As hard as it might be to believe, in Canada a 50-year-old man really is being allowed to compete in swimming competitions alongside 13- and 14-year-old girls. Melody Wiseheart, formerly Nicholas Cepeda, is a professor of psychology and behavioural science at York University in Toronto, specialising in children and young people.

:roll:

Are we sure this is a real story?

Reading the story, it looks like this person is allowed to compete because there's no explicit age restriction to the competition - any 50 year old woman could compete - and so the only contentious point here really is that this person is trans.

Should trans women be allowed to compete as women? This is the big question, and I think it's a fair question to ask. There are studies that show that in some realms of competition, trans women have a lasting, perhaps life long, advantage over non trans women.

I have what I think is a simple low-controversy solution: in whatever realm of competition the question is being asked, "should we allow trans women / trans girls to compete with the other females?", it should be done by anonymous vote, and only the current female competitors should have a vote.

Nobody else should be allowed to vote. Not officials, not parents, not spectators, only competitors.

And the vote should be renewed every 5 years or so, in case they change their minds in the mean time.

The reason only competitors should be allowed to vote it's because it's ostensibly only them who have something to lose. If trans people do have an advantage, it's of course only the female competitors who are losing spots to trans athletes. If they decide, as a group, that they're okay losing spots to trans athletes, then why stop them? And if they come to regret that decision because they find that, WHOOPS, now every event is being won by a trans woman, they can reverse that choice in 5 years.

This is, I think, the fairest option for all female competitions to take. Let the people who are going to be affected most by it choose.

His club seems to be Dufferin Aquatic Masters. https://www.swimming.ca/en/swimmer/5257113/

But it seems some open tournaments are effectively almost exclusively frequented by young girls, with some participants in their 20s and last age group from 16. So he's an outlier in age and trans on top. Maybe he had a good reason but this isn't reported on.

As to whether trans women are allowed to compete, that depends on the rules. I think it's perfectly logical to demand trans people only get to compete in their original sex.

So the rules need re-writing. Why is this not in the lounge?

+1

So the rules need re-writing. Why is this not in the lounge? — Banno

Perhaps OP neglected, perhaps for an unavoidable reason such as time or other constraints, what his philosophical views or belief(s) as to why this ties into philosophy. Allow me to do so.

Since the dawn of man, there has been woman. The social order, simply if not tragically simplified into two: patriarchy and matriarchy. It is a known fact, as things are now (though perhaps may have been different in the past) the average male is of higher muscle mass, higher endurance, and, this is where scholars differentiate, of higher mental fortitude or ability to handle stress and anguish, whether or not due to the proven fact menstrual cycles affect the brain and induce higher levels of rage, aggression, or perhaps on the opposite end, lower levels of tolerance and the chemicals (dopamine, serotonin) that make a person feel "okay" or "at ease".

These facts in mind, what are the social consequences of allowing someone who is advantaged by never having to ever once experience such a scientifically noted phenomenon? Any at all?

Perhaps even more importantly, how will this affect society, the social construct we call "the world", and what potential for abuse (or perhaps benefit?) is allowed or denied as a result? These are the questions people wish to know, yet often fail to ask. So, lead on OP, what do you think?

Edit: And even further, I suppose one could extract the following debate. Does one who naturally has greater ability hurt or perhaps strengthen and encourage those who, on average, have less? (Allegedly)

An excellent question, OP! Excellent indeed.

You'll be banning fish from swimming, next. There's a long tradition of young girls kissing frogs and hoping. It's human nature.

in Canada a 50-year-old man really is being allowed to compete in swimming competitions alongside 13- and 14-year-old girls. — RogueAI

It's hard for me to believe this is true, but it sounds like it might be. — RogueAI

What is true is that a 50 year old transgender woman was allowed to compete in the women’s events for athletes 16 and older.

OK. Turns out the rules don't need to be re-written.

Why is this not in the lounge? — Banno

Because I just now saw it.

It's like that old joke where the football team brings in a donkey to kick a field goal because it's not expressly against the rules.

Fair.

What is true is that a 50 year old transgender woman was allowed to compete in the women’s events for athletes 16 and older. — Michael

I'm unsure this makes it any better... The idea that 50 year old male is given unfettered (in context) access to vulnerable young females undressing and competing is... extremely uncomfortable and you've got to question motive.

it should be done by anonymous vote, and only the current female competitors should have a vote.

Nobody else should be allowed to vote. Not officials, not parents, not spectators, only competitors. — flannel jesus

The problem is that this is a transphobic thing to do. No one is allowed to speak about the experience, place, or social impact of trans women except trans women.

Bigot.

If they decide, as a group, that they're okay losing spots to trans athletes, then why stop them? — flannel jesus

In reality though, because it is extremely clear that people are unable to make sound decisions in an ideological whirlpool. I note you've said anonymous - this does not preclude the over-all or general criticism (which is almost always vitriolic and aimed at destruction) having a serious effect on anyone who voted 'No'. It is not a burden females should have to bear - deciding whether or not to allow males to take from them.

It is not a burden females should have to bear - deciding whether or not to allow males to take from them. — AmadeusD

Keep in mind that the majority of trans support in society, up to and including the idea that they should be allowed to compete, comes from females.

I agree that it's an unfortunate reality that people would be criticised for "no" votes, and that it would not be fair to female competitors for them to put up with that. On the flip side, a bunch of men deciding for women something that those women don't want seems unfair as well, in case those women DO want to allow trans to compete with them.

Perhaps the majority of women's soccer, for example, want to allow trans athletes. Why should a bunch of men in a board room decide, and not the women themselves for whom the league was created?

I'm unsure this makes it any better... The idea that 50 year old male is given unfettered (in context) access to vulnerable young females undressing and competing is — AmadeusD

Is your concern her age, that she's trans, that she's competing, or that she uses the women's changing room?

Regarding the competition, it is an open age category. Anyone over the age of 16 could compete. There is never a maximum age for these things. In fact, in terms of competitiveness, it is better for the other participants that she is 50 rather than say 18, as a 50 year old is much less fit.

Regarding the changing room, would you care if it was a 50 year old cisgender woman, or an 18 year old transgender woman?

you've got to question motive. — AmadeusD

She wants to compete in swimming competitions, like everyone else competing.

Your apparent suggestion that transgender people have some nefarious motives for being transgender is straight up transphobia.

Amadeus has a good point about motive. Biological men are much more likely to have nefarious motives than biological women.

Amadeus has a good point about motive. Biological men are much more likely to have nefarious motives than biological women. — RogueAI

That biological men are more likely to have nefarious motives than biological women isn't that there is a good reason to believe that a transfemme swimmer has nefarious motives for competing in women's swimming competitions.

AmadeusD doesn't have a good point, it's simply transphobia. Much like it would be homophobia to suggest that a gay swimmer has nefarious reasons for competing in a men's swimming competition for anyone over the age of 16.

That biological men are more likely to have nefarious motives than biological women isn't that there is a good reason to believe that a transfemme swimmer has nefarious motives for competing in swimming competitions.

AmadeusD doesn't have a good point, it's simply transphobia. — Michael

You think a 50 year old biological male should be sharing a changing room with teenage girls? You don't see any problem with that? What if the girls are 13? 8?

You think a 50 year old biological male should be sharing a changing room with teenage girls? You don't see any problem with that? What if the girls are 13? 8? — RogueAI

Is your concern their age or that they're transgender? Would you mind if it were a 50 year old cisgender woman, or a 16 year old transgender woman?

Is your concern their age or that they're transgender? Would you mind if it were a 50 year old cisgender woman, or an 16 year old transgender woman? — Michael

I don't have a problem with biological women sharing a changing room with little girls. I have a serious problem with a biological men sharing a changing room with little girls. Also, the fact that he's 50 makes me suspect he's perving on them.

Do you think grown men should be allowed in changing rooms with pre-teen girls?

Also, the fact that he's 50 makes me suspect he's perving on them. — RogueAI

So you're a transphobe, got it.

Would you assume that a 50 year old gay man using the men's changing room is perving on any 13 year old boys who also happen to be changing? Or a 50 year old lesbian in the women's changing room?

Would you assume that a 50 year old gay man using the men's changing room is perving on any 13 year old boys who also happen to be changing? — Michael

I would say it's a definite possibility. I don't entirely trust men to be around little kids. I'm a teacher and I'm always a little suspicious of male teachers in elementary school settings (and the priesthood). I think the reasons are obvious. I would not let a man or teenage boy babysit my daughter. I am equally suspicious of gay and straight men.

So you're a transphobe, got it. — Michael

I have no problem with women who identify as men, they can go wherever they want. Biological men, however, cannot be trusted around kids to the same degree.

Biological men, however, cannot be trusted around kids to the same degree. — RogueAI

So just sexism. Biological men must be assumed to be child-molesting paedophiles. :roll:

So just sexism. Biological men must be assumed to be child-molesting paedophiles. — Michael

No, but we're about nine times more likely to sexually abuse children.
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens#:~:t

Until that changes, men should not be trusted to be around kids as much as women. I know as a male teacher I am regarded with much more suspicion than my female coworkers. I don't have a problem with that. It's certainly justified. I have a problem with my gender being so violent and rapey.

Biological men are much more likely to have nefarious motives than biological women. — RogueAI

:rofl:

Oh no, my inexperienced friend, let me assure you, men are simply more physically, and as a result socially, capable of carrying out nefarious desires. Perhaps it can be argued men are traditionally greater thinkers (though the margin between those who are and aren't is quite large) ie. more likely to get away with immorality thus lessening the fear of getting caught thus increasing the desire to act on said desires, be it so out of intrinsic biological nature/adaptation or simple social status and resulting education.

Unfortunately this thread is likely doomed to be a political discussion instead of an actual philosophical one, so I will bow out.

I find this whole topic incredibly divisive and prone to abuse, intentional and otherwise. Some men are more "traditionally masculine" than others, often physically, sometimes in other ways. Just because someone is an "effeminate" male in contrast to another male does not mean they need to start thinking if they're actually a female and need to consider having their genitals removed and taking permanently mind and body altering drugs. That's predatory abuse, bullying, and frankly downright ridiculous at face value.

It is documented many trans people, before any procedure, suffered from some sort of mental illness. No one just woke up one day and said to themself "Wow I just realized I was supposed to be born with a vagina". Not a one. My point is sometimes people with a documented high risk of mental illness who are burdened with self-diagnosing any alleged "ailment" or whatever the scholarly medical term is for "being born the wrong gender" are reasonably likely to possibly be incorrect. Therefore it can be argued blind, forceful pushing of the idea on someone who later chose such an operation is abusive and illegal.

I'm a bit of an alternate thinker mind you so I believe when there's money to be made, it shall be. Insurance scams run rampant in the 21st century. At the expense of innocent, vulnerable people.

No, but we're about nine times more likely to sexually abuse children. — RogueAI

That biological men are nine times more likely than biological women to sexually abuse children isn't that biological men are likely to sexually abuse children.

Until that changes, men should not be trusted to be around kids as much as women. — RogueAI

Even if they shouldn't be trusted as much it doesn't then follow that they shouldn't be trusted.

I'm much more likely to die in a car crash than being eaten by shark, but I'm not going to assume that I'm going to die in a car crash. In fact, I'm very unlikely to die in a car crash.

That biological men are nine times more likely than biological women to sexually abuse children isn't that biological men are likely to sexually abuse children. — Michael

I didn't say we were. I said we should not trust men to be around kids as much as we trust women.