Transgender

Those born male have a physical advantage over those born female in sports. This is why the women's category exist, and why they should be exclusive to those born female. As much as transgender women should not be discriminated against professionally or socially, sports is simply an area where it is necessary to exclude transgender women to ensure fair competition. At least when there are ranking points, titles, or money on the line. Of course there can be leeway in social competition.

I have no problems with an open category instead of a men's. Born males have the physical advantage. Transgender men that join the competition won't have an unfair advantage that distorts the competition. I think even women should be able to take on the men if they have what it takes. Obviously that won't happen at the absolute top, but at lower levels it is possible.

Unfortunately, "open singles" doesn't really roll off the tongue like "men's singles", so after reconsideration I vehemently oppose the introduction of the open category.

 

I read the update email this morning.

What about Mixed? They don't say anything about mixed doubles.

I assume there aren't enough players to make a transgender only category, hence them including them with the "open" category.

 

As long as transgenders are not playing against females, it's all good.

 

i thought so too but ... .

from WebMD

There is a wide spectrum of gender identities that continues to grow. In 2023, the list of genders numbers more than 100 and growing.

 

It's not about gender identity. It's about distinction in physical performance. A women's category exists because the base level and top level of women's physical performance is drastically lower than men's physical performance. A transgender category could exist to separate transgender women from the women's category given their physical advantage from being born male, while also separating them from the men's category given their likely physical disadvantage due to HRT or other procedures.

Players can never be categorised by their identity, because if a transgender woman hasn't (yet) had any procedures done, then her performance will be on par with men. Categories therefore have to be based on inherent physical capability.

While transgender men might also have some lingering disadvantage of being born female, it doesn't matter as much, because they likely want to be seen as men and compete in the mens category regardless. This is not a problem, because they don't have an unfair advantage. The problem arises when transgender women want to compete in the women's category. The unfortunate consequence is that there isn't a true place for transgender women in sports. They are too advantaged to play in the women's, too disadvantaged to play in the men's (and also they likely want to be seen as women and therefore wouldn't want to compete with men anyway), and there is too few to create a separate category.

To have an open category instead of a mens is the best solution. By removing the "mens" label from the category transgender women (or anyone really) can hold on to their identity while competing fairly (even if at a disadvantage). Transgender men can compete even in the early stages of their transition without having to justify themselves. And women can challenge themselves if they deem the local or regional women's category too weak. All the while women still have their own category that doesn't include anyone who would have an unfair advantage based on inherent physicality.

 

Let science and nature do the talking, if you have Y chromosome, you are a man, pure and simple and should compete as a man.

 

While I am unaware of any trans players at the international level in badminton, I am also a part of the swimming community.

Skip this next part if you already know the context.

For context, the controversy surrounding the transgender woman, a biological male but identifies as a woman, is mainly the process of when they began to transition. The person in question, Lia Thomas, began their transition during a gap year after competing for three seasons on the men's team. There are many concerns as to why they transitioned, such as trying to gain a competitive advantage, or be it simply because they identified as a woman and wanted to be one.

However the main issue lies in having fully developed and going through puberty as a male, meaning that they would have higher testosterone than a biological female. More testosterone will correlate to a physical advantage, and since they began their transition late, they would also have more testosterone than the competition as they haven't been on hormones for a long enough period of time .



I am not all that surprised that Badminton England is developing the open category, considering that World Aquatics is taking steps to create the open category as well. Personally, I believe that the reason why this inclusion is so controversial is because there has never really been any transgender athletes in professional sports. There isn't enough scientific data to back up conclusions of being a trans woman does not give a physical advantage, and it is easier to believe that it does rather than it doesn't.

I have seen a video of TTY playing a not incredibly high ranked MS player, sorry I don't remember his name. She was given a point handicap IIRC, and she still was defeated soundly. Now, if we were to take that same exact player, put them on HRT, and after a year or two have them compete again, what would the result be? If that MS player were to then lose, we could then compare their result to the rest of the field.

My stance is neutral. I don't necessarily agree, but I'm not entirely against it either. It's a tough spot to be in for those that identify as something else. Without a large enough sample, I am still inclined to believe that there is an inherent physical advantage

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

I’m pretty sure that swimming has changed it’s standpoint on that matter as it caused such an outrage
As someone else said, all these mentally Ill people should just compete against each other and leave the original format alone.
Imagine dedicating your whole life to a sport, reaching the pinnacle of your career and then some bloke who identifies as a woman, beats you,
I know it’s the men’s category and it’s all inclusive blah blah blah but it’s the beginning of the end


The sooner this charade fades away the better

 

A recent update in the swimming world. World Aquatics (formerly FINA) has announced that they will be attempting the use of the "open" category at the world cup stop in Berlin. We will see how this pans out in October.

It is to my understanding that this category is separate from Men's and Women's, and there will be less events (50 and 100 Meter events only, no 200+).

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

Transgender activists don't see it as a reasonable solution, they in fact see this as transphobic. They claim that transgender women have no competitive advantage if they have transitioned early (before puberty I think) so should not be discriminated against. I'm not sure this "open" category (which is in practice a male at birth category at high level) really does much other than serve as a token offering to placate the transgender community over the fact that they're not fundamentally being regarded as being any different from their birth sex by the English badminton assosciation. It also seems to differ from World Aquatics definition of an "open" category as mentioned by Arisuin above which appears to be specifically for transgender and non-binary participants so it's already confusing.

The thing that most concerns me with this solution is that the document states that females at birth i.e., transgender men can play in the womens category. Transgender men may have taken testosterone during transition which is a banned substance in competitive sports. Is there no competitive advantage from a female deliberately forcing the body to become more masculine at a young age? There appears to be no mention of this in the document so I'm not sure if I've missed how that's supposed to be workable. If I'm not missing anything then I suspect should a transgender man begin winning in the womens category this will start throwing all sorts of questions up on competitive advantage as it has done with transgender women. Will we see top level women take testosterone for competitive advantage under the premise of transitioning if this is adopted by the BWF?

I think they've jumped the gun a bit in following UK swimming's lead and this has the potential to cause more problems than it solves personally. The frequent use of the transphobic label and cancel culture doesn't facilitate environments in which these concerns can be discussed openly. Badminton volunteers will have to spend time relabelling documents and players are going to have to be conscious of using "Open" instead of men's for fear of offending others. It has the potential to cause yet more resentment and division in a Country that already has far too much of it and it seems to fall short of offering anything that the transgender community would be happy with, so I don't understand the reasoning behind it.

 

Unless it is definitively proven that such an advantage does not exist, they shouldn't be included. In sports, the integrity of the competition is more important than inclusion. And if it is proven, then a line is needed to determine at what age puberty is considered to have started. If that line is too generous, some athletes may slip in that have an advantage. If it is too conservative, some athletes without unfair advantage are excluded. There is always going to be an overlap, and it is better to be conservative with it to ensure a fair competition. And even then, if they win something it will always be questioned.

I wouldn't want to win by cheating. If I have match point in the most important match of my life and I have to make a line call that no one else could reasonably see, I won't call it in my favour if I don't think it was. Some players on club nights will make an accurate call in the opponents favour and joke that they would have taken it in competition, as if it's acceptable and normal. This puts a bad taste in my mouth. If you know, or think you might have an unfair advantage, you shouldn't want to compete. I know there are people who don't care how they win, but those people are a poison to sports and competition, and shouldn't be indulged. They should be limited by rules and regulations to protect the integrity of the sport. Therefore, any trans woman player that transitioned in or after puberty that decides to enter in the women's category is either a cheater or wilfully naïve. The question is more open if they truly transitioned before puberty, but that would be the minority of trans women.

The world aquatics definition of an open category is wrong. Words have meaning. If the competition is closed to most people, it is not an open category. Just because they are wrong doesn't mean the BWF or BE has to be.

If it is a banned substance for women, then it should be a banned substance for anyone participating in the women's category. Transgender men participating in the womens would already be a disaster when it comes to acceptance, because if they transition they're telling everyone want to be accepted as men. To then participate in the womens is hypocritical, and shows that their motivation for transitioning is corrupt.

If the open category was previously known as the mens category (as it would be if this change happens), you will have to expect it to take years for the terminology to completely shift before it becomes natural. To take offence when people (intentionally or not) call it the mens category is to be intentionally thin skinned. I respect the average adult enough to assume they have the mental resilience expected of an adult. There will always be people that disappoint me based on that expectation, but to lower the bar is a disservice to the human race.

Trans people should be accepted for who they are, and they shouldn't be discriminated against. If that causes division then so be it. However biological factors should not be ignored, and the decisions regarding sports need to be made with a level head in the face of political pressures. I know that is easier said than done, but I think the way to deal with cancel culture is to ignore it, push through the correct decisions and trust that the silent majority are reasonable people.

I fully agree that my rigid perspective might be naïve, and that I might misunderstand the situation or don't know the depths of the politics involved, but I don't much care to involve myself in politics at whatever level or institution, because it is almost always a miserable situation.

 

I don't think that perspective is naive or wrong. I have often played with a trans woman this past year. I can't really make a comment on their ability since they weren't particularly good, poor form and incorrect grip, didn't really know positions in doubles, etc. But from what I could see is that they were definitely stronger than the other women I've played with but weaker than the men.

But. The problem lies in that my school already has a poor male to female ratio (tech institute) and there are even less women playing badminton here. Most of them aren't great, so to make the comparison between someone who is not skilled to someone who is even less skilled doesn't work.

It's exactly because of difference in skills that can make it very hard to determine the difference between someone who is trans and someone who is not. Of course, that's not to say that a direct competition in physical prowess between a large sample population would help in determining the main conflict between the groups.

Overall, this is just a very gray area.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

I agree but I think the science on this is muddy. Can you even definitely prove such a thing in this situation? I don't know. I think one of the arguments is that the burden of proof that there is an advantage falls on those that are those that are excluding those that are transgender on the basis that there is one. I think someone is trying to legally challenge these changes in other sports on this basis.

Transgender men could feasibly justify playing in the womens category as a protest against transgender women being excluded from that category.

I don't think it's naive, I'm not disagreeing with your points but highlighting the possible problems that are going to arise with this change.

 

So by this they agreed that transgenders who transitioned after puberty should be discriminated against? Now that's progress at least.

 

I know I'm nitpicking here, but I feel it is worth mentioning. To discriminate is to unjustly or with prejudice treat different groups of people differently. There is no injustice here. And the group is being excluded based on accurate judgements that apply to everyone in that group. So there is also no prejudice. Just as there is no discrimination against adults in children's competition, there is no discrimination here. The exclusion is justified and without prejudice.

 

Well, as long as you know...

 

It's now October, and that means the very first international swimming event with an open category. Unsurprisingly, there is not a single entry in the open category. It is, however, the very first, so this isn't sure evidence. It also doesn't help that besides Lia Thomas, there doesn't seem to be anyone else that is openly Transgender at a high enough level to compete internationally.

Should the open category be moved down to national and regional levels, there will be more information to gather and make a conclusion.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk