ESPN article on W swimmer G Ryan who is genderqueer / non-binary
Leaders and best, another Wolverine breaking barriers and overcoming challenges -- swimmer G Ryan.
http://www.espn.com/espnw/sports/article/18908049/michigan-wolverines-s…
As the article says, G Ryan identifies as "genderqueer" or "non-binary," I didn't make those terms up or apply them randomly.
Watch your male-cis-binary-nonqueer privilege you tool!
lol... but...
I think Ryan or G is female by genetics, so it's not really breaking any barriers really... just a fluff piece.
I think that's a pretty small minded way of looking at it. Even if G is purely female anotomically (and I don't know if that's the case) this is still significant from a societal perspective and raises good questions and discussion. There are many aspects of society, sports being one of them, that has a harsh segmentation between male and female and these issues (along with the very popular bathroom issue) challenge many of our norms. Whether or not you agree with it, it's interesting and pertinent to our lives.
WolvinLA, I agree with a lot of what you say and certainly believe you are a good willed person. I think there will always, and appropriately be a "harsh segmentaton" between the sexes in sports. I would even call it an "appropriate segmentation".
I don't think it is appropriate or sexist to say I don't want to see a woman fight Connor McGregor. I don't want to see a woman swim against Michael Phelps. I don't want to see a woman try to pitch against Miguel Cabrerra. The "harsh segmentation" is simply an acknowledgement of the simple fact that males and females are physically different. That doesn't take away from a man / woman's personhood or value...just acknowledges the simple fact of reality that men are genetically physically more gifted than women on the whole. Not in every circumstance of course...but elite male vs. elite female the male is going to win every time.
But the examples you provide are not really the equity issues that will arise. If a woman wants to compete for a spot on the men's baseball team she will either make the cut or not--and it's her decision if she wants to compete against other players who are likely faster and stronger. But what if an athlete who is born male identifies as a woman and wants to play on the women's basketball team? Then the athlete is no longer an underdog, but may have an unfair advantage.
That was my point below: we have to figure out how to balance the rights of the transgender athlete with the rights of the athletes against whom they will compete.
I'm not going to pretend I know the answer--I have thoughts about which way I would lean, but I'm conflicted.
March 15th, 2017 at 10:37 PM ^
March 15th, 2017 at 11:41 PM ^
March 15th, 2017 at 11:17 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
March 16th, 2017 at 12:26 AM ^
March 16th, 2017 at 10:52 AM ^
What's the point? Why is that superior to the current system?
March 15th, 2017 at 11:33 PM ^
Just have one team for both genders and it will be the end of female collegiate athletics. They are just not on the same level as men.
Also I feel sorry for young people. They got mind fucked from a young age.
March 16th, 2017 at 12:40 AM ^
it would've been simply not fair to other women athelets.
And that was a big theme in the article. I think the article deserves credit for acknowledging that these are tough issues and we are entering into uncharted waters (pun kind of intended). How do we come up with policies for athletic competitions that are fair to individual athletes who may have complicated gender identities AND other athletes who are also participating? This is a new dilemma and I don't think we've figured out the answer.
March 15th, 2017 at 10:36 PM ^
The answer isn't difficult at all to your question of "How do we come up with policies for athletic competitions that are fair to individual athletes who may have complicated gender identites and the other athletes who are also participating?". It isn't popular, but it is an easy answer.
I would propose this. You have an "XY chromosome" and an "XX chromosome" division. An athlete can identify with any gender they want. They can be called any pronoun they want. The deciding 100% objective, and I believe the most in line with fair play / sportsmanship, is to have contestants competing against the "same sex chromosome". Again, you can identy with any gender, but you can only compete agains similar "sexual chromosomes".
March 15th, 2017 at 10:57 PM ^
That may be the best solution, but I'm not sure it is a perfect or easy one. What if a person is born with ambiguous genitalia (something that I understand is not all that uncommon), and the parents raise that child as a boy. Turns out that the child, is actually xx rather than xy. I imagine as the child grows he will, for all intents and pursposes, identify as and be treated as a boy. When the boy gets to some competitive level of athletics, he is told that he has to compete in the xx division.
Or maybe the opposite is more likely--a child with xx chromosomes but ambiguous genitalia being raised as a girl. I don't know enough about the topic to know which is more common, but in either case the chromosome-based athletic divisions may not be as simple as they seem.
March 15th, 2017 at 11:14 PM ^
901 P, definitely not gonna be a perfect or easy solution. For the 0.1% of that population, I would certainly leave room for them to go with the sex they were raised.
March 15th, 2017 at 11:15 PM ^
901 P, also wanted to say I have really enjoyed reading and hearing your thoughts. They differ from mine, but I respect the way you engage, put your thoughts together, and are happy to dialogue.
March 15th, 2017 at 11:23 PM ^
Thanks Lakeyale13. This is why I'm ambivalent about the blanket "no politics" rule. I get why we have it, and most of the time I agree that I don't want the blog to descend into political bickering. But occasionally we can have informative and enlightening discussions about the political issues that permeate sports. There are lots of really smart people on this blog--sometimes I want to hear how they address the most complicated (and often political) issues that we face.
Other times I just want people to make 3-9 jokes.
March 15th, 2017 at 11:28 PM ^
LOL. Jokes are good too!
Please excuse a third-party opinion, but I went back and re-read your exchange. I have to say that I found it to be intelligent, articulate, and respectful, and I applaud the two of you for having it.
But in a back-handed way, I think it’s an example of why there should be the “No Politics” rule. Your exchange was the exception, not the rule. Hey, if the mods and members of this blog could absolutely guarantee that all political discussions would be conducted like yours, then I’d be all for it.
But of course, they can’t, and it’s ridiculously naïve to think it ever could be. 901 P, you made the observation that “there are lots of really smart people on this blog,” and that’s true (many of them much smarter than me.) But it’s also unfortunately true that there are plenty who aren’t - and their default reaction to disagreement is hostility and insult. In my time here, I’ve seen arguments break out over every topic from Beilein’s recruiting ability to whether the football helmets should have a matte finish. And these are relatively unimportant topics. But if you introduce politics into what can be a combustible atmosphere … well, then this blog becomes like so many others: a shitstorm waiting to happen.
And that would be a damn shame. Speaking for myself, I really like this blog. I get to keep up on one of my favorite subjects – all things UM – and frankly, I learn a hell of a lot. (A perfect example was Ace’s recent dissection of Beilein’s offense in the Wisconsin game. I sat staring at my screen, fascinated at the ballet between Wagner’s clear-out and MAAR’s cut that led to an easy layup.)
I’ve seen other blogs and message boards that started with good intentions, but degenerated into the shitstorm I mentioned before. I’d really, really hate to see that happen here, because I enjoy this blog so much. I’d rather keep doing what that noted Wolverine fan Willie Shakespeare once wrote:
"I like this place and willingly could waste my time in it.”
tl, dr.
Just kidding! Excellent points--thanks.
March 16th, 2017 at 12:06 PM ^
+1, because that was truly funny.
Amen, Sam.
March 15th, 2017 at 11:26 PM ^
What about an athlete that is XXY or XYY? What division do they get to participate in?
Yes but it's probably also not fair to have a female transitioning to male who is taking testosterone participate in a female sport....If the amount of testosterone they get is enough to increase muscle mass, I don't know if it is.
That's the case that worries me. If you come down on the side of "fairness" then the girls/women shouldn't be discounted by allowing the very drugs and PEDs that are banned from being acceptable just because someone is transitioning. The option to transition one's gender is a choice and with that may come some sacrifice. One such sacrifice is not being able to compete against your original gender. Maybe the solution is to expand the Special Olympics to include a trans category. People can still train and compete.
I was pointing out that just going by chromosomes isn't fair either as the transitioned birth females will have an advantage.
I also read an article recently on a high school wrestler born female transitioning to male that they would not allow to compete against boys and she's just been dominating the girls.
March 16th, 2017 at 11:20 AM ^
when speaking of a singular person in the English language. Strictly grammatically, I find it very hard to understand what is being stated. For example, there are times in this article when Bottom is quoted where I can't tell if he's speaking about G or the entire team.
Rather than use "they" or "their," I would prefer a new, singular gender neutral pronoun such a "Z" or just refer to the person when they are talking about an individual, such as "G Ryan."
Maybe non-binaries should compete agasinst men.
Non-binaries can be born physically male or female but do not identify with either the male or female gender.
So totally ignorant to "non-binary" term. Are these individuals clearly born a male or a female and just choose not to associate with a certain gender, or is it anatomically they are perhaps not fully belonging to a specific gender. Truly not being an asswipe...looking for clarification.
They're born XY or XX and have gender dysphoria according to the DSM.
Let's hope they get the mental help they need.
Really, putting all politics aside, this would be the most objective way to classify where an athlete plays / competes. Don't take away what pronoun someone wants to be called. Don't take away the gender they want to identify with. Just simply let Science, which makes no opinions just states facts, dictate. That gets rid of all political / religious agendas. If you are XY...you compete against males. If you are XX you compete against females. We can call still call you by the pronoun you want or even the gender you want to identify with, but your genetics (100% objective) dictate where you compete and who you compete against.
I tend to agree with this. Anything else involves complicated administration that exhausts resources for something that benefits a very small segment of the population aka it's easier to make exceptions to a rule 99% of people live by than it is to flip the whole system.
March 16th, 2017 at 12:32 AM ^
Seriously, I'd be fine with them just calling it the "XY Division" and the "XX Division". Call yourself whatever you want, but genteics is the common denominator to your competing.
these are small segments of the population but what about those born with ambiguous genitalia raised as boy/girl regardless of their chromosomes, or those born xxy or with androgen insensitivity? there's a lot more than "scientifically" male or female at play here.
For the 0.1% of the population, I would suggest using Science to measure their testosterone level. If it correlated more with a male, then the individual would compete against males, if the T Level correlated more with a female then against they females they would compete. If in the middle, then take your pick. LOL
I mean, 0.1% is not very large, but against the world population that is a lot of people. This topic is getting more exposture now, but still...
Another question: This seems to be a primarily American thing. Are other countries facing the issue of gender transition at the same rate as the US?
March 15th, 2017 at 10:25 PM ^
March 15th, 2017 at 10:24 PM ^
March 15th, 2017 at 10:35 PM ^
Here we go
March 15th, 2017 at 10:38 PM ^
March 15th, 2017 at 10:55 PM ^
March 16th, 2017 at 12:17 AM ^
Most people who are mentally ill don't think they have a problem. Personally I think most people are mentally ill, so if the majority is mentally ill then they would be normal so maybe they don't have a problem /shrug.... who knows.
March 15th, 2017 at 10:41 PM ^
The rate of suicide attempts among the transgender population is 41%. The national average is 4.6%
I would say there are significant mental health problems in the transgender community.
March 15th, 2017 at 10:45 PM ^
Yeah but there's a difference between depression and Gender Dysphoria. You're diverting the argument.