GOT BALLS? Trans Athlete vs. Rabid Libertarian – Case Summary

By SOLO

Yes, you heard. Trans woman sues CrossFit, as the company would not allow her to compete in women’s division of the CrossFit Games.

There is plenty of coverage already on how CrossFit is right, and how CrossFit sucks, and on whether suing for money takes away from the main point, and, of course, on whether trans women have an athletic advantage over cisgender (gender identity matches biological sex at birth) women.

trans Chloie

Instead, I want to outline three arguments that can be used to defend Chloie’s case, and also three reasons those arguments will not do diddly squat to convince CrossFit founder and owner Greg Glassman to do so.

Greg Glassman identifies himself as a rabid libertarian.

“You know,” he says, “you make me do something — if I’m already doing it, I’ll stop doing it. Even if I thought it was a good idea and it’s something that I wanted to do.”

Now, if you need a refresher:

Libertarians uphold liberty as the highest political end and are skeptical of governmental authority (because it has a potential to undermine individual freedom). In libertarianism, the agents fully own themselves. If you are sensing anarchistic overtones, you are not completely wrong.

Yes, yes – and you thought CrossFit was the next cool thing. It encouraged you to view yourself as a misfit again. I’ve been wearing orange socks to the gym, for goodness’ sake.

It was just so… rebellious. So… fresh. So… anti-establishment. It turns out it is (significantly) older than your grandmother. Bummer.

Glassman started reading economics when he was a high school student, naming Milton Friedman (best known for his “Capitalism and Freedom”) and Friedrich August Hayek among his favorites.

Notably, F.A. Hayek’s “The Fatal Conceit” is one of the books that Glassman reports enjoying over and over again. Looking into “The Fatal Conceit” more closely demonstrates that Glassman’s views, while outlandish, do have a clear origin.

Phew. My world makes sense again. My world is insane, but at least I know why.

It’s quite a read, by the way.

Perhaps, it should be included as a required text for CrossFit Level 1 Trainer Certification. It would definitely take longer than two days, but we’d end up with significantly less dumb coaches. Hi, Rich!

Although the author warns that many of his remarks would be unpalatable to some intellectuals. I must be an intellectual, because many of his remarks were, indeed, unpalatable. [Did you catch fallacious logic there? Good. Just checking that you are paying attention.]

I present to you three arguments that can be used to argue Chloie’s case. Using Hayek’s “The Fatal Conceit” as reference, I will also present three reasons why these three arguments will not mean diddly squat to Glassman.

.

1. ETHICS

The state of California recognizes Chloie Jonsson as a woman. You’d think that this is where the conversation ends. If it’s good enough for the government, surely, it should be good enough for a garage with a squat rack? Otherwise, I’d have to prove my womanhood to every single gym I attended, despite what it says on my driver’s license.

Chloie’s lawyer will allege that CrossFit is not following California law, and is discriminating against Chloie on the basis of her gender identity. Easy!

          BUT…

One of the essential basic rights in libertarianism is the right to private ownership. Hayek goes as far as saying that private property is the heart of the morals of any advanced civilization, and is inseparable from individual freedom.

To Glassman, “freedom requires that the individual be allowed to pursue their own ends and to no longer be bound by their community”. His (that is, Glassman’s) individual freedom to run the business as he sees fit trumps everybody else’s.

“Free markets”, “private property”, and “capitalism” – these words alone will give a libertarian an erection. And, a rabid libertarian? As Ana, the main character from Fifty Shades of Grey, would say: “Oh my!”. Insert some sort of bodily fluids here. Since we are talking about CrossFit, probably vomit.

If court rules against him, Glassman will oblige, but not change his tune. To him, it would be simply government interfering with his personal freedom, and reinforcing an abstract rule.

[Oh, and am I the only one to see irony in the fact that in ancient Greece, it was the Spartans (ha!) who not only resisted the commercial revolution, but also did not recognize individual property? Reebok + CrossFit + Spartan makes for an interesting threesome.]

.

2. LAW

I think it’s hilarious that de facto sex segregation in sports is used as evidence that men and women are actually inherently different.

“Well, we’ve always had males and females compete separately. There’s gotta be a good reason for that”.

If you truly believe that’s enough of a reason, then I have a great business proposition for you. It may or may not involve Nigerian military regime, large amount of money that I cannot acquire in my own name, and you sending me a small fee in mail.

Oh, and Ukraine’s friendly neighbor Russia is currently in Crimea just to rescue the ethnic Russians from the threat of torture and genocide. You are cute.

Is there really any need to reinvent the wheel? Precedent has been set. Dozens of times. There is already a commonly accepted practice in a number of well-recognized regulatory bodies when it comes to trans athletes and their participation in sports.

The IOC has put together a policy back in 2004 (see Stockholm consensus) allowing trans athletes to compete in the division congruent with their gender identity. And guess what? They  have done their research.

Curiously, there has not been a slew of transgender medalists, taking the spots of cisgender female athletes, riding on all that extra testosterone and genetic advantage.

          BUT…

That’s not good enough for CrossFit.

CrossFit is, essentially, a state, an organized political community under one government. Enter government, aka Glassman. Note that not only Glassman is the sole owner of the company, which has no board of directors, but that he also turned down many potential sources of revenue, so as to not jeopardize the tight monopoly that he is running. A monarchy, if you will.

A monarch must act as a guardian of tradition, and won’t be told what to do by another government. Just ask President Putler.

The preservation of tradition are crucial, and a “taboo” issue will only act as an instrument for strengthening the social ties within the state.

In “The Fatal Conceit”, Hayek quotes Adam Smith: “The most decisive of the prosperity of any country is the increase of the number of its inhabitants.” Amen. I mean… AMRAP.

Glassman cares about one thing and one thing only – increase the number of CrossFit’s inhabitants. Not about making the sport LGBT friendly.

.

3. SCIENCE

This, of course, is the crux of the case.

A common sentiment tends to be something along the lines of: “Well, it’s a really complicated issue, but I personally think that she would (or would not) have an unfair advantage.”

Polite Canadians must have come up with this strategy – you veil a statement as an opinion, because you do not want to upset anybody. And you can escape public ridicule.

Not from me.

You do not get to have a personal opinion on how someone’s chromosomal make-up and hormonal profile affects their athletic performance any more than you get to get a personal opinion on quantum physics. Or gravity.

Which takes us to THE argument. You know… when people pull out the BIG GUNS. Aka the Genetic Advantage Argument.

On average, men are stronger than women.

No shit, Sherlock.

Yet just being XY does not translate into inherently better athletic performance. I can outrun and outlift many XY individuals. With or without a penis.

Let’s go back to Critical Thinking 101.

  • Not all men are stronger than all women.
  • Some women are stronger than some men.
  • Some women are stronger than some other women.
  • Most men are stronger than most women.
  • Some men are stronger than some other men.

Still with me?

However, notice that none of the above logical masturbation actually applies to trans women.

Trans women are more similar to cisgender women than they are to cisgender men.

After extensive research, both ICO and NCAA have decided (independently!) that HORMONE PROFILE is the primary determining factor for gender qualification in sport. So let’s focus on what matters.

Don’t trans women have an unfair advantage because they have much higher levels of testosterone?

Testosterone is the true muscle juice. It is produced in the testes, in the ovaries, and (a very small amount) in the adrenal glands. A cisgender male (adrenal glands + testes) produces roughly 10 times the testosterone of cisgender female (adrenal glands + ovaries).

A post-op trans woman will only have the testosterone produced by her adrenal glands.

I talked to Alaina Hardie, a trans woman and a trans athlete, and a science nerd behind www.transathletes.org, one of the best resources on the web for trans athletes, their coaches, allies and friends.

She is also a former grappler, who competed on a Canadian National team for three years. Grappling is a combat sport sanctioned by the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles (FILA). [Listen to a podcast interview with Alaina on No Holds Barred, where she talks about trans athletes, grappling and robots.]

“My testosterone is so low that it can’t be accurately measured”, says Alaina. “Yet somehow there is this fear that an army of transsexual women will come and dominate the sport”.

We know that men with average testosterone are stronger than women with average testosterone. Yet, the hormone profiles of some female athletes are actually closer to that of male athletes than to non-athletic females, showing higher than average levels of testosterone.

Thus, chances are that my testosterone levels are significantly higher than Alaina’s.

“I take steroids that make me weaker and fatter”, Alaina laughs.

There is no evidence to suggest that trans women have any genetic or other advantage over cisgender women. Now if you are curious to dig into the actual research – be my guest. One of the best compilations of scholarly references can be found here.

Larger frame (or other variables) can provide an athletic edge, but given a tremendous morphological variation between individuals, that is hardly an issue unique to trans women, and does not justify discrimination.

What are you going to do? Kick me out of the next WOD, because I look stronger than you?

As an XX female (as far as I know), I’d be happy to compete with Chloie. And I’d be curious to see who would win.

          BUT…

Unfortunately, all the scientific evidence in the world will not convince Glassman, as he would claim that this is a moral matter, and traditional morals fail to meet rational requirements.

Hayek is also very clear on this: “Morals cannot be scientifically reasoned”. He goes on to accuse intellectuals of scientism, a somewhat derogatory label used to refer to belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method.

In other words, since you can never know anything for sure, you should give up trying, and just… you know… go on morals.

I’m pretty sure that’s called chaos. Oh, wait, and we are back to anarchy.

Sorry, Chloie.

****************

 WARNING:

If you identify as queer, as part of LGBT community, as trans activist, or simply as an educated and/or reasonable person, tread carefully.
Vitriol will not help your(our) argument. Slamming possibly uninformed, yet well-intentioned individuals will not help the argument. I can tell you the difference between trans woman, cisgender woman, AIS woman, and intersex woman. Most people cannot.

Posting, commenting and asking questions is an invitation for more information. When people post, comment and ask questions, they indicate their desire to know more. Take it as an open invitation for sharing the knowledge that you possess. It’s an opportunity. A teachable moment. Use it wisely.

 ****************

Before writing this article, I thought I don’t like Glassman.
It turns out I REALLY don’t like Glassman.

But you know what? I respect him. While deeply disagreeing with everything he stands for, I respect that he stands for something. It’s… refreshing.

Yet herein lies the irony.

While advocating a perpetually changing mix of training, CrossFit failed to realize that our gender is also constantly varied across broad modal and time domains.

Adaptation to the unknown is the key to any and all evolution. Currently, CrossFit is not doing a very good job.

Fast forward?

If CrossFit will fail to adapt, it will fail to evolve. Things that fail to evolve go extinct.

Remember the vibrating belt machines?
Exactly.

YOUR TURN:
What do you think will be the outcome of this case?
Is CrossFit as inclusive as it claims to be?

Annoyed into a trance,
Solo

Share
Posted March 13, 2014

4 responses to “GOT BALLS? Trans Athlete vs. Rabid Libertarian – Case Summary”

  1. Ryan Atkins says:

    Good post Solo!
    I’ll play devils advocate, and present a few points that I think are relevant.

    I think that if it all comes down to hormonal profiles, then for sport to be “fair” we would have to ensure that everyone has the same hormonal profiles, in all sports. Lets not stop there, include hematocrit levels, iron levels, and every other marker for performance. This just isn’t practical.

    Also, if its just hormonal profiles that determine your sex, then you could take a man with hypogonadism, and say that he should compete against women. Even with a penis. Now that doesn’t seem right.

    Another counter point, is that all the years spent training as a “man” will still be an advantage post-op. Those types of gains stay with you forever.

    This being said, if its good enough for the IOC, then it should be good enough for crossfit.

  2. Kristen says:

    Solo great write-up. Let me help with the details;

    The never did the research… I have signed correspondence from experts who were part of it in 2003, as well IOC Medical Officials admitting for the record they never did either. The whole point of the exercise is, the fact the research was never done, the athletes are put at tremendous to false social concepts, that are untrue. Moreover policy derived to empower & hurt individuals who are the most vulnerable.

    In-fact, the athlete is heavily physically contraindicated as the science shows and that amongst international experts puts the athlete at tremendous disadvantaged to other female competitors, moreover and most importantly health risks.

    That is the IOC, “KINGS” of oppression of women… This is not an LGBT issue and or a human rights one either. It is a broad reaching problem of how older european men see women women in society… This is translated into sport, through gender policy. It is oppression…

    Once you understand this; IOC Stockholm Consensus is the equivalent of…

    “Handing a hand gun to a young person and having the lock off, and giving them permission to shoot somebody because I (IOC) told them it is okay. Knowing it is ethically and morally wrong, and the individual consequences to the athlete are profound.”

    The athlete is not the issue, though tragically implicated in a problem far exceeding them at the highest level of sport.

  3. Tormuse says:

    I love your analysis, Solo! 🙂

    As to your questions, I’m hoping that the outcome will be that Chloie gets to compete in the women’s division like she wants to, partly due to reasons you have outlined, but mostly because I believe in a sense of social justice and I believe that transgender people need more representation in high profile positions like this to serve as an inspiration to others to show what is possible. This year, there were no transgender athletes at the Olympics, but after Chloie’s example, who knows? So I hope that Crossfit will get the message that this kind of discrimination is unacceptable and costly and they won’t do it again.

    Are they inclusive? Short answer: no. Long answer…

    I think it’s pretty funny how hard Crossfit is shooting themselves in the foot with their choices of counterarguments that make them seem grossly and willfully misinformed. If their argument is about genetics, then they have to acknowledge all the minority genome types and how gender really isn’t as black and white as a high school biology class makes it out to be (I’m glad the article talked about that; I was prepared to dig up research about it) and besides, it’s not like any of their athletes have had their genes tested anyway. The bothersome part is how damn condescending they are about it and that’s where their bigotry really shows.

    I’ve read over all their arguments and counterarguments and I’ve seen nothing to convince me that they are anything but transphobic. I am quite sure that they would deny being transphobic and that’s why they try to come up with all these “legitimate” sounding reasons for what they’re doing but it just feels like so much grasping at straws to me. The fact that they are ignoring mountains of research evidence that they are wrong, not to mention the law, and the fact that they are even willing to risk losing 2.5 million dollars over it, (I looked it up; that’s how much she’s suing them for) just goes to show how far their hatred of transgender people is taking them.

    In the face of all that animosity toward transgender people, I don’t see any possible resolution to this that will satisfy everyone. Even setting aside issues of gender dysphoria, If Crossfit puts Chloie in the men’s competition like they want, she will be at a severe disadvantage. (Sorry, Ryan Atikins, but I would dispute your claim in your above comment that Khloie’s gains from before her surgery carry on forever; I’ve seen tons of evidence that there is merit to the saying, “use it or lose it” and she would have to have worked *very* hard to keep muscle mass up after her surgery) And if they put her in the women’s team, it will probably further convince Glassman that he’s right that government is the enemy and push him further into his libertarian ideas.

    As for Glassman himself, I admit that I’ve never looked up “libertarian” until today, though I’ve seen the term thrown around a bit by social justice types like it’s a dirty word. On the surface, it seems all right, (individual liberties for all? Yay freedom!) 🙂 but then that bit about the importance of personal property comes in and Glassman becomes a living example of everything wrong with libertarianism. Theoretically, if Glassman was really interested in individual freedoms, then surely he would let Chloie exercise her freedom to join the women’s team, right? But no, since Crossfit is his “personal property,” his freedom over his organization is more important than her freedom… or to put it another way… under libertarianism, the freedom of rich people is more important than the freedom of poor people. That’s what it’s really about. They dress it up to make it sound like it’s about “freedom,” when it’s really an excuse to make rich people richer and poor people poorer.

    Glassman could have chosen to use his priviliged position to uplift Chloie and make her a shining example of what transgender people can accomplish. (Considering how widely misunderstood and hated they are, the trans community could certainly use it!) Instead, he has chosen to further trod on an already marginalized community and this shows what type of person he really is and Solo, I can certainly see why you really don’t like him.

  4. […] this post? You may enjoy my post on trans athletes in CrossFit and rabid libertarianism, or my musings on […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe

Instagram

Load More
Something is wrong. Response takes too long or there is JS error. Press Ctrl+Shift+J or Cmd+Shift+J on a Mac.

Categories

SOLO on Facebook