Christina Cauterucci: Why 'The Real L Word' Is Bad For Lesbians
Jeanne Faulkner: The State of the World's Soccer Moms
When Lana Lawless wanted to register for the LPGA this year, the organization told her she wasn't qualified ... because she was born a guy. The 57-year-old former police officer underwent a sex change five years ago, but the LPGA requires all competitors to be "female at birth."
"I am, in all respects, legally and physically female," Lawless said in a statement. "The state of California recognizes me as such, and the LPGA should not be permitted to come into California and blatantly violate my rights. I just want to have the same opportunity to play professional golf as any other woman."
Lawless has filed suit, claiming that this rule violates California civil rights law and is pushing to prevent the LPGA from holding competitions in the state until transgendered women are allowed to participate. She's also seeking an undisclosed amount of damages.
Lawless isn't stopping there. She's also suing three LPGA sponsors as well as the Long Drivers of America, an event she won in 2008 but was banned from this year after the contest adopted the LPGA's gender regulations.
Many sports organizations have made special allowances for transgendered athletes. Lawless has argued that even the International Olympic Committee has been letting transgendered people compete since 2004, as long as they have gone through surgery and at least two years of hormone-replacement therapy.
"I could participate in female wrestling in International Olympic events," she told the A.P. We say go for it, but only because female wrestling is awesome and watching golf kind of makes us fall asleep.
Comments:
Add a comment
Thursday 14 October
By Anon.
LPGA or LGPA? Proofread next time.
Reply
Thursday 14 October
By Lulu
I agree that she should not be admitted because although she has undergone a sex change, I am sure that she is still a lot stronger than women who are born women are. This would make things unfair for female-born competitors
Reply
Thursday 14 October
By KW
Oh, really? Well, if YOU ARE SURE....then it MUST be true. THe fact is, if she has been sans testicles (and thus testosterone) for this long, and has been on estrogen for longer than that, then she doesn't have any advantages other than size. There are plenty of large women, and there distinction between men, athletically, is due to their inability to easily put on and retain muscle. Lawless has this same inability.
She should be allowed to play, and barring a grant of Cert by the Supreme Court, will be (Renee Richards case of 1975).
Thursday 14 October
By Leslie
After about 2 years on hormones the strength advantage is pretty much gone. Most have been on hormones 1-2 years before having surgery, making it 4 years by the time they are allowed into sports as a female and that is if they do it as quick as they can, something most cannot afford to do, and in most cases just isn't possible.
They still retain the male bone structure which is deceiving. Just because they look a little bigger does not mean they are stronger, remember, they still have to carry the weight of those bones as well.
The one place they do have an advantage though is that boys tend to play sports more as children, so they can be better trained and conditioned, but that is nothing a girl couldn't do as well.
Reply
Friday 15 October
By Weezie
While I agree she has every right to go forward with the lawsuit, I think any proceeds she acquires from this would be better served with education in professional sports regarding transgender human beings and the uncomfortableness of this process and the outcome and living issues faced by this small population. This is a hot topic. NOT everyone in USA lives in California...so to be realistic...this should be looked at from the LPGA TOUR AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL, wholly and without prejudice. I will be watching this case and its outcome with great interest.
Reply
Friday 15 October
By Easy
Question: If the PGA/LPGA/other sports ogranizations can discriminate based on gender (which it can), then how would the legal issue be framed where groups discriminate based on "gender at birth"?
It appears that the rationale for gender discrimination in sports is the differential between male/female build/strength. Since I don't think anyone would argue that a sex-change erases all traces of the underlying gender then why shouldn't the LPGA prevent a person who is legally a female (a legal fiction) but who still on the margins retains a physical/strength advantage?
Reply
Friday 15 October
By Seriously?
You're not a woman, you're a man taking female hormones with breast implants and mutilated genitals.
Reply
Friday 15 October
By bobebarn
"Lana" - take it from an expert in psych. (and Popeye - I yam what I yam). A mind that is defiant of reality is by definition "under a psychosis". If the fact is that the sun is shining, and your mind is telling you that it is overcast and raining, then you would be defined as having a pyscosis in need of treatment to re-train your mind of what is and isn't reality. The reality is that you ARE a XY gene set. Always have and always will. By allowing you to think and do otherwise people have pushed you deeply into a false reality - like giving a drug adict more drugs you are elevating the problem and not fixing it. You are deeply sick and need REAL help.
Reply
Sunday 17 October
By Ned Schnittt
This dude should man up and go out for the PGA.
Reply