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.
So do you want your manhood questioned by other men so that you can win some running races as non-binary? How many men are like yourself?
for example, Chicago open division gets $150k, wheelchair winner gets $25k, master winner gets $5000 and para winners get $1500. The thing here is that they give the same amount for men and women, So the complexity here is what do you do if you are a master non binary for example or wheelchair non binary or simply an open non binary. Solving that issue is beyond my SJW pay grade. Should prize money be equal between men and women in the first place (45% of participants in the open category are women so at least that’s pretty close to 50/50), so maybe it’s just that. I believe that 0.3% of the US population identify as non binary, so maybe the money split should be based on that. I’ll round it up to $500 for non binary winner (just a thought).
2) some good runners are non binary (Hiltz for example - no chance that they enter Chicago, but you know what I mean). What happens to them? Would they be a “fraud/cheat” if they try to enter the woman category to get more prize money? We know that they are non binary. Again I don’t have the solution to that.
The thing is that if you care enough to recognize non binaries as an actual category (not saying that you should or should not). You need to complete your thoughts and actions about the subject. Unfortunately there are ramifications and consequences whether you like it or not.
The most recently appointed Supreme Court justice could not define what a woman is because she is not a biologist.
This made me think.
If a Supreme court Justice cannot define or determine this, who am I to determine if I am a man or a woman?
Race organizers are asking this question on their race registration form. From what the Supreme Court justice said, pretty much everybody registering are not qualified to answer that question in the first place.
what to do? enter as male for my first race of the year, then woman for second race, then male for third…. Not answer question at all?
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.
So do you want your manhood questioned by other men so that you can win some running races as non-binary? How many men are like yourself?
I guess I would just have to wipe my tears with that prize $$$
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.
That is why you make the prize money proportional to the number of entries. Everyone pays $180 or so to enter. A percentage of that goes towards prize money (say 10%). That becomes the pot the people in that category compete for. It’s not that complicated.
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.
That is why you make the prize money proportional to the number of entries. Everyone pays $180 or so to enter. A percentage of that goes towards prize money (say 10%). That becomes the pot the people in that category compete for. It’s not that complicated.
Well my post was specifically about men who aren't good enough to get prize money in the men's category, so winning relatively less money in the non-binary division would still be better than winning no money in the men's division.
This idea is worse than the BroJos putting the Chicago preview behind a pay wall. If they're so concerned, go run in your true gender race. I mean Niki Hiltz identifies and something other than female, YET she enters the Oly Trials, Fifth Ave Mile, and every other race as a woman. Woke hypocrisy at it's finest.
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.
This does not affect cis women who are competing in the women's division. If female non-binaries think this is a problem, then that's an issue to be sorted out within the non-binary category. If they want allies, I'd be more than happy to support them. Otherwise, I'd just stay out of their business.
The most recently appointed Supreme Court justice could not define what a woman is because she is not a biologist.
This made me think.
If a Supreme court Justice cannot define or determine this, who am I to determine if I am a man or a woman?
Race organizers are asking this question on their race registration form. From what the Supreme Court justice said, pretty much everybody registering are not qualified to answer that question in the first place.
what to do? enter as male for my first race of the year, then woman for second race, then male for third…. Not answer question at all?
That's not what she said. She knows she is a woman. She cannot tell whether someone else is a woman or not, because she is not a biologist. There are people with all kinds of DSD, and it's not her expertise to tell whether each one of them is a woman or not.
Those who are mocking her answer either don't know the complexity of human sex, or they are trying to erase people with DSD from public consciousness.
Sex and gender literally isn’t hard to figure out. You and the woke mob are just living a privilege life and creating new and creative problems that make no sense. And the normal people are annoyed.
The most recently appointed Supreme Court justice could not define what a woman is because she is not a biologist.
This made me think.
If a Supreme court Justice cannot define or determine this, who am I to determine if I am a man or a woman?
Race organizers are asking this question on their race registration form. From what the Supreme Court justice said, pretty much everybody registering are not qualified to answer that question in the first place.
what to do? enter as male for my first race of the year, then woman for second race, then male for third…. Not answer question at all?
That's not what she said. She knows she is a woman. She cannot tell whether someone else is a woman or not, because she is not a biologist. There are people with all kinds of DSD, and it's not her expertise to tell whether each one of them is a woman or not.
Those who are mocking her answer either don't know the complexity of human sex, or they are trying to erase people with DSD from public consciousness.
No, she was asked to define what a woman is. She couldn't do it, or she refused to.
This response is correct. Dedrdr over-simplified what the topic was. There are DSD individuals and as far as gender identification goes, there are legitimate reasons an individual might self-identify differently from their sex. Conservatives love to use these wedge issues for political reasons. Keep for focus on competitive sports, because that is the area where biological sex is not us for grabs.
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.
That is why you make the prize money proportional to the number of entries. Everyone pays $180 or so to enter. A percentage of that goes towards prize money (say 10%). That becomes the pot the people in that category compete for. It’s not that complicated.
But making the prize money proportional to the number of entries does nothing to alter the fact that the people to take home the purses and trophies in the non-binary category will always or almost always be non-binary males. Doesn't matter if 20, 200 or 2,000 people enter the NB category, or what the sex ratio amongst the entrants is, chances are close to 100% that the winners of the prize money in every race will be male.
Even female non-binary entrants who've been taking exogenous T for years, or who took T in the past, won't be able to compete at the same level as male non-binary athletes. As the female East German athletes who were doped to the gills in the 1970s and 80s showed, female athletes jacked up on exogenous androgens will have an advantage over other females, but they still won't be able to compete at anywhere near the same levels as males.
Given the fact that adopting a non-binary gender identity seems to be much more popular amongst females than males today, it's likely that there will be many more female runners entering or wanting to enter in non-binary category than non-binary males. So if we go with your idea - everyone pays an entry fee of $180 or so, and a percentage of the pot is paid out as prize money - then it's very likely that the monetary prizes won time and again by non-binary males with annoying predictability will be funded mostly or at least disproportionately by non-binary females.
Again I gotta ask: how is it fair to create a new category in marathons and other road running events that will inevitably benefit non-binary males and disadvantage non-binary females? It's sex discrimination against females in sports so blatant that it harkens back to the era when girls and women were officially barred from road running events in the USA because of our sex.
Sorry but I thought we *weren't* supposed to do this? I thought it was *discriminatory* to create a non-binary/trans division because there weren't enough people to compete in it? That's why trans women HAD to compete against cis women because *inclusion*
Sex and gender literally isn’t hard to figure out. You and the woke mob are just living a privilege life and creating new and creative problems that make no sense. And the normal people are annoyed.
The difference between sex and gender actually seems pretty difficult for a lot of you guys to figure out.
The privileged population didn’t create this “problem.” The “problem” has existed for a long time, and some people are attempting to handle this “problem” in a more humane way than we used to.
These things tend to change generationally. Young people are more accepting of transgender people then their elders, but they still have a long way to go. I think it’ll be another 20, 30, maybe 40 years before trans people reach the status that gay people have reached now.
You have to remember that tons of social progress has been made in the last 100 years. People used to think it was crazy that we started allowing women to vote. Now those people are dead.
