PonyBoy wrote:
I wonder how Nikki would feel if Hocker decided to let his hair down and race the women’s field.
He would have no advantage
-
145
-
let meet in the middle here wrote:
Just do races by chromosomes divisions. You be you and live according to how you identify. But when it comes to athletics and sports, biological factors do matter the same way weight matters in wrestling. Which is why they have weight divisions in wrestling. As someone that is a leftist i hate that my fellow leftist decide to die on this hill. When this is clearly unpopular by the general public and it is clearly one of the billionaires favorite ways to astroturf.
Or indeed, to AstroTERF.
23 -
This quoted post has been removed.
By non-binary, you mean confused male. Because you never see a biological female in the "non-binary" division.
4617 -
Interesting Convo wrote:
I think there needs to be more nuance in this conversation instead of everything being so black and white. Nikki and other trans activists are up in arms about the notion that anyone would think trans women competing is unfair, they don't even want to have the conversation, calling it transphobic. But the fact of the matter is, sports were separated by sex for a reason, and trans women, while not being men, ARE biologically male.
On the other hand, so many people are such jerks about trans people living, breathing, existing. They go to great lengths to paint all trans women as deviants, mentally ill or "failed male athletes" as another poster put it. Can you all consider that trans women DO exist, and they don't all transition for some nefarious reason? Come on.
Everyone deserves opportunity, respect and dignity. But sometimes we have to navigate making sure people have equity in opportunity without trampling on others.
I think Nikki is right about the following:
Participants in the Boston marathon, like all major marathons are competing for themselves. They are there for the atmosphere, to get the most out of themselves and see where they measure up. When I finish 390/1112 out of all women in a major race, I'm not wondering how many are trans. I'm just looking at my placing and time, feeling a little proud, hoping to maybe improve and moving on.
But I would have cared more about who I was competing against when I was an NCAA athlete fighting for spots, for my team to make nationals or win conferences. Competing against runners with unfair advantages would have bothered me.
Could it be like what I said before? Increase spots available to women, to account for trans women, while cis women don't lose spots? Could it be to separate the category for trans women and have higher qualifying standards given their advantages? Can we compromise at all on this one?
False. They're men.
4314 -
4520
-
She's more cringey than all running YouTubers combined.
596 -
I have a solution.
Just like you have a wheelchair division (because wheelchair athlete have an advantage)
can we just have a trans division (because male to female trans athlete have an advantage).
putting trans athletes in with women makes no more sense than putting wheelchair athletes in male or female open division.
545 -
Oh no, another one of these threads!
118 -
Too many people are not using there brains about this subject. Biological MEN should not be running with biological FEmales!
If you think about what Natalie Patterson said, she said, she said just that she doesn't like men like Nikki Hiltz running against her when the PRIZE is on the line! How is this going to age? Does anybody know?
269 -
Interesting Convo wrote:
This had me thinking. I am someone who believes that it is unfair for trans women to compete against cis women. I am also someone for whom this issue is not something that keeps me up at night.
I wouldn't drop out just because there are trans women racing. At the same time, because this is the Boston marathon, aren't trans women taking away spots from cis women?
If this were another marathon I wouldn't care in the slightest.
I feel bad for a random unknown participant getting lit up by the running community on social media. Whether it's JK Rowling or Nikki, I don't like it when people with platforms do this to others.
On the other hand you have to remember that 80% of people agree that trans women have an unfair advantage in sports to cis women. Maybe don't push the many liberal folk who agree by saying stupid things like "men in women's category"? They are trans women. We don't have to call them men to acknowledge the lack of fairness.
I usually agree, but that “unknown participant” brought up Nikki first. The podcast person made it sound like Nikki resented USATF and World Athletics for not letting them take testosterone & grow a beard (while still getting to compete in the women’s field). Like 2 years ago or something, Nikki did say sometimes they “resents the sport” because the reality is they has the desire to do those things, but can’t yet. But Nikki doesn't actually think (nor say) World Athletics should let them take testosterone and race in the women’s field.
The women also said “(Nikki) was in the Olympics and represents the women’s field but is embarrassed to be a called a women, refuses to be called a she, and is resentful she can’t take testosterone, grow a beard, and still compete in the women’s field”. Then she said this will lead to the women’s field being left as: “men dressing up as women and women taking performance enhancing drugs.”
Again, I’ve never heard Nikki advocate that women should be able to take testosterone and compete in the women’s field. I personally understand what the woman is trying to say, but it’s also very understandable Nikki would see this and be like “what the heck”. And imo, this removes the “random unknown participant” label.That being said, I don’t think anyone in the social media comments watched more of the podcast or knows anything about this podcast person and I’m not sure the podcast woman really understands Nikki or people who identify as trans. So we’re still just left with both groups not understanding each other and the tension shall remain.
I think people say too much. IMO the only response should be “I think all people should participate in sport. Sports are awesome and for everyone. I think everyone is free to express themselves & gender identify how they please. Respectfully, why do you feel it’s NOT okay for all of us to compete according to biological sex while still expressing ourselves?” And then from their answer, you talk through that and go from there. Maybe they have a good point and you can have a legitimate discussion.
1714 -
Wholestory123 wrote:
Interesting Convo wrote:
This had me thinking. I am someone who believes that it is unfair for trans women to compete against cis women. I am also someone for whom this issue is not something that keeps me up at night.
I wouldn't drop out just because there are trans women racing. At the same time, because this is the Boston marathon, aren't trans women taking away spots from cis women?
If this were another marathon I wouldn't care in the slightest.
I feel bad for a random unknown participant getting lit up by the running community on social media. Whether it's JK Rowling or Nikki, I don't like it when people with platforms do this to others.
On the other hand you have to remember that 80% of people agree that trans women have an unfair advantage in sports to cis women. Maybe don't push the many liberal folk who agree by saying stupid things like "men in women's category"? They are trans women. We don't have to call them men to acknowledge the lack of fairness.
I usually agree, but that “unknown participant” brought up Nikki first. The podcast person made it sound like Nikki resented USATF and World Athletics for not letting them take testosterone & grow a beard (while still getting to compete in the women’s field). Like 2 years ago or something, Nikki did say sometimes they “resents the sport” because the reality is they has the desire to do those things, but can’t yet. But Nikki doesn't actually think (nor say) World Athletics should let them take testosterone and race in the women’s field.
The women also said “(Nikki) was in the Olympics and represents the women’s field but is embarrassed to be a called a women, refuses to be called a she, and is resentful she can’t take testosterone, grow a beard, and still compete in the women’s field”. Then she said this will lead to the women’s field being left as: “men dressing up as women and women taking performance enhancing drugs.”
Again, I’ve never heard Nikki advocate that women should be able to take testosterone and compete in the women’s field. I personally understand what the woman is trying to say, but it’s also very understandable Nikki would see this and be like “what the heck”. And imo, this removes the “random unknown participant” label.That being said, I don’t think anyone in the social media comments watched more of the podcast or knows anything about this podcast person and I’m not sure the podcast woman really understands Nikki or people who identify as trans. So we’re still just left with both groups not understanding each other and the tension shall remain.
I think people say too much. IMO the only response should be “I think all people should participate in sport. Sports are awesome and for everyone. I think everyone is free to express themselves & gender identify how they please. Respectfully, why do you feel it’s NOT okay for all of us to compete according to biological sex while still expressing ourselves?” And then from their answer, you talk through that and go from there. Maybe they have a good point and you can have a legitimate discussion.
Do you have a link to the podcast?
11 -
When will this end wrote:
Oh no, another one of these threads!
Haters devastated, same tired responses. Nikki wins again.
543 -
a trans women is not a women.. so they should not be able to compete in a women’s category regardless.. I could care less if they made a trans category for them to compete in though. Hiltz arguement is stupidity at its finest though because Boston has limited spots for men & womens division. So unless there is a separate category for trans women that hold spots for only trans athletes and not biological women then she is just flat out wrong. The women who is upset has a right to be upset because people who are not qualified to compete in here division are stealing spots…
435 -
PonyBoy wrote:
I wonder how Nikki would feel if Hocker decided to let his hair down and race the women’s field.
In the event of prize money or championships, Boston has adopted the WA rules which require starting hormone treatments prior to puberty. Hocker letting down his hair won’t be good enough.
The trials also use WA rules, so there will never be another transgender competing.
46 -
bladerunner wrote:
By non-binary, you mean confused male. Because you never see a biological female in the "non-binary" division.
Cal Calamia says hello to you.
219 -
I could care less what you do in your personal life, you do you. I’m all for acceptance. I bet that some days Nikki feels like a man, sometimes a woman. She was born a female and believe she should race others who were born females.
That said, by her rationale, on days she wakes up feeling like a male… why does she not race with the men? It is hilarious how it’s always trans men who want to race biological women, but never the other way around.
I wonder how Nikki would feel is a trans male was allowed to compete and she never got to compete in the Olympics?
403 -
Letsbereal wrote:
I could care less what you do in your personal life, you do you. I’m all for acceptance. I bet that some days Nikki feels like a man, sometimes a woman. She was born a female and believe she should race others who were born females.
That said, by her rationale, on days she wakes up feeling like a male… why does she not race with the men? It is hilarious how it’s always trans men who want to race biological women, but never the other way around.
I wonder how Nikki would feel is a trans male was allowed to compete and she never got to compete in the Olympics?
She’s not a transgender female so there’s no hypocrisy. The rules are what matter and not her rational.
517 -
There is this now extremely widespread notion that trans women should never compete in women's events. And it is clear by the idiocy in this thread that a lot of people don't have much of an understanding. So to start, Nikkii identifies as Trans. Nikki gets no biological help racing as a trans woman, or do you not understand that? She would never have any problem with the rules in track and field that have some limitations.
The problem people have with trans females competing in women's events is (should only be) because of the physiological advantages of having male hormones etc for years. I agree with that, but anything else about being trans is a more a sign that you want to dictate that the world should be just like you want it. What exactly is your problem if your are, say, a computer programmer and Sally your co-worked transitioned to being female. Does some hormone treatment (plus,...) make them sub-human?
Note, there are a number of people that identify as Trans that are not fitting your stereotype of what that means and you do not get to rule the world.
633 -
She’s not a transgender female so there’s no hypocrisy. The rules are what matter and not her rational.
And you think so because you are so uninformed that you think that the entire trans population consist of people who physically transitioned in certain ways. You can have your own opinions but you cannot have your own facts.
421
1 post was removed from this page.
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.