When a mediocre female cyclist transitions to a male and then gives elite male cyclists a good kicking, then I’ll find it acceptable.
Until then imo no transitional male should be allowed to compete with female athletes in the equivalent sporting activity.
Not withstanding human rights, those of the females to have a valid level playing field preempt those of the transitioning male.
The science is becoming incontrovertible of the long term effects of testosterone doping in male athletes long after they have stopped taking it. The effects of testosterone on a male in puberty are many factors greater. When that male transitions, well the advantage is clear irrespective of any future hormone balancing.
You’re not the first person to make this mistake, but you’re the most recent so I’ll reply directly to you.
Please do not confuse some of the opinions here with people not understanding “gender dysphoria”.
It is disingenuous of you to suggest that these people have a lack of knowledge or compassion based on their position on this subject. Why can’t you argue about the pros/cons of trans involvement in sport rather than jumping to “you don’t understand these people so you must be wrong”?
Whether you agree/sympathise with trans people or not doesn’t have any bearing on whether it is scientifically correct or morally right for these people to be competing in different gender groups.
Because defining age groups for the purpose of setting a “fair” competition is entirely arbitrary. Smaller races will use 10-year groups, larger ones will use 5-year groups, is the latter more fair than the former? Is age a good determinant of a fair race? Why not VO2Max, percentage of fat, or FTP? Or FTP over weight?
But age does have correlation with performance right? The same as gender. Not that you addressed how sex is arbitrary in your answer, which is the topic of this thread.
We could create classes based on VO2 max or FTP instead of sex if you prefer, but then there will be very few/zero women winning any strength/power or short distance endurance events.
Sure, but I disagree with those people as outlined previously.
Maybe we could have a discussion based on our own views rather than using the “well some people think” argument. I know that some people think that, it was in the link that I posted on creation of this topic
The US Women’s Soccer team is living out your scenario, and aren’t getting paid squat while the men’s team is paid handsomely for terrible performance and attendance.
I know it’s a different sport, but I think it’s a good example.
For many people, the world is not a binary choice re: gender. The fact that someone is “born a woman” according to this binary equation does not mean that it reflects who they are. That is societal norms trying to squeeze people into a preconceived “box”.
Correct - I did not adress gender categorization, although some cases show that it, like other categories, does not prevent border cases. Age does correlate with performance, so in theory it’s a good categorization mechanism, but there is a lot more variability so much more edge cases. Zwift uses W/kg to make categories, which makes more sense in climbing than flat events. All categories attempt to create “fair” groups, all categories create border issues.
I’m not really sure what you mean by “binary equation”. If you think that you cannot seperate 99% of people in to male or female based on a number of biological factors then we can certainly have a discussion about that.
I’ve not seen any resistance on this thread to allowing people to be who they are. But at the point where “who they are” can negatively impact others, it at least warrants a discussion that everyone can be a part of, whether they have been through the same experience themselves or not.
I think I explained it pretty clearly…if you think someone who is “born as a woman” (one part of the binary equation that society has placed on gender - male or female) is therefore “a woman”, then yes, you have a lack of knowledge on the subject.
Additionally, if you think 99% of the world falls into that binary equation, then again, you have a lack of knowledge on the issue. The fact is that no one knows how many people identify as non-binary because it is just now coming to light and the numbers are constantly increasing.
I’m sorry if that comes across as harsh, but it is factual.
Again, I’ll err on the side of inclusion rather than exclusion. If that means a handful of people across the world are denied a medal in a sporting event, so be it. it is definitely unfortunate for them and I absolutely sympathize with them.
Because they aren’t selecting, for want of another word, performance categories. They’re selecting (apparent) biological sex, and inferring a performance category.
Given your approach of erring on the side of inclusion, I wish you could have extended me the same compassion when reading and interpreting my message to you.
Firstly, I simply asked “what about being born as a woman?”. I didn’t state an opinion. I asked a question. You can refute an opinion I share, but you can’t suggest I have a lack of understanding because I asked a question. You should be thankful for me being open minded and asking for other peoples thoughts rather than shoving my ideology down other people’s threads as has been displayed by some people here. And also, assuming I do support the traditional role of men and women, that doesn’t mean I lack understanding, or intelect or compassion. It could also, shock horror, mean that I’ve read and listened to lots of different perspectives and come to a different conclusion to you.
Secondly, please note that I did very carefully select the words “male and female” when speaking of the 99%. I also said that that was based on biology. I didn’t refute how people feel or “identify” so you’ve argued against a point there that I didn’t make.
Maybe you could put the same effort in to us finding common ground as you do in to finding strange ways to try and disagree with me and we can have a more productive conversation.
