Laura Nagtegaal 2019 Amateur World Champion FA40

[Smigles]

"just too strong for a woman's competition", possibly so, but that would then start the slippery slope again, where Michael Phelps would need to be excluded from swimming for yet another (Olympic) medal, because his body secretes way too little lactic acid, or moving Jeremy Koling to another division, because he has too much wingspan.

Would you still allow Phelps and Koling to compete if they got their advantages cause of an operation?

And historically, the female participation grade of PDGA membership is constantly hovering around 8%. 92% are men. That is NOT, I repeat, NOT, due to transgender women.

Gotta give that to you, you are taking the most extreme step to increase woman participation at tournaments :thmbup::hfive:

 

[gingerandhoney]

Would you still allow Phelps and Koling to compete if they got their advantages cause of an operation?

Performance-enhancing interventions (through medication or surgery) are strictly regulated and monitored and sacntioned by the WADA and other anti-doping authorities.

Transgender people, through their innate wish to finally have a body that matches what they are on the inside are doing exactly the opposite. They are undergoing performance-reducing interventions, by either suppressing the creation of testosterone via medication, or removing the testes altogether.

I see where your question comes from, but that is still pendent on the premise that a person would transition to gain an advantage.
Would a boxer have body parts they deem not-useful removed to gain access to a lower weight class?
No, their only way to do so is lose weight, and that goes directly against their power, inertia behind punches, and ability to withstand blows. It's a trade-off.
The same goes for transgender women. They trade in explosivity and stamina and power, in return for having the body they can accept as theirs. (gaining access to gender-protected divisions is really no more than collateral "positive" damage in this regard).

At best, that advantage (the IOC and in our case the PDGA) is consider until further notice to be either inexistent, or too hard to quantify otherwise, lest possibly stepping on that slippery slope that regulates certain physical traits.

If physical traits - and very specifically, ruling out too much variance within - were that important in sports, then wouldn't there be way more divisions in sports that DO regulate this? The only regulations of that sort that distinguish within a gender or age group is WEIGHT, and that is exclusively * in fighting/martial arts sports.

* = Correct me if I am wrong, I really do not know any other type of sport where any kind of physical trait regulation is active within a gender or age based division.

Here's some glaringly obvious examples where you'd think you want to see these physical traits result in separate divisions.
There are no high jump events where they classifiy people on height.
There are no running events where they classifiy people on weight.
There are no throwing events where they classifiy people on weight or limb length.
There are no swimming swimming events where they classify on either limb length or hand/foot size.
There are no ball sports where they select on weight, or height.
Want me to continue this list?

Gotta give that to you, you are taking the most extreme step to increase woman participation at tournaments :thmbup::hfive:

You're welcome

 

[Smigles]

Performance-enhancing interventions (through medication or surgery) are strictly regulated and monitored and sacntioned by the WADA and other anti-doping authorities.

Transgender people, through their innate wish to finally have a body that matches what they are on the inside are doing exactly the opposite. They are undergoing performance-reducing interventions, by either suppressing the creation of testosterone via medication, or removing the testes altogether.

As you said before, even when reducing your performance, you gain compared to the field you play against (your example, top 50% male to top 5% female).

So maybe performance-enhancing is the wrong word, but it is in the end still result-enhancing. Cause you take your reduced phisical abilities into a field where the level is lower by a bigger factor than you reduced your abilities by. (That's my feling, i dont really have numbers to back up that claim.)

I see where your question comes from, but that is still pendent on the premise that a person would transition to gain an advantage.

You gain that advantage during transition if you want it or not.

 

[gingerandhoney]

As you said before, even when reducing your performance, you gain compared to the field you play against (your example, top 50% male to top 5% female).

So maybe performance-enhancing is the wrong word, but it is in the end still result-enhancing. Cause you take your reduced phisical abilities into a field where the level is lower by a bigger factor than you reduced your abilities by. (That's my feling, i dont really have numbers to back up that claim.)



You gain that advantage during transition if you want it or not.

It's neither performance-enhancing (most certainly not)
nor is it result-enhancing (in my case, you'd be expecting to see me beating women with higher ratings than mine, right? Not happened).
It is at best chance-of-placing-well-enhancing.


I am glad you are stating it as your feeling, and specify that is not backed by data.
That makes it way more relatable and understandable than claiming "men just have broader shoulders" etc.

As far as data and research goes (but more is needed, I'll be the first to admit that *), the people @ IOC have deemed the removal of testosterone to be enough of a field-leveller for consideration to allow a transgender person to seek gender-reclassification.

* person X's measurable performance pre-transition vs person X's measurable performance post-transition is the most useful study to be done.
Doing a comparative study of measuring a transgender woman's performance to the average cisgender woman's in the same sport is - even when the layman would see most merit to that study - futile at best.
Because the flip side of that study is going to HAVE TO BE, that it would force the discussion on getting - specifically for disc golf - wing span divisions, muscle mass divisions, momentum-building-through-x-step divisions, hip flexibility divisions, separate stand-still & x-step divisions, etc...

 

[Smigles]

What gives me the feeling of an unfair advantage is mainly the idea that the build up of muscle mass and strengh during normal growth is different in a male or a female body. (Also body height?) And that you keep some of that extra strengh even after you transition with the hormone therapy, specially if you transition late in life.

Maybe you could research it if one of a set of identical twins undergoes a transition early in life but i dont think that would be particulary accurate.

Maybe my feeling about growing up with a male body is just wrong. I am not a biologist and should leve such research to them.

Now i am off googling wether or not the sexual orientation changes in a transgender person while they are in the transition. Never thought about that.

 

[gingerandhoney]

What gives me the feeling of an unfair advantage is mainly the idea that the build up of muscle mass and strengh during normal growth is different in a male or a female body. (Also body height?) And that you keep some of that extra strengh even after you transition with the hormone therapy, specially if you transition late in life.

Maybe you could research it if one of a set of identical twins undergoes a transition early in life but i dont think that would be particulary accurate.

Maybe my feeling about growing up with a male body is just wrong. I am not a biologist and should leve such research to them.

Now i am off googling wether or not the sexual orientation changes in a transgender person while they are in the transition. Never thought about that.

I understand that feeling.
And I apparently can not tell you often enough that while that MAY be true (and straightforward dinner table thinking would probably side with you). BUT, the IOC, and in our case the PDGA, have established that the field-levelling operative factor in all of this is the removal of testosterone.

Identical twins would already be a more interesting topic, but that still does NOT give actual data on the loss of advantage in the transgender individual.


On sexual orientation changing (or not)...
Aside from the fact that this is a question that is "not done", I'll answer you anyway.
You know my blood works values, I have no issue with sharing you my sexual orientation either.

There is ZERO correllation between gender identity and sexual preference.
For each person this is different. Some stay attracted to the gender they were attracted to before transitioning, some don't.

In my case, I did, and do only feel attraction to women; romantically and physically and emotionally. So, while my sexual orientation did NOT change, the label DOES.

Before. I would be labelled as an (awkwardly, because I didn't identify with my body) straight male.
And has me labelled as a happy lesbian now.
Mind blown?

 

[BigDickHyzer]

I find it interesting that some folks need to have some imaginary needle moved for them personally as though their opinion is what ultimately decides these things.

IF you look back at my FIRST comment on this thread, you will notice the main reason why I am here. In private local groups of the Am World runner-up, the people closest to her were speaking up in opposition to what has transpired. It's interesting that in those private discussions, people were able to voice displeasure with somethin, without someone like Robert Leonard calling them disgusting people.

I understand that my own opinion (which is still in flux) nor anyone else's "ultimately decides these things" but my point remains that anecdotal evidence is not sufficient for myself to be 100% for or against something.

Looking at big picture, long term consequences is important here. People that depend on disc golf as their career, such as Sarah Hokom have legit concern with these developments. She has been vocal in opposition and has been met with great disdain for it. But it is her livelihood and she has done extensive research on it.

 

[gingerandhoney]

IF you look back at my FIRST comment on this thread, you will notice the main reason why I am here. In private local groups of the Am World runner-up, the people closest to her were speaking up in opposition to what has transpired. It's interesting that in those private discussions, people were able to voice displeasure with somethin, without someone like Robert Leonard calling them disgusting people.

I understand that my own opinion (which is still in flux) nor anyone else's "ultimately decides these things" but my point remains that anecdotal evidence is not sufficient for myself to be 100% for or against something.

Looking at big picture, long term consequences is important here. People that depend on disc golf as their career, such as Sarah Hokom have legit concern with these developments. She has been vocal in opposition and has been met with great disdain for it. But it is her livelihood and she has done extensive research on it.

Please appreciate that I AM using personal anecdotes. Even if they don't align with your viewpoint.
I am not expecting or pretending or demanding you change your opinion because of my personal anecdotes.

I do not pretend I am the same as any or all other transgender people, or that I have THE answers, but in answer to at best second-hand knowledge via "well, I think/heard/feel/read that this is unfair/wrong", someone with first-hand knowledge - even if the answers aren't aligned with what you (broader sense) think/heard/feel/read - would possibly at least be given the respect to take their words for "quite possibly true".
In the now 5.5 weeks since AmWorlds, my story has been way too uniform and consistent for me to simply be making stuff up, and it is in no one's best interest if I did, anyway.

Question for you, did Kerri herself speak up in opposition in any way in those private local circles, or was it only the people around her? Are you IN those circles yourself, or are you 'only' connected to people who are? Your profile states you are from Texas, while her "private local circles" will most likely be in Iowa, as that's where she is "local"

and second question to you, did Sarah go on record with her concerns with these developments?

 

[DG_player]

Huh? In disc golf you are competing against other players, not the course. Rated rounds are directly related to the performance of all the players playing the same course configuration, on that day. That's why the same score with different weather/course conditions can result in different rated rounds. Then there's the ratings factor, a pool of higher rated players tends to yield higher rated rounds compared to a pool with lower rated players. Even though that particular subject has been highly debated.

Obviously your competing against other players, but indirectly by comparing your scorers versus a course. It's not as if you're playing goal keeper and trying to putt their putts out of the air. Theoretically (obviously there are some nuances), your round rating should be a very good approximation of your skill level regardless of your competition, with the same metric being used for players in every class or division. In a sport like tennis or volleyball where your competing directing against other players, it would be very hard to come up with any tangible measurement of skill change pre- and post- transition.

 

[DG_player]

I am just categorically refusing to accept the worst case scenario that this would happen SOLELY because of that player wanting to have a chance at winning in a gender-protected division. That's just not how transitioning works.
Rachel, Hannah, Laurel, me, and the other (openly or not) transgender people; try asking them (at gun point, if you think they'd not be honest enough if you simply asked them) why they transitioned.
Do you really think that any of them transitioned BECAUSE of improved athletic opportunity?!?!?!!?

I don't think anyone is seriously concerned that men are going to transition for the purpose of winning in a sport. The concern is that men who do transition may have an advantage over cis women, and that it's unfair for them to have to compete against non cis women.

 

[gingerandhoney]

Obviously your competing against other players, but indirectly by comparing your scorers versus a course. It's not as if you're playing goal keeper and trying to putt their putts out of the air. Theoretically (obviously there are some nuances), your round rating should be a very good approximation of your skill level regardless of your competition, with the same metric being used for players in every class or division. In a sport like tennis or volleyball where your competing directing against other players, it would be very hard to come up with any tangible measurement of skill change pre- and post- transition.

Funny you mention tennis; it is possibly the one sport with the easiest measuring tool available. A player's serve is being measured in km/h or mp/h, and I am confident that as transition progresses, that serve speed will drop.

 

[gingerandhoney]

I don't think anyone is seriously concerned that men are going to transition for the purpose of winning in a sport. The concern is that men who do transition may have an advantage over cis women, and that it's unfair for them to have to compete against non cis women.

I have had to debunk exactly that allegation close to a hundred times across all the topics I found online; men who couldn't cut it in their own division simply transitioning in order to beat women. Even if it's only a troll posting it, it IS poisoning the well. And I am pretty confident it was a relatively low amount of trolls, and a fairly high amount of actually angry and fearful people (mostly men, ironically) posting those posts.

BTW: I think the MAY with regards to advantage you (narrow sense) refer to, is proving the exact opposite of the point you (broader sense) are trying to make.

 

[Hampstead]

I'm just a dumb dude. I do alright with the competitive disc golf, but pro tour isn't my future. I really can't fathom undergoing a sex change just so I can win a few lower tier events. Maybe there are guys so desperate for disc golf dominance they'd prefer expensive surgery over fieldwork, but I have my doubts about it.

 

[gingerandhoney]

You're not a dumb dude
Anyway, assuming for a second that it would actually be POSSIBLE to transition simply for an athletic edge over women, it indeed seems like a terrible detour with way too many negative side effects that are going to have a life-long effect (possibly life-threatening).
Field work, gym, mental game practice, putting routine... it all leads to better results, quicker. Cheaper.
I don't know US data on gender confirming surgery costs, but $30k seems to be a low estimate. And with insurance coverage in the USA being what it is (and insurance certainly not covering that surgery without the much-needed green light after psych eval, and only POSSIBLY covering it after green light), that may seem like way too much of a burden.

 

[DiscFifty]

Theoretically (obviously there are some nuances), your round rating should be a very good approximation of your skill level regardless of your competition...

Trust me.. I WISH ratings were based on how well you played the course, but it's not. It's directly related to how well you did against the other players on that day. It's pretty simple to witness. Consider the scenario where someone shoots the same score as someone else, except his rating was lower? It's because they were in seperate divisions and the lower rated round had a pool of lower rated players.

 

[DiscFifty]

I don't think anyone is seriously concerned that men are going to transition for the purpose of winning in a sport. The concern is that men who do transition may have an advantage over cis women, and that it's unfair for them to have to compete against non cis women.

Agreed.

 

[gingerandhoney]

It all works out, except for the last 11 words. That's not necessarily so. The same score with the same average rated players pool in a certain pool, on the same day on a different layout (long vs short tees), could still result in a lower round rating.
Enter SSA.

 

[Binky Yutz]

I have followed this thread from the beginning, and I usually stay out of these types of threads....

What I was wondering was (as it pertains to disc golf only): Are there any persons naturally born female, that have transitioned to male, and now play in the MPO, MA40, or any male division....AND are there then inherent disadvantages, due to all the same reasons given for being an advantage in the male to female transitioning person???

Does that even make sense?? In other words, is the OPPOSITE true also, for the same reasons.

Would the same arguments be made?
Would MPO players have a problem with that ?

 

[DavidSauls]

I have followed this thread from the beginning, and I usually stay out of these types of threads....

What I was wondering was (as it pertains to disc golf only): Are there any persons naturally born female, that have transitioned to male, and now play in the MPO, MA40, or any male division....AND are there then inherent disadvantages, due to all the same reasons given for being an advantage in the male to female transitioning person???

Does that even make sense?? In other words, is the OPPOSITE true also, for the same reasons.

Would the same arguments be made?
Would MPO players have a problem with that ?

It's not equivalent. The M-- divisions aren't protected. (If a man could transition into an older man, and play in an age-protected division despite his birthdate, it would be slightly similar).

The protected divisions exist because biological realities reduce the average skill level of those groups, as well as the ceiling. This applies to both age- and gender-protected divisions, though the ceiling might at 40+ may be disputable.

The PDGA has adopted the position of the IOC and many other sports---that the effects of the male-to-female transition are essentially the same as the biological limitations of those born female. Not exactly the same, but enough, to make eligibility for a protected division reasonable.

None of this would apply to an unprotected division.

 

[Arisugawa]

Performance-enhancing interventions (through medication or surgery) are strictly regulated and monitored and sacntioned by the WADA and other anti-doping authorities.

Transgender people, through their innate wish to finally have a body that matches what they are on the inside are doing exactly the opposite. They are undergoing performance-reducing interventions, by either suppressing the creation of testosterone via medication, or removing the testes altogether.

Slight correction.

You are referring to transgender women here, not all transgender people, correct? Transgender men would be undergoing testosterone therapy and whatever the equivalent surgeries are for them, to gain a performance-enhancing intervention. Performance-leveling may be a better word for it.

Regardless, while I know your intent was to address your side of the situation, it doesn't apply equally across both halves of the spectrum.