Get the words right
Transgender athletes face increased restrictions ahead of the Paris 2024 Olympics compared to previous rules, as it was recently decided that they must have completed their transition before the age of 12 to avoid unfair advantages.
Transgender athletes face greater hurdles in qualifying for the upcoming Olympic Games, which will take place in Paris from 26 July to 11 August. It has been mandated that the transition must be completed before the age limit of 12, as doing so after that age could give an advantage over cisgender female competitors.
That is, male athletes who cheat by claiming to be women will find it harder to cheat now that they are required to have completed “transition” before age 12.
Previously, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) had issued guidelines that allowed any transgender athlete to compete as a woman as long as their testosterone levels were below 10 nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months before their first competition. However, the current requirements have been changed to avoid disadvantaging cisgender women.
Women. The requirements have been changed to avoid blatantly cheating women.
Unsurprisingly, transgender athletes, who previously qualified to compete against cisgender female athletes, have not welcomed the new protections for female athletes. It appears that these restrictions are based on the premise of not disadvantaging cisgender women.
Male athletes who want to cheat women have not welcomed the new protections for female athletes, because they prevent the male athletes from cheating women. The point of the restrictions is to prevent male athletes from cheating women.
One wonders, given the incessant hormone treatments and cosmetic surgeries, if “completed transition” is a meaningful phrase. Especially in light of the age limit of 12 years. It would be so much simpler and better if they just said “no males”.
Nowhere is it mentioned what the policy is for women-who-claim-to-be-men. If such a woman wishes to compete in the women’s division, must she have “completed … transition before the age of 12”? (Why would such a woman want to compete in the women’s division? Perhaps for the same reason certain men want to do so.)
Nor is it mentioned what the policy might be for people who claim to be neither sex.
Is a transition ever completed?
They say that like it’s a bad thing.
So, back to the days of the castrati.
Or even begun…
@Maroon, that’s basically what they’re saying, isn’t it? Males who were (chemically and/or surgically) castrated as children can compete in the women’s category.
For many reasons, there is no such thing as a completed transition, but one is that the drugs never stop.
Every successful application points to sick parents who castrated their child.
Any child who has “transitioned” before the age of 12 (!!!) has been indoctrinated and/or brainwashed (which is easy to do at that age), and most likely abused, tortured, disfigured, mutilated, chemically assaulted, or some combination of those. The sorts of people who push the trans agenda on children need to be stopped. There needs to be an age of consent, and an all out ban on people who were born male (and still are male) from taking over women only spaces and endeavors. Make “transitioning” less attractive to boys who want to cheat girls out of the places and activities they have rightly earned. If you’re not a gifted male athlete, find something else to do FFS. Go do trans things, play dress up and exploit stereotypes all you want, maybe you can monetize whatever that is (fecking Ru Paul makes a living at it). But if the goal is to cheat women and girls, then the price is too high.
@Papito,
Yeah, it used to be for keeping the singing voice pure, or so they’d grow up to be harem guards. Now it’s to win medals, I guess.
@Maroon, Farinelli was 6’3 and fit; he could surely have dominated women at some niche sport or other.
@twiliter, Should the age at which a boy can consent to become incapable of sex really be lower than the age at which a boy can consent to have sex?
I’d think the puberty blockers plus cross-sex hormones would do more of a number on a prepubescent boy than cutting his balls off.
“Castration” usually refers to removal of the testicles (orchidectomy). It renders a man sterile but not incapable of sex; castrati were often enough sought after as sex partners because they could not make women pregnant. It appears to be relevant whether the castration was performed well before puberty (roughly under 10) or near the onset of puberty (roughly 10-12); the older group could obtain and maintain erections, and developed a more masculine physical appearance. Note that all of these boys are nonetheless under the target age of 12.
Sex “reassignment” surgery includes both orchidectomy and penectomy. A male without a penis cannot have sex.
It is somewhat misleading to compare castrati to boys given “bottom surgery”.
@Sackbut, you’re right. The castrati had it better. They lived longer than other men. Today’s medical experiments, like Jared Jennings, will have their lifespans shortened. It is a misleading comparison.
OK, so castration+. Even worse.