can't even imagine what trans people go through, what they have to endure. But will it somehow help them if they compete as women in top athletic events, but will it further widen the gap between them and the majority, already, often unfairly, extremely distrustful society?
I am absolutely opposed to anyone discriminating against them. But I don't feel it's discrimination now that they're currently not allowed to compete in women's athletics because of their advantages against cis women.
As I said, the issue is just extremely complex. And it's at least good how detailed and in depth it's being discussed. I certainly don't think anyone wants to hurt trans women athletes. Rather, we are learning as a society to shift and come to terms with what new things life brings us. And to demean the debate by simplistically shouting that the current ban is a simple attack on trans athletes or trans women in general is also, in my opinion, a pointless rant without presenting evidence. We should really be discussing this in the most factual way possible.
