Transgender athlete sues CrossFit for banning her from competing as female

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Dreadclaw69**

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/07/us/transgender-lawsuit-crossfit/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

(CNN) -- A transgender woman prohibited from competing in a strength competition as a female is suing the fitness company sponsoring the competition, seeking $2.5 million in damages.

Chloie Jonnson, a personal trainer, charges the CrossFit company with discrimination, intentional infliction of emotional distress and unfair competition in a lawsuit filed Thursday in Santa Cruz, California.

While her lawyer calls it a case of discrimination against transgender people, CrossFit's lawyer calls it protecting the competition.

Last year, Jonnson sought to compete in the CrossFit Games, a contest aimed at determining the fittest man and woman.

According to the lawsuit, Jonnson has identified herself as a female since her teenage years and is legally recognized by California as a woman. She had sexual reassignment surgery in 2006 and has been on female hormone therapy, according to her lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleges that a CrossFit teammate of Jonnson's sent an anonymous e-mail to the games organizers asking about transgender athletes in the competition. CrossFit determined that competitors in the event had to compete in the gender of their birth.

Jonnson disagreed with its decision and the dispute has escalated to a lawsuit.

Transgender woman barred from restroom Jesuits honor murdered transgender woman Transgender Victoria's Secret Angel? Transgender woman barred from restroom

CrossFit maintains that Jonnson was born as a male, so she should compete in the men's division, according to a letter from the company's lawyer to Jonnson's attorney. It also stated that the company had an "obligation to protect the 'rights' of all competitors and the competition itself."

"The fundamental, ineluctable fact is that a male competitor who has a sex reassignment procedure still has a genetic makeup that confers a physical and physiological advantage over women," according to the letter from CrossFit's lawyer sent in October.

CNN reached out to CrossFit but did not get a response on Thursday. The letter from CrossFit was provided to CNN by Jonnson's attorney, Waukeen McCoy, who blasted the company's decision.

"(Jonnson) doesn't have an advantage over other women. She's been on estrogen for such a long time," he said about his client.

Hormone replacement therapy for transgender women includes anti-androgen therapy, which nullifies the effects of testosterone to reduce the masculine features of the body. Therapies can also consist of the hormones, estrogen and progesterone to feminize the body.

Transgender men receive the opposite types of hormones -- mainly testosterone to masculinze their bodies with features such as increased muscle and hair growth.

McCoy said that CrossFit should change its rules to be more like the International Olympic Committee, which allows transgender athletes to compete in their identified gender after undergoing sexual reassignment surgery.

"She's female," McCoy said about Jonnson. "She's legally female. A corporation like CrossFit, they're doing business in California. The law precludes from discrimination on gender identity."

He said Jonnson seeks a reversal in the competition's policy.

The lawsuit also alleges that CrossFit's policy of having to compete in a person's original birth gender, would require that transgender athletes would have to reveal their personal histories. In essence, that they'd have to "out" themselves, even if they sought privacy, the lawsuit alleges.

After her sexual reassignment surgery, Jonnson changed all her records to reflect her sex change to female, including her birth certificate, according to her lawsuit. Jonnson kept her background a secret and did not identify herself as transgender, according to the complaint.

In a press release statement, Jonnson said: "If I am going to be forced to out myself, I want it to be for the good for all transgendered people and athletes -- not because of a company's discriminatory policies."

**kronk**

"If you were born with a wang, then you have to tee-off from the men's box." Golf Digest.

My give a gak on this issue is non-existant.

**djones520**

Legally may be, but biologically is she?

I know one transgender person, who was born a male, served in the Army as a male, fathered a child as a male. Now a woman. Except all those muscles, and everything that would affect their physical performance were due to the physical development as a male.

How is that fair to the other women?

Or maybe I'm just a bigoted donkey-cave.

**daedalus**

I think this crap is getting out of hand.

/startingtonolongercareifbigot

**Breotan**

The Olympics wouldn't let him compete as a woman.

**cincydooley**

Breotan wrote:
The Olympics wouldn't let him compete as a woman.

And I think this should be the standard.

Good God are we a litigious country.

**LordofHats**

Is there any research into the issue of post op competitors? I mean, if a transwoman has had her testoserone nullified, is there any evidence that's been collected to determine her parity in competition with genetically born women?

**marv335**

Breotan wrote:
The Olympics wouldn't let him compete as a woman.

Actually, since May 17th 2004, they would if the Transgender athlete in question had met three criteria.
1. They must have had gender reassignment surgery
2. They must have legal recognition of their assigned gender
3. They must have at least two years of hormone therapy

So looking at the case, she would be able to compete in the Olympics, so I can see her winning this one.

**Hulksmash**

Sorry, I'm probably a bigot but if you swap bitz you compete against your starting point.

It would be interesting to see any studies they do though. Especially of the converse of a female, turned into a man, and taking testoterone and bulking up and competing with women.

**LuciusAR**

Can’t say I agree with this. If someone want to undergo a cosmetic change and live as a woman then that is their prerogative but it doesn’t alter the fact that despite all the surgery and hormones they still have the basic biology of a man.

**trexmeyer**

No. Just no. I could rant about this, but that would only offend someone. It's sufficient to say anyone born as a male will have a significant advantage over most women in any physical contest involving strength, speed, endurance, or jumping ability.

Edit: Clarification for the Kronkites of the world.

**kronk**

trexmeyer wrote:
No. Just no. I could rant about this, but that would only offend someone. It's sufficient to say anyone born as a male will have a significant advantage over most women in any physical contest.

Except childbirth. Women with that physical contest every time.

See Also: Looking good in a bikini and remembering gak you did 5 years ago.

**hotsauceman1**

Well looks like im the loner here. She should have the right. She is legally a female. And this policy directly discriminates against Transgendered. And believe it or not. Those men going under hormone therapy are actually loosing muscles.

**ZultanQ**

I'm going to bring a tiger to a horse race and if they deny me a spot in the race I'm going to sue.

Also, when I start uni I'm going to show up naked and sit in the birdbath before class begins instead of taking my morning shower. If anybody says anything to me I'll file harassment charges. I am a bird and it doesn't matter what my physiology is because I know I'm a bird on the inside. Deal with it bigots.

/trans"logic"

**Ouze**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Well looks like im the loner here. She should have the right. She is legally a female. And this policy directly discriminates against Transgendered.

Not all discrimination is unlawful or ethically wrong. You are allowed to impinge on people's freedoms if you have a compelling, reasonable reason for doing so. For example, if your religion required you to have a beard, but your job as a scuba diver required you to wear an oxygen mask as a requirement to do your job, your religious practice is trumped by the job's requirement for your oxygen mask to have a tight fit. If you wear a crucifix, your job could prevent you from doing so if there was a machine it could reasonably be caught in, or if you couldn't have metal in an area like for an MRI or whatever.

That's the legalistic definition. Morally, everyone needs to decide for themselves but for myself, I think the rationale for preventing a mtf trans woman from competing is both reasonable and compelling. I got into this exact argument with a transgender friend and she disagreed with me, but that is where I am.

**hotsauceman1**

ZultanQ wrote:
I'm going to bring a tiger to a horse race and if they deny me a spot in the race I'm going to sue.

Also, when I start uni I'm going to show up naked and sit in the birdbath before class begins instead of taking my morning shower. If anybody says anything to me I'll file harassment charges. I am a bird and it doesn't matter what my physiology is because I know I'm a bird on the inside. Deal with it bigots.

/trans"logic"

1: Having a Tiger is illegal They are dangerous
2: You are naked in public, that is the problem.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Well looks like im the loner here. She should have the right. She is legally a female. And this policy directly discriminates against Transgendered.

Not all discrimination is unlawful or ethically wrong. You are allowed to impinge on people's freedoms if you have a compelling, reasonable reason for doing so. For example, if your religion required you to have a beard, but your job as a scuba diver required you to wear an oxygen mask as a requirement to do your job, your religious practice is trumped by the job's requirement for your oxygen mask to have a tight fit. If you wear a crucifix, your job could prevent you from doing so if there was a machine it could reasonably be caught in, or if you couldn't have metal in an area like for an MRI or whatever.

That's the legalistic definition. Morally, everyone needs to decide for themselves but for myself, I think the rationale for preventing a mtf trans woman from competing is both reasonable and compelling. I got into this exact argument with a transgender friend and she disagreed with me, but that is where I am.

Well, if you knew that your job required those things of you, why would you apply to them in the first place?
I am saying it is bigoted because estrogen and anti-androgen strip away male features and muscle mass. I have seen it ad it leaves them weaker then the average male

**Platuan4th**

hotsauceman1 wrote:

1: Having a Tiger is illegal They are dangerous

Actually, it's legal to own tigers provided you have the right permit.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

I see two easy and fair solution.
- Create a third category (fourth ? fifth ?) for transgender, and pit them against one another, or
- Remove all categories. You compete regardless of gender.

**curran12**

The only thing I really take offense to in this thread is that folks are referring to the surgery as a 'cosmestic' change. That cannot be farther from the truth for transgender.

**dogma**

Can I sue CrossFit for creating a douchey exercise cult?

**Goliath**

LuciusAR wrote:Can’t say I agree with this. If someone want to undergo a cosmetic change and live as a woman then that is their prerogative but it doesn’t alter the fact that despite all the surgery and hormones they still have the basic biology of a man.

It's not a cosmetic change. The main difference between a man and a woman isn't "Oh, they have different genes" it's that those genes cause the expression of different hormones. If you artificially replace those hormones, it has (largely) the same effect as switching the genes, meaning that because this woman has been under hormone therapy for the past eight years, she is (apart from on a genetic level, and for some physiological changes that occur prior to puberty, such as hip width) a woman.

trexmeyer wrote:No. Just no. I could rant about this, but that would only offend someone. It's sufficient to say anyone born as a male will have a significant advantage over most women in any physical contest involving strength, speed, endurance, or jumping ability.

Too late, already angry, mainly because you're wrong.

Apart from the upwards of 8 years on hormone therapy that ensures that any meaningful advantage she may previously have had have been nullified; There's also the fact that your use of "anyone born as a male" is ludicrously broad. I can't imagine Stephen Hawking beating any woman in an arm wrestle.

Breotan wrote:The Olympics wouldn't let him compete as a woman.

Her. They, according to you (incorrectly, by the way, as she meets the standards to compete as a woman), wouldn't let HER compete as a woman.

**kronk**

dogma wrote:
Can I sue CrossFit for creating a douchey exercise cult?

And overweight cousins that haven't lost a pound in 6 months bombarding my facebook page with crossfit bs.

I have now agreed with Dogma twice this year. I can quit the internets!

Goliath wrote:

Her.

Complete agreement that anyone that has undergone sex reassignment surgery has certainly EARNED the right to be called her or him, as the case may be.

Getting to participate in gender specific sports? I'm very sorry, but I'm just not sold on that and can't agree at this time.

**Goliath**

ZultanQ wrote:
I'm going to bring a tiger to a horse race and if they deny me a spot in the race I'm going to sue.

Also, when I start uni I'm going to show up naked and sit in the birdbath before class begins instead of taking my morning shower. If anybody says anything to me I'll file harassment charges. I am a bird and it doesn't matter what my physiology is because I know I'm a bird on the inside. Deal with it bigots.

/trans"logic"

Except that's utterly ridiculous and you're the one in this situation that's not using any form of logic.

For one because a tiger would be utterly useless in a horse race, as horses are a lot faster than tigers.

For another because your proposed university situation doesn't involve you having spent the past 8 or more years on bird hormones and undergoing large amounts of surgery to make you a bird physically, nor are you legally recognised as a bird. ALL of which the lady in the article has been through (were she a bird rather than a woman)

**Polonius**

I'm really conflicted on trans acceptance. The evidence seems to indicate that people that undergo gender reassignement are happier and healthier then those that feel trans but don't. It seems that for whatever reason, mind and body don't quite match up, and people simply are a different gender then their biological sex. You can argue that, but you'd be wrong. It "feels" wrong, but isn't.

Still, while I'm down for allowing a person to be whatever gender they wish, I do think there are some times when an entity can refuse to accept that. I think it come down to if there is a reason it would be unfair to others. I don't know about transfemale athletes and their advantages. I'd guess they'd be a bit stronger, but that's a WAG.

It's an important discussion, and not an easy one.

**Ketara**

Breotan wrote:
The Olympics wouldn't let him compete as a woman.

Correction. The Olympics wouldn't let her compete as a woman.

**Medium of Death**

If somebody is going to have their genitals mutilated to win at a game of sports then let them.

I doubt "sporting advantage" was on the top priority of their lists when choosing to go through the procedure.

**ZultanQ**

I'm not entirely "anti-trans" or whatever you call it. I recognize that there are people who are diagnosed with gender identity disorder and have legitimate mental problems because of this. But that's all they are, mental problems, and not something to be celebrated. Who really wants to be transgender? If you are transgender, wouldn't you rather have just been born in your "correct" gender in the first place?

I actually agree with proponents of whatever this liberal hodgepodge ideology you call it is in the sense that I do believe society has misleading labels. But I don't dislike the labels, I dislike that they are too easily bent to whatever anybody wants them to mean. So fine, if you want to be a male or female, go ahead, because those things apparently mean "whatever I want them to mean" these days.

How we fix this is scrap "male" and "female" altogether in systems where biology actually matters like sports teams, public restrooms etc. We should have a concise word or phrase for biologically male and biologically female. "Bale" and "Fale" if you will, just throwing something out there. So now we have Bale sports teams and Fale sports teams so that these sports remain fair and don't become the targets of semantics abuse.

**dogma**

Ouze wrote:

That's the legalistic definition. Morally, everyone needs to decide for themselves but for myself, I think the rationale for preventing a mtf trans woman from competing is both reasonable and compelling. I got into this exact argument with a transgender friend and she disagreed with me, but that is where I am.

It is an interesting issue. In my opinion, as CrossFit is a private entity, CrossFit should have the freedom to set its own standards regarding its competitions.

In fact, I call into question how CrossFit discovered she was originally a man, especially given that she does not, apparently, identify as trans.

**Polonius**

ZultanQ wrote:
I'm not entirely "anti-trans" or whatever you call it. I recognize that there are people who are diagnosed with gender identity disorder and have legitimate mental problems because of this. But that's all they are, mental problems, and not something to be celebrated. Who really wants to be transgender? If you are transgender, wouldn't you rather have just been born in your "correct" gender in the first place?

They do, which is why they undergo enormous expense to reassign their gender.

I actually agree with proponents of whatever this liberal hodgepodge ideology you call it is in the sense that I do believe society has misleading labels. But I don't dislike the labels, I dislike that they are too easily bent to whatever anybody wants them to mean. So fine, if you want to be a male or female, go ahead, because those things apparently mean "whatever I want them to mean" these days.

I'm not sure how a male saying "I want to be female" changes the societal meaning of either male or female.

How we fix this is scrap "male" and "female" altogether in systems where biology actually matters like sports teams, public restrooms etc. We should have a concise word or phrase for biologically male and biologically female. "Bale" and "Fale" if you will, just throwing something out there. So now we have Bale sports teams and Fale sports teams so that these sports remain fair and don't become the targets of semantics abuse.

Well, the term used is "Cis-gender," as opposed to "transgender." The term exists, I'm just not sure being explicitly discriminatory is preferable to semantic abuse.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:
It is an interesting issue. In my opinion, as CrossFit is a private entity, CrossFit should have the freedom to set its own standards regarding its competitions.

In fact, I call into question how CrossFit discovered she was originally a man, especially given that she does not, apparently, identify as trans.

Well, gender is a protected class, even more so in California. As always, private entities can discriminate until they can't.

And I believe she asked what the trans policy was, and was told they have to compete in their biological gender.

**easysauce**

Acceptance of transgender is one thing,

But there are phsycial differences that most certainly are NOT lost simply through a few years of taking hormone pills, to assert otherwise is the height of bad science.

last I checked with my two trans gender friends, they agree with me.