The US swimmer Lia Thomas, who rose to global prominence after becoming the first transgender athlete to win a NCAA college title in March 2022, has lost a legal case against World Aquatics at the court of arbitration for sport – and with it any hopes of making next month’s Paris Olympics.

The 25-year-old also remains barred from swimming in the female category after failing to overturn rules introduced by swimming’s governing body in the summer of 2022, which prohibit anyone who has undergone “any part of male puberty” from the female category.

Thomas had argued that those rules should be declared “invalid and unlawful” as they were contrary to the Olympic charter and the World Aquatics constitution.

However, in a 24-page decision, the court concluded that Thomas was “simply not entitled to engage with eligibility to compete in WA competitions” as someone who was no longer a member of US swimming.

The news was welcomed by World Aquatics, who hailed it as “a major step forward in our efforts to protect women’s sport”.

  • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    5 months ago

    So any woman stronger than the average for women ought to also be excluded then? Again, why is it specific that trans women be excluded?

    There are not and likely will not be anywhere near enough trans people to occupy a single category at a single event. Refusing to allow trans women to compete as women, like every other woman, is a de facto ban on transgender women participating in sporting events. Transgender women are women, just like tall women are women and women with large lung capacity are women. Why should trans women be excluded for being above average but other women who are above average shouldn’t be?

    • SleepyWheel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      No, not any woman stronger than the average for women, because by definition the leading woman will always be stronger than other women.

      At the same time, plenty of cis men are weaker than the average female athlete, but we don’t let them compete.

      We exclude all males as a category, including former males, because on average they have an unfair advantage. Attempting to make exceptions based on individual performance isn’t feasible.

      Effectively, women’s sports are like amateur vs pro competition. You don’t let an ex pro play in an amateur match, even if they’re not as strong as they once were.

      • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        So de facto banning some women from any kind of professional sporting competition is acceptable because it’s too much work to include them? Why is that acceptable to you? And why is it necessary to couch these concepts in discussions about fairness when you yourself admit they are not fair? Excluding female people from female categories seems counterproductive to any attempts at providing level playing fields for women and girls in professional athletics.

        Also there are other groups of women that are on average more physically capable then the average for women as a whole. Should they also be excluded?

        • SleepyWheel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          5 months ago

          Level playing fields for women and girls aren’t served by allowing competition from people who haven’t always been female. Its not fair on cis women to have to compete against people who’ve had advantages from going through puberty while male.

          The purpose of women’s sport isn’t to be inclusive of women, its to be exclusive of men. And its not that it’s too much work to include some trans women on the basis of ability, it’s that it’s just impossible. Do they include only those who aren’t likely to win? Maybe some that can win, but not by too much? What about a champion male who’s recently transitioned and would shatter the world record, making it unattainable for any cis woman for years to come, maybe ever? There’s no way of making those judgements, no matter how much work is done.

          Its the same principle as banning performance enhancing drugs. Some clean athletes might beat some drug using athletes, but we don’t try to figure that out, we just ban drugs. And puberty as a male is getting a few years if hormone-induced muscle gain that isn’t fully lost even post-transition, even on hormone blocking drugs.

          • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            5 months ago

            Trans women are not male.

            The bar for entry is and has always been several years of sustained hormone therapy with normal estrogen and testosterone levels. And even that is far too restrictive.

            What about groups of cisgender women who are above the physical average for women as a whole? Why is the proposal to ban transgender women and not other groups/classes of women based on them being on par above average? I mean is it fair for women from South Korea to compete against women from the Netherlands? Should women from the Netherlands be banned from competition? They have an average advantage, so it’s unfair to the rest of the women that they’re allowed at all.

            Your essential argument has to be that transgender women are not women. There is no other argument for excluding trans women that adequately explains why it’s necessary for trans women to be excluded and not anyone else.

        • TheFonz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m not sure where the disconnect is happening. It’s been explained to you over and over but you loop back.

          The two categories exist to provide women a fair chance to compete in a category of their own. We don’t establish categories based on outliers, but on averages. On average male athletes will always outperform female athletes. There is no way around this fact. It’s not a matter of too much work to include females. There is no work to be had if we wanted to ensure fair odds. Most of the trans community agrees with this assessment. It’s not that hot of a take.

            • DarkGamer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Most of the trans community agrees with this assessment.

              No they don’t…

              I tried googling for some statistics regarding trans people’s opinions on this matter and I didn’t find anything, is there a poll either of you has seen that indicates this or is this the general consensus among trans people you know?

              • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                No poll. But I’m a trans athlete that has been active in trans communities for nearly a decade.

                I have no numbers, but I think it’s safe to say I’d be aware if most of my own community was against my participation.

          • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Most of the trans community absolutely does not agree that trans women should be excluded from women’s sports, no clue where you’re getting that from.

            And trans women are women, excluding us from women’s sports is literally not fair. We are not men, nor are we male. So we are not going to compete in men sports or male categories.

            And if we don’t make sports fair for everyone then why are you talking about fairness?? If it’s not fair already then what materially is lost by trans women competing?

            Say a transgender woman wins at a competition in women’s sports, what materially has been lost here? A woman won a women’s sporting event. What is happening that is unfair?? She’s female, she’s a woman, so how can you assert that she shouldn’t be able to participate in women’s sports? To what end? What is lost by letting the half a dozen trans female athletes in the world compete?

            The literal only justification for it is a fundamental belief that trans women are not female or are not women. Any other attempt at justifying it falls apart at the seams because there are more outlier women physically than there are transgender women at all, so banning transgender women but allowing outlier women to compete is literally just banning us cause we’re trans.

    • kitnaht@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Why should trans women be excluded for being above average but other women who are above average shouldn’t be?

      Because by nature of their transition, they don’t fit in a single cleanly defined category. We should just change the definition to say: Those with XX chromosomal pairs. Because you can’t change those. Nice and simple. Anyone with double-X chromosomes, good deal. Anyone with XY - goes into the “open” category - which is by default, the ones usually with mostly men in them.