Issue is not unique to women, as there are often amateur classes, junior classes, special (Olympic) classes, etc. Bending rules to allow pro’s, adults, or fully able (if that’s the pc term) obviously is unjust to those who meet the limiting criteria.
Allowing even 1 adult to compete in a U-16 class championship would obviously hurt the youth competitors. Right?!
This is an exercise in manufacturing straw men. The key question is whether gender identity should take precedence over biological sex in determining categories for sport. This has only become an important issue since transitioning became much more common. There is a natural conflict between the desire to make it easy for individuals to change their gender identity and the extent to which we use gender rather than biological sex.
The reason for the recent controversy is that transwomen, who are male, want to compete with females.
This raises issues of fairness and, in contact sports, safety.
The position adopted on much of the left is that gender should take priority of biological sex.
This prioritises the rights of transwomen over the rights of females.
Those who object to this are condemned as transphobic.
That is obviously unreasonable.
It is depressing to see scientists and policymakers trying to justify a clearly unreasonable approach by a spectrum of bad faith arguments. The only reasonable argument they have is kindness and inclusivity. Apparently this only applies to transwomen.
I thoroughly disagree with this claim: "As society’s perspective on gender has changed over time, sport has needed to keep up, since sport is a part of society." Why should it change? The fundamental differences between males and females have not changed. You make a bald statement without providing supporting facts. The facts are that men, xy, are bigger, faster, and stronger. The facts are that once a man has gone through puberty, those changes to the body remain regardless of other hormonal treatments. To compare these basic biological facts with PEDs is to be purposely blinding oneself to the reality of the situation. And yes, there are sports such as archery or rifle marksmanship where the gender differences are less relevant. But when it comes to running, jumping, and hitting, this entire discussion is about xy people, ie men, competing against xx people, that is women in womens events. Because women will never be able to compete equally against men in men's events. And that final fact should bring all else to clarity.
Issue is not unique to women, as there are often amateur classes, junior classes, special (Olympic) classes, etc. Bending rules to allow pro’s, adults, or fully able (if that’s the pc term) obviously is unjust to those who meet the limiting criteria.
Allowing even 1 adult to compete in a U-16 class championship would obviously hurt the youth competitors. Right?!
I think Roger gets this wrong.
This is an exercise in manufacturing straw men. The key question is whether gender identity should take precedence over biological sex in determining categories for sport. This has only become an important issue since transitioning became much more common. There is a natural conflict between the desire to make it easy for individuals to change their gender identity and the extent to which we use gender rather than biological sex.
The reason for the recent controversy is that transwomen, who are male, want to compete with females.
This raises issues of fairness and, in contact sports, safety.
The position adopted on much of the left is that gender should take priority of biological sex.
This prioritises the rights of transwomen over the rights of females.
Those who object to this are condemned as transphobic.
That is obviously unreasonable.
It is depressing to see scientists and policymakers trying to justify a clearly unreasonable approach by a spectrum of bad faith arguments. The only reasonable argument they have is kindness and inclusivity. Apparently this only applies to transwomen.
Still can’t believe that this is a topic of conversation. How stupid have we become that we debate if there are differences between men and women?
Common falsehoods that get in the way of pragmatic policy.
Hmmm. Seems vaguely familiar but can’t think of where we might have seen that before, Roger. Certainly not in our own respective professions.
I thoroughly disagree with this claim: "As society’s perspective on gender has changed over time, sport has needed to keep up, since sport is a part of society." Why should it change? The fundamental differences between males and females have not changed. You make a bald statement without providing supporting facts. The facts are that men, xy, are bigger, faster, and stronger. The facts are that once a man has gone through puberty, those changes to the body remain regardless of other hormonal treatments. To compare these basic biological facts with PEDs is to be purposely blinding oneself to the reality of the situation. And yes, there are sports such as archery or rifle marksmanship where the gender differences are less relevant. But when it comes to running, jumping, and hitting, this entire discussion is about xy people, ie men, competing against xx people, that is women in womens events. Because women will never be able to compete equally against men in men's events. And that final fact should bring all else to clarity.