By your "logic", I'm better than Kipyegon at running, regardless of how much training she puts in, since my 1500/mile PRs are faster. Would you view a random 4:0x NCAA miler as better than her?
-
31
-
kiltedrunner wrote:
Fairorunfair wrote:
A load of incomprehensible crap
You can introduce a hundred more strawmen into the conversation but it doesn't change why people are rightfully aggrieved by this situation. Your allegory doesn't even make sense because you'd have to qualify it by saying there's one race for those taking Adderall and one for those who aren't, and then have someone who is taking Adderall but who identifies as not being on it, then going on to compete in the non-adderall race. And if you did that, it's still pointless because the general public just don't (and will never) agree with boys running in girls races; for the same reason they're against men running in boys' races, or heavyweights fighting against middleweights.
I am honestly not following you. Set aside the gender argument for the moment. I ask you straight, is it fair if some of the runners are on adderall and others are not? If you think it is fair or does not matter, ok. If it is the latter I would ask you why does it not matter? If you feel it is not fair, then I ask why do we let is slide in HS, but not at the level of WA? If you feel it is not fair and does matter, then sure, we could disqualify these kids or make them get a TUE or set up a race for those on the medicine or some other strategy to ensure fairness.
12 -
Fairorunfair wrote:
kiltedrunner wrote:
You can introduce a hundred more strawmen into the conversation but it doesn't change why people are rightfully aggrieved by this situation. Your allegory doesn't even make sense because you'd have to qualify it by saying there's one race for those taking Adderall and one for those who aren't, and then have someone who is taking Adderall but who identifies as not being on it, then going on to compete in the non-adderall race. And if you did that, it's still pointless because the general public just don't (and will never) agree with boys running in girls races; for the same reason they're against men running in boys' races, or heavyweights fighting against middleweights.
I am honestly not following you. Set aside the gender argument for the moment. I ask you straight, is it fair if some of the runners are on adderall and others are not? If you think it is fair or does not matter, ok. If it is the latter I would ask you why does it not matter? If you feel it is not fair, then I ask why do we let is slide in HS, but not at the level of WA? If you feel it is not fair and does matter, then sure, we could disqualify these kids or make them get a TUE or set up a race for those on the medicine or some other strategy to ensure fairness.
I am just trying to make the point that the enforcement of fairness differs depending on the level of the race. I think you could conclude that Soren running is NOT fair, but not worth enforcing. This is not the same as saying it is fair. Why does this make you so angry?
11 -
According to GOP lawmakers, HS sports should be taken MORE seriously than the Olympic Games. That's why they should have more exclusionary policy, and athletes who would be eligible to compete in the Olympics should be banned from HS sports.
And many posters on this board seem to agree with them.
112 -
tlm1959 wrote:
While HS XC is not a big deal in the whole scale of things, to these young athletes, it is very important. Many of us park on Letsrun because of our experiences with XC in high school. There is something about being young and forming memories. Many of us will never forget races that may seem insignificant to many, but are very important to a 16 year old. High school coaches know that these races are formative experiences for their charges and that the impact in their lives is far beyond just the times they run. This is why coaching is so satisfying to many. I don't remember my high school typing teacher. The controversy here is that many realize the developmental nature of high school sports and are worried about the message we are sending to kids and this concern is from both sides of the issue.
What message are we sending to kids?
00 -
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
According to GOP lawmakers, HS sports should be taken MORE seriously than the Olympic Games. That's why they should have more exclusionary policy, and athletes who would be eligible to compete in the Olympics should be banned from HS sports.
And many posters on this board seem to agree with them.
The WAC does not allow transgender women who went though male puberty to compete in athletics, though.
In regard to transgender athletes, the Council has agreed to exclude male-to-female transgender athletes who have been through male puberty from female World Rankings competition from 31 March 2023.32 -
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Primate1 wrote:
Now I understand the entire premise of your position on this. You believe that sports are inherently unfair because the average person cannot train to become as good as a world class athlete. And if sports are inherently unfair, then what is one more unfairness thrown onto the pile?
Most people, of course, completely reject your definition of what constitutes fairness in sports. If you had to race while wearing a five pound weight around your waste and Ingebrigtsen didn't, then that would be an unfair race. But him destroying you in a race in which neither of you have a five pound weight is completely fair -- he is just better than you are at running, regardless of how much training effort you put in.
Hopefully you can now understand why the vast majority of people do not agree with your position. It is not that they hate trans people (although some do), it is that they have a fundamentally different viewpoint than you do about fairness in sports.
The runner who won the Maine regional XC race was just better than her competitors were at running, regardless of how much training effort they put in. You are supporting my argument.
It's the "it's unfair" crowd that seems to want a setup wherein every racer has equal opportunity to win. I think that's bogus.
So far, every person against this runner on this thread has called Soren a "biological male" or "him" or "a dude." Some do this and simultaneously claim they don't hate trans people, but it's pretty hateful to call a transfemale a "male."
OK then XY athletes do not belong in XX division. XY was better because of XY running against XX only competition. If this XY would run against XY than it would have been fair and would have lost dearly. Looks like they are looking for an unfair advantage.
44 -
Unvaccinated straight white male wrote:
By your "logic", I'm better than Kipyegon at running, regardless of how much training she puts in, since my 1500/mile PRs are faster. Would you view a random 4:0x NCAA miler as better than her?
I guess it depends. Is the runner a 4:06 miler or a 4:09 miler?
16 -
Fairorunfair wrote:
Doesn't anybody think we are collectively caring too much about the outcome of a high school race? American kids, both boys and girls suffer from a bunch of frustrated adults treating these meets like they are the Olympic games when they are not. Soren winning this race is simply not the same as Kelvin Kiptum declaring himself Karen Kiptum and taking Sifan Hassan's Chicago title from her. Treating these situations the same in terms of enforcing fairness and having the same outrage is doing a disservice to all of the kids running. NONE OF THEM are going to the Olympics and if any of them do have this talent, then the outcome of the outcome of this race will not matter. I would say this to the boys too if say there was some strange loophole that allowed Kiplimo to race and beat the boys winner by 4 minutes. I ask Armstronglivs how many of these kids racing in the boys or girls race are on adderall? Do these kids have an unfair advantage? Did they get a TUE to compete? No? But is this fair?? We had a thread a thousand posts long about Molly Seidel and adderall. Why do we care if she is on it and not these kids?
Because being a dude is just a bit different than adderall?
93 -
Fairorunfair wrote:
kiltedrunner wrote:
You can introduce a hundred more strawmen into the conversation but it doesn't change why people are rightfully aggrieved by this situation. Your allegory doesn't even make sense because you'd have to qualify it by saying there's one race for those taking Adderall and one for those who aren't, and then have someone who is taking Adderall but who identifies as not being on it, then going on to compete in the non-adderall race. And if you did that, it's still pointless because the general public just don't (and will never) agree with boys running in girls races; for the same reason they're against men running in boys' races, or heavyweights fighting against middleweights.
I am honestly not following you. Set aside the gender argument for the moment. I ask you straight, is it fair if some of the runners are on adderall and others are not? If you think it is fair or does not matter, ok. If it is the latter I would ask you why does it not matter? If you feel it is not fair, then I ask why do we let is slide in HS, but not at the level of WA? If you feel it is not fair and does matter, then sure, we could disqualify these kids or make them get a TUE or set up a race for those on the medicine or some other strategy to ensure fairness.
What’s this “we” stuff? A judge could potentially rule in favor of some changes but no one else has that power.
20 -
Surprise! wrote:
Fairorunfair wrote:
Doesn't anybody think we are collectively caring too much about the outcome of a high school race? American kids, both boys and girls suffer from a bunch of frustrated adults treating these meets like they are the Olympic games when they are not. Soren winning this race is simply not the same as Kelvin Kiptum declaring himself Karen Kiptum and taking Sifan Hassan's Chicago title from her. Treating these situations the same in terms of enforcing fairness and having the same outrage is doing a disservice to all of the kids running. NONE OF THEM are going to the Olympics and if any of them do have this talent, then the outcome of the outcome of this race will not matter. I would say this to the boys too if say there was some strange loophole that allowed Kiplimo to race and beat the boys winner by 4 minutes. I ask Armstronglivs how many of these kids racing in the boys or girls race are on adderall? Do these kids have an unfair advantage? Did they get a TUE to compete? No? But is this fair?? We had a thread a thousand posts long about Molly Seidel and adderall. Why do we care if she is on it and not these kids?
Because being a dude is just a bit different than adderall?
So only some sorts of "unfairness" bothers you. I get it. Boy vs girl, BIG problem, but PED use, no problem. Ok, so it is not really about fairness after all, or it is only some unfairness, but not all of it.
06 -
Fairorunfair wrote:
I am honestly not following you. Set aside the gender argument for the moment. I ask you straight, is it fair if some of the runners are on adderall and others are not? If you think it is fair or does not matter, ok. If it is the latter I would ask you why does it not matter? If you feel it is not fair, then I ask why do we let is slide in HS, but not at the level of WA? If you feel it is not fair and does matter, then sure, we could disqualify these kids or make them get a TUE or set up a race for those on the medicine or some other strategy to ensure fairness.
Ah, the ol' reverse slippery-slope argument. A runner taking Adderall, a widely prescribed prescription drug is not an apt metaphor for a dude running a girls race. Completely unrelated and irrelevant.
61 -
Dudes don\'t belong in women\'s sports..... wrote:
OK then XY athletes do not belong in XX division. XY was better because of XY running against XX only competition. If this XY would run against XY then it would have been fair and would have lost dearly. Looks like they are looking for an unfair advantage.
We don’t separate athletes based on how likely they are to “lose dearly.” We separate boys and girls. Soren is a girl. Thus, she runs with girls.
011 -
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Dudes don\'t belong in women\'s sports..... wrote:
OK then XY athletes do not belong in XX division. XY was better because of XY running against XX only competition. If this XY would run against XY then it would have been fair and would have lost dearly. Looks like they are looking for an unfair advantage.
We don’t separate athletes based on how likely they are to “lose dearly.” We separate boys and girls. Soren is a girl. Thus, she runs with girls.
Thanks for the downvote but soren is an XY for the rest of they life. That doesn't make him a girl or an XX in a women's race.
54 -
Fairorunfair wrote:
. I think you could conclude that Soren running is NOT fair, but not worth enforcing.
"but not worth enforcing"
This is misogyny, whether you're intending it or not. The girls division- which exists for the sole reason to exclude male advantage- is 'not worth enforcing'? Girl's and women's sport is not there to affirm mediocre men, it is for girls and women. Period. The relative 'fairness' for each competitor within the category (i.e. Peds, age, ability, etc etc) is entirely meaningless if the category itself is broken into pieces by disciples of the church of genderology, who you are (perhaps inadvertently) cheerleading for right now.
102 -
Dudes don\'t belong in women\'s sports..... wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
We don’t separate athletes based on how likely they are to “lose dearly.” We separate boys and girls. Soren is a girl. Thus, she runs with girls.
Thanks for the downvote but soren is an XY for the rest of they life. That doesn't make him a girl or an XX in a women's race.
Where was that poster who said that all those who oppose transgender athletes weren’t full of hate?
This is one of your guys, right?
09 -
Feeling Sad wrote:
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
According to GOP lawmakers, HS sports should be taken MORE seriously than the Olympic Games. That's why they should have more exclusionary policy, and athletes who would be eligible to compete in the Olympics should be banned from HS sports.
And many posters on this board seem to agree with them.
The WAC does not allow transgender women who went though male puberty to compete in athletics, though.
In regard to transgender athletes, the Council has agreed to exclude male-to-female transgender athletes who have been through male puberty from female World Rankings competition from 31 March 2023.All the states that banned trans athletes do not make any distinction between those who transitioned before or after puberty.
Trans athletes who did not go through male puberty are banned by their states, and now they are suing the states.
06 -
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Dudes don\'t belong in women\'s sports..... wrote:
Thanks for the downvote but soren is an XY for the rest of they life. That doesn't make him a girl or an XX in a women's race.
Where was that poster who said that all those who oppose transgender athletes weren’t full of hate?
This is one of your guys, right?
Don't know what you are talking about. Only hate is for it being unfair advantage against the XX in the competition. Don't assume.
62 -
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Dudes don\'t belong in women\'s sports..... wrote:
Thanks for the downvote but soren is an XY for the rest of they life. That doesn't make him a girl or an XX in a women's race.
Where was that poster who said that all those who oppose transgender athletes weren’t full of hate?
This is one of your guys, right?
"Anyone who doesn't completely agree with me is 100% a hate-filled bigot"
120 -
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
All the states that banned trans athletes do not make any distinction between those who transitioned before or after puberty.
Trans athletes who did not go through male puberty are banned by their states, and now they are suing the states.
Fair- many of those states also make gender affirming care before (and even after, not great!) 18 illegal, meh.
00
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.