I hope you recognize that you're rejecting the principle of scientific objectivity. You're saying that people's perceptions of reality should carry greater weight than data based on observations of the material world.
Facts, statistics, etc do not tell us what to do any more than a rock does. Human beings decide what to do.
Has a woman ever hit an Olympic qualifying standard for for that particular Olympic cycle? Nope. Not even close.
Has a woman ever hit a US Olympic Trails qualifying standard. Nope, not even close.
I’m not saying women aren’t amazing athletes, they are, but they should never be compared to men.
It’s plain to see when a hack XXY is completing with the women at worlds or Olympics. The women athletes have near perfect form and athletic physicality to reach Olympic level. The XXY athlete just got there on brute male physical advantage.
Has a woman ever hit an Olympic qualifying standard for for that particular Olympic cycle? Nope. Not even close.
Has a woman ever hit a US Olympic Trails qualifying standard. Nope, not even close.
For the marathon this is simply incorrect. Paula was just off the Olympic A standard for men's marathon when she ran her 215. [ in fact they're just changed the standard a couple years before if they had not I think she would have beaten it]
And if she had happened to be American of course she would have easily beaten the men's Olympic trials qualifying standard.
Deena Kastor was in fact very close to meeting the USA men's trials standard and now so is Keira D’Amato.
But.....lemme guess: those examples "don't count" or you "meant something else" ? Right.
[ the large majority of people agree with your overall point that most people are making on this thread that elite women cannot compete with the elite men but you all need to stop exaggerating and get your facts straight or you lose credibility]
People with DSDs are not strange, unnatural, cursed creatures created by capricious gods and goddesses the way they are depicted in ancient Greek myths. They were not brought into being in weird, novel ways that can't be accounted for by evolution - nor do they reproduce in peculiar ways, either. All people with DSDs came into being in exactly the way we all did: egg + sperm.
So are people with ovotestecular symdrom male or female? If human sex is binary, every single one is them is either male or female, right? Are they allowed to decide whether they are male or female, or is it people like yourself who get to decide it for them?
I hope you recognize that you're rejecting the principle of scientific objectivity. You're saying that people's perceptions of reality should carry greater weight than data based on observations of the material world.
So where are the data on how people with DSD identify themselves? Where are the data that they think they are stigmatized when they are called "intersex"? What percentage of people with DSD think that way? Are all the individuals in the linked videos among the very small minorities?
It is true that most people with DSD identify as either male or female. That does NOT mean they object to being called "intersex." And many people with 46XY DSD identify as female. They may or may not find "intersex" objectionable, but they are certainly insulted when they are called "men" as many people on this board do.
The problem is we have conflated gender with biological advantage. If we agree that gender is fluid then we need to stop talking about men's and women's categories. We need to talk about whether of not the racer has the key differentiating physical aspect: testicles.
On ranches there are often 3 categories of related to testicles (Bull/Stallion, Steer/Gelding, Cow/Mare). There are clear physiological difference in terms of size and performance.
So, if we are thinking about adding a new category (as the BA is with non-binary) we don't add non-binary, Instead the race categories become "with testicles", "post testicles", and "no testicles". If you have testicles you have to race in the "with testicles" group. You can identify as male, you can identify as female, you can identify as unicorn but if you have testicles you have to race in that group.
If you have made the choice to remove your testicles/or they have both been removed - for whatever reason, you now race with the post testicles group. In addition, if you want to compete with those with testicles that is allowed. But you can't compete with no testicles unless your testicles were removed before puberty, or you have undergone significant hormone replacement therapy.
Those that have never had testicles only race against each other, but - again - can race against either of the testicle groups if they so choose.
Within each group you can identify as male as female but awards and placement are solely determined by having testes. This by the way also solves the Caster Semenya issue as she is purported to have internal testes and so should race in the "with testicles" group.
You are welcome.
That may solve the Semenya issue, but it will not solve the Martinez Patino issue.
Teaching Differences of Sex DevelopmentIn this video, Jennifer Potter, M.D. and Katharine Baratz Dalke, M.D. discuss how to effectively teach differences of ...
**Note: This is part two of the interview. Please start with part one (https://youtu.be/BVKNvEEy3Tc) here if you have not already done so.Teaching Difference...
Decades of research have shown that sex is far more complex than we may think. And though sex differences in sports show advantages for men, researchers today still don’t know how much of this to attribute to biological difference versus the lack of support provided to women athletes to reach their highest potential. “Science is increasingly showing how sex is dynamic; it has multiple aspects and also shifts; for example, social experiences can actually change levels of sex-related hormones like testosterone in our bodies in a second-to-second and month-to-month way!” Sari van Anders, the research chair in social neuroendocrinology at Queen’s University, in Ontario, told me by email. She said that this complexity means it doesn’t make sense to separate sports by sex in order to protect women athletes from getting hurt. “If safety was a concern, and there was evidence to select certain bodily characteristics to base safety cut-offs on, then you would see, say, shorter men excluded from competing with taller men, or lighter women from competing with heavier women, across sports.” We do see weight-class separation in boxing, rowing, and wrestling, yet it’s far from the norm across all sports, and isn’t typically seen as a method of integrating athletes of different sexes—though it could be. Old notions of sex as a marker of physical capability are changing, and more research is making clear that sex differences aren’t really clear at all.
LRC friendly reminder. When quoting from an article or social media post, please try to link to it. Here is the article:
It's going to be very interesting to see what happens when the trans stuff is even more mainstream than it is now. I don't see any way women's sports can avoid being casualty in the culture war barring women rejecting a lot of key tenets of feminism, which while would be good for society, I don't see happening for at least another few generations when the rot it has caused comes home to roost
Has a woman ever hit an Olympic qualifying standard for for that particular Olympic cycle? Nope. Not even close.
Has a woman ever hit a US Olympic Trails qualifying standard. Nope, not even close.
For the marathon this is simply incorrect. Paula was just off the Olympic A standard for men's marathon when she ran her 215. [ in fact they're just changed the standard a couple years before if they had not I think she would have beaten it]
And if she had happened to be American of course she would have easily beaten the men's Olympic trials qualifying standard.
Deena Kastor was in fact very close to meeting the USA men's trials standard and now so is Keira D’Amato.
But.....lemme guess: those examples "don't count" or you "meant something else" ? Right.
[ the large majority of people agree with your overall point that most people are making on this thread that elite women cannot compete with the elite men but you all need to stop exaggerating and get your facts straight or you lose credibility]
Kastor was close, but so were a bunch of other men. One man might have lost an olympic qualifying spot if Kastor ran under the standard and was allowed to compete with the men. BUT, she would have needed to run VERY fast to qualify for the olympics within that group. Same with Radcliffe. AND If she could run that fast, she would likely be uninterested in competing with the women anyway.
Unless women are taking qualifying spots from men, them being able to run fast isn't really what this discussion is about. People with physiological advantages over women are asking to compete with women, therefore taking qualifying positions/medals/roster spots from women who would otherwise be finding success.
Something is being taken from women, whereas it really isn't being taken from men, or at least to a much lesser extent (i.e Deena Kastor/Paula Radcliffe)
is it really unfair for a biological male to participate in a female only sport? lets use galen rupp for this example. if galen rupp transitioned from male-to-female and won the women's olympic marathon, is that really unfair to the top females in that marathon? well those top females that even got to make it to the starting line of that race already has an advantage over all the other females who have inferior genetics for running.
it is never fair to begin with. let sports be hobbies. being good just means that you got lucky with the gene lottery
I hope you recognize that you're rejecting the principle of scientific objectivity. You're saying that people's perceptions of reality should carry greater weight than data based on observations of the material world.
So where are the data on how people with DSD identify themselves? Where are the data that they think they are stigmatized when they are called "intersex"? What percentage of people with DSD think that way? Are all the individuals in the linked videos among the very small minorities?
It is true that most people with DSD identify as either male or female. That does NOT mean they object to being called "intersex." And many people with 46XY DSD identify as female. They may or may not find "intersex" objectionable, but they are certainly insulted when they are called "men" as many people on this board do.
You're actually arguing based on authority: here's somebody with an MD saying things I agree with!
Objectivity means separating the researcher/knower, along with their subjective perceptions, values, politics, etc. from the object of scientific investigation.
So like I said no woman has hit an Olympic mens qualifying standard for the respective Olympic cycle and no woman has ever qualified for the US mens Olympic trails. Even massive outlines in woman’s performance don’t even qualify for US Olympic trails.
The best women in the world would be hard pressed to win state-level high school boys track events.
Anyone who advocates for men to complete against women is delusional and an anti-feminist.
Just because some woke liberal arts major at Atlantic (with no useful skills) has an agenda, doesn't justify going against everything that is obvious in nature. The males and females of all animal species are Different (fortunately). Remember, stupidity is not a virtue.
So where are the data on how people with DSD identify themselves? Where are the data that they think they are stigmatized when they are called "intersex"? What percentage of people with DSD think that way? Are all the individuals in the linked videos among the very small minorities?
It is true that most people with DSD identify as either male or female. That does NOT mean they object to being called "intersex." And many people with 46XY DSD identify as female. They may or may not find "intersex" objectionable, but they are certainly insulted when they are called "men" as many people on this board do.
I hope you understand that the identity of people with DSDs does not change the material reality of biological sex.
I don't even understand what you are trying to say. Where is your "data" that people with DSD think the "intersex" is a stigmatizing word. Any mass surveys available on the sebject?
Are these people with DSD stigmatizing other people by calling themselves "intersex"? Are they stigmatizing themselves?
You're actually arguing based on authority: here's somebody with an MD saying things I agree with!
Objectivity means separating the researcher/knower, along with their subjective perceptions, values, politics, etc. from the object of scientific investigation.
What's your point? That the MD in the video cannot be objective because she has DSD herself? What specifically about the content of the videos do you disagree and what the the basis for that disagreement?
From a very young age, Maria knew that her body was different than other girls. In her adulthood, however, she had to address this difference head-on - and l...
How much do you really know about the history of the word "Intersex"? Find out on this episode of InQueery hosted by them.'s own Maria Tridas. InQueery is th...
How much do you really know about the history of the word "Intersex"? Find out on this episode of InQueery hosted by them.'s own Maria Tridas. InQueery is th...
I hope you understand that the identity of people with DSDs does not change the material reality of biological sex.
I don't even understand what you are trying to say. Where is your "data" that people with DSD think the "intersex" is a stigmatizing word. Any mass surveys available on the sebject?
Are these people with DSD stigmatizing other people by calling themselves "intersex"? Are they stigmatizing themselves?
I'm saying that the identities of people with DSDs do not determine the nature of the condition. For example, if males with a particular DSD all identified as female, that would not make them female. If the reproductive system is organized around the production of sperm, an individual is male, even if they look female on the outside and view themselves as women.
I think RunRagged is pointing out that many people with DSDs find the term "intersex" stigmatizing (some clearly don't), but the more important point from a scientific standpoint is that they are not truly intersex.
BMJ published "Consensus Statement on the Management of Intersex Disorders" in 2006. They advocate for different and more precise language and propose Disorders of Sex Development as a replacement for intersex. Here's a quote from the article:
"Advances in identification of molecular genetic causes of abnormal sex with heightened awareness of ethical issues and patient advocacy concerns necessitate a re-examination of nomenclature.1 Terms such as intersex, pseudohermaphroditism, hermaphroditism, sex reversal, and gender based diagnostic labels are particularly controversial. These terms are perceived as potentially pejorative by patients,2 and can be confusing to practitioners and parents alike. The term “disorders of sex development” (DSD) is proposed, as defined by congenital conditions in which development of chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomical sex is atypical."
Several people wrote responses to the statement and the proposed change in terminology.
Management of intersex disorders The birth of an intersex child prompts a long term management strategy that involves a myriad of professionals working with the family. It is estimated that genital anomalies occur in 1 in 450...
