They contacted another person and they weren't upset but said if they'd known about the category they would have competed in it.
A third person said Chicago is doing everything right within the guidelines they've been given.
Doesn't seem like something we all need to get too excited about.
This is it.
I see way too many articles these days claiming people are upset about something, then open them up and see something like this where it's 1-2 people being interviewed, or worse ones where it's a collection of tweets as if 10 people on Twitter speak for all of society.
Then people share those articles and say WOW LOOK AT THE *insert political affiliation* FREAKING OUT AGAIN WE ARE SO SCREWED MAN. And then there's online debates sparked by a very small amount of people.
Otherwise reasonable people everywhere then proceed to fight over societal sentiments that don't actually exist. Rinse and repeat. This is why the internet really sucks sometimes
Nope. the things you claim noone cares about are actually not only reported about but implemented. now we got non binary division, the next thing will of course be equal prices for them. Even I (who knows non binary people just have mental issues) find categories without prices idiotic.
I see way too many articles these days claiming people are upset about something, then open them up and see something like this where it's 1-2 people being interviewed, or worse ones where it's a collection of tweets as if 10 people on Twitter speak for all of society.
Then people share those articles and say WOW LOOK AT THE *insert political affiliation* FREAKING OUT AGAIN WE ARE SO SCREWED MAN. And then there's online debates sparked by a very small amount of people.
Otherwise reasonable people everywhere then proceed to fight over societal sentiments that don't actually exist. Rinse and repeat. This is why the internet really sucks sometimes
Nope. the things you claim noone cares about are actually not only reported about but implemented. now we got non binary division, the next thing will of course be equal prices for them. Even I (who knows non binary people just have mental issues) find categories without prices idiotic.
So they'll be paying the prices as everyone else? Surely that's fair.
In an effort for “equity”, the Bank of America Chicago half marathon isn’t in the Loop anymore. Instead, it’s through the “vibrant areas” on the West Side (Garfield and Humboldt Park). These neighborhoods are literal warzones. Why did they do that?
They should have prize money. The amount of the prize money should be proportional to the number of entrants. Everyone pays to compete. Making the prize money proportional makes sense. There are 40,000 people expected to compete, 1.6% of the US population identifies as non-binary, so about 640 people would be assumed to be competing in the non-binary category. That would be a good compromise.
The woke are referring to women as “pregnant people” and “birthing bodies”. They also use the term “people who menstruate”
"People who menstruate" is hateful language for biological women who have gone through menopause or who have had a hysterectomy, as that term excludes them from other biological women.
Speaking of non-binary, USA Triathlon 2023 national championships is going to have separate non-binary divisions.....including for 11-12 year olds. WTF.
At that age, the majority of boys and girls are equally athletically competitive, they should remove the gendered races and just have a co-ed or open race category
the NYRR and Philly Marathon races pay out the same prize money as the elite male/female to the "non-binary" runners. how are they going to prove i'm not non-binary if i show up and wipe the floor with the pixie cut males who run 1:17 for a half marathon and walk away with $1000 prize money?
Why not just eliminate all gender and/or sex divisions altogether? Everyone competes on an equal footing, the fastest runners win the money, no hassles, no debates, no one's feelings get hurt.
I was part of the production crew for a race about 15 years ago with prize money and no gender divisions. Trail/mountain race. The small business sponsoring the race and putting up the prize money plus all the production costs was female owned, and the owner was adamant that the race would not have separate male and female prize money not would it have open/masters money. Someone talked her into having prize money categories that were based on the weight of the runner, I think something like Open and Lightweight, with 125lbs as the line. Given that certain runners have legitimate body issues we decided that racers only needed to weight in if they wanted to compete for the Lightweight money.
If I remember, the race paid 5 deep in each category, good money too like $5K for the wins. A few women got paid in the Lightweight division, but I think around 7 or 8 men got paid.
Not surprising, that was a one and done race. Business went under within a year.
They should have prize money. The amount of the prize money should be proportional to the number of entrants. Everyone pays to compete. Making the prize money proportional makes sense. There are 40,000 people expected to compete, 1.6% of the US population identifies as non-binary, so about 640 people would be assumed to be competing in the non-binary category. That would be a good compromise.
In the few races that have given monetary prizes in the new non-binary category so far, all the money winners have been non-binary males. Presumably, this will continue to be the case all of the time or almost all of the time. Because having or claiming a non-binary gender identity doesn't do anything to remove or diminish the significant natural physical advantages people with male bodies have over people with female bodies in running and most other sports.
Even if some female non-binaries do win some of the non-binary prize money every once in a while, for the most part the new non-binary division will just end up as an extra category for males to shine and win in - and most of the money will go to males. How exactly is this fair and "inclusive"?
Creating a new category that will basically just give males more chances to make the podium and pocket prize money doesn't strike me as a way of bringing about a world that is better and fairer for all. On the contrary, it seems to be just adding more male privilege.
The woke are referring to women as “pregnant people” and “birthing bodies”. They also use the term “people who menstruate”
"People who menstruate" is hateful language for biological women who have gone through menopause or who have had a hysterectomy, as that term excludes them from other biological women.
I wouldn't normally use that term, but they do in fact only use it to refer to people who actually menstruate. As in "people who menstruate need access to pads" or something like that. They don't use it to refer to women in general.
the NYRR and Philly Marathon races pay out the same prize money as the elite male/female to the "non-binary" runners. how are they going to prove i'm not non-binary if i show up and wipe the floor with the pixie cut males who run 1:17 for a half marathon and walk away with $1000 prize money?
Speaking of non-binary, USA Triathlon 2023 national championships is going to have separate non-binary divisions.....including for 11-12 year olds. WTF.
At that age, the majority of boys and girls are equally athletically competitive, they should remove the gendered races and just have a co-ed or open race category
It's not true that the majority of boys and girls are at 11-12 "are equally athletically competitive." The records for youth track & field and swimming show that in the 11-12 age bracket, boys perform better in every event in track & field and in nearly every swimming event.
Also, at 11-12 nearly all girls are undergoing puberty of adolescence. Many will be menstruating already and will have breasts.
Going through the significant bodily changes that occur over the course of 28-day ovulation-menstruation cycle and dealing with the hassles and problems that girls' cycles and periods often bring - mood swings, insomnia, depression, breast tenderness, cramps, heavy bleeding, embarrassing leaks, headaches, joint aches, added vulnerability to certain sports injuries - creates enough difficulties and disadvantages for girls at that age as it is.
Plus, 11-12 is when most girls find their social standing in the the world has markedly changed. Once girls start developing breasts, boys and grown men start looking at them as sex objects and subjecting them to catcalling, leering, groping, voyeurism, flashing, unwanted sexual advances and creepy comments. Most girls find this distressing, unnerving and discombobulating.
Because of their changing bodies and changed social status, girls already commonly start dropping out of sports in significant numbers in their pre-teens and early teens. Moreover, when girls are 11-12, they commonly experience a big drop in self-esteem and self-confidence. 11-12 is when many girls begin developing pretty serious body-image issues and disordered eating too.
Making 11-12 year old girls compete against boys who already have physical advantages over them in sports and who are dealing with none of the physical and social disadvantages that come with having a developing female body is patently unfair to girls.
If you want to get more girls to drop out of sports, forcing them at 11-12 to compete against boys is a great way to go.
They should have prize money. The amount of the prize money should be proportional to the number of entrants. Everyone pays to compete. Making the prize money proportional makes sense. There are 40,000 people expected to compete, 1.6% of the US population identifies as non-binary, so about 640 people would be assumed to be competing in the non-binary category. That would be a good compromise.
In the few races that have given monetary prizes in the new non-binary category so far, all the money winners have been non-binary males. Presumably, this will continue to be the case all of the time or almost all of the time. Because having or claiming a non-binary gender identity doesn't do anything to remove or diminish the significant natural physical advantages people with male bodies have over people with female bodies in running and most other sports.
Even if some female non-binaries do win some of the non-binary prize money every once in a while, for the most part the new non-binary division will just end up as an extra category for males to shine and win in - and most of the money will go to males. How exactly is this fair and "inclusive"?
Creating a new category that will basically just give males more chances to make the podium and pocket prize money doesn't strike me as a way of bringing about a world that is better and fairer for all. On the contrary, it seems to be just adding more male privilege.
Exactly. The "non-binary" division effectively becomes a JV male division. If there are races out there offering prize money for "non-binary" racers, then I don't get why the guys who know they're just outside the pool of contenders just enter in the non-binary division. It would be easy cash and it's not like your time gets affected anyways.
Cal Calamia who is featured in the article won Bay to Breakers non-binary division in ~46:55. That was nearly 5 minutes behind the women's winner (and there isn't really an elite field). I'd personally be a tiny bit embarrassed to be given special participation prize money, and way more embarrassed to be begging for prize money while putting up some pretty mediocre times.
I definitely would NOT be calling myself an 'elite' athlete.
I think the first place prize for the winner of the nonbinary division should be 10 free therapy sessions with a psychologist.
Of the handful of nonbinary or non-gender conforming individuals I know, most were able to arrive at that "place" after committing to therapy and self-help (that stemmed from a general, unidentifable unhappiness). They're truly happier, more productive people now.
While I agree 100% in the protection of women's sports and am torn on the idea of a non-binary division, I urge you all to have a heart. These are just human beings who want to be happy and do not have any nefarious intentions. I wish you the best, dafuq.
As an ex runner, I was never concerned about stuff like this. They never gave prizes, even when I won. Yeah I am old.
This whole certificate thing is ridiculous. The whole call out for recognition is ridiculous.
Just run. Who cares about the rest of it. Not me.
The world should not have to revolve around the personal decisions people make.
"People who menstruate" is hateful language for biological women who have gone through menopause or who have had a hysterectomy, as that term excludes them from other biological women.
I wouldn't normally use that term, but they do in fact only use it to refer to people who actually menstruate. As in "people who menstruate need access to pads" or something like that. They don't use it to refer to women in general.
But it's not just "people who menstruate" who "need access to pads." The pads that girls and women use for menstruation are used by us for a variety of other reasons too.
For example, women don't menstruate when we are pregnant or have recently given birth, but we still need and use pads during those times. Coz spotting occurs pretty commonly during pregnancy - and after giving birth vaginally most women need to use pads for weeks or months: Bleeding after birth usually lasts for four to six weeks, but could last up to 12 weeks after your baby's born.
Post-menopausal women don't need access to pads for menstruation obviously. But lots of post-menopausal women still have reason to use pads for various health issues and after surgeries and treatments for gynecological and urinary problems.
By age 65, about a third of women will have gotten a hysterectomy, an operation that always results in considerable bleeding that exits the body via the vagina. Many older women also get surgeries for problems like vaginal and pelvic organ prolapse. These result in bleeding and clotting for which women who aren't "people who menstruate" still need access to pads.
Similarly, women who no longer menstruate still might have need of a colposcopy after getting unusual results from a Pap smear. Women are routinely advised to wear pads after colposcopy because bleeding for several days afterwards is common.
Women who use vaginal suppositories for various health conditions that affect women both before and long after menopause often use pads too.
My impression is that most of the people pushing for use of neologisms like "people who menstruate," "menstruators" and "menstrual bleeders" in discussions around san pro and matters of female health and hygiene are relatively young and/or not very well acquainted with all the various reasons that women who are not "people who menstruate" still "need access to pads."
