DISCUSSIONHow do you feel about the details of the FINA restriction?

submitted by lunarstrain from (self.TumblrInAction)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ClassroomPast6178 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It’s either a coward’s ban, or a clever, diplomatic solution depending on your perspective.

Part of me thinks that they should have had some backbone and simply banned it without caveat, but the more pragmatic side of me says that what they chosen to do achieves a ban without leaving much room for an appeal to the courts. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that they have had a legal team working on this for a while.

[–]Liz23 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't even think it was selected to be diplomatic, even though it reads to you like a compromise. Much like free testosterone was initially believed to be the reason for the performance gap (and requirements were made to regulate that) the consensus view seems to have shifted to the idea that male puberty is another major contributor to the consensus gap and also needs to be "regulated" in trans athletes. I think carving out a requirement that is as narrow as possible was the best thing to do while balancing fairness and inclusivity.

It may also end up being an effective ban as society at large comes to grapple with the real cost of early transition. Some sports are just not practical for people with complex medical needs, and those who have sought medical intervention for gender dysphoria need to come to terms with that, even if their medical conditions essentially serve to make some of them ultra competitive.

This also doesn't serve to create an unnecessary precedent that could be used to ban transmen from athletics by isolating the finding to male puberty.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Lord Coe made an interesting comment that had me rather impressed, he said:

But when push comes to shove, if it's a judgement between inclusion and fairness, we will always fall down on the side of fairness - that for me is non-negotiable.

Seems like that statement alone, from someone in authority in sport, is a watershed moment. It’s finally the recognition that placing inclusion on a pedestal, as has been the fashion for the past twenty years, has not always taken into account fairness, and that sometimes fairness must take precedence. It’s something that actually has wider implications outside of sport, for instance, in education I think unthinking inclusive policies have actually had a detrimental effect on the education of a lot of children (the push to put children with complex needs in mainstream schools has caused the education of the other children in their classes to suffer).

[–]Liz23 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree completely.