They are so very good at distracting us with nonsense like this instead why in god's name we are sending $100 billion to Ukrainian criminals and being on the brink of nuclear war.
"The top five athletes in the new nonbinary category will earn a cash prize, with the top finisher receiving $5,000. The nonbinary category is for general runners only—there is currently not a professional nonbinary category.
There is currently no prize money for the top men and women who aren’t pros or aren’t in any other specific category, such as NYRR members or masters."
"The top five athletes in the new nonbinary category will earn a cash prize, with the top finisher receiving $5,000. The nonbinary category is for general runners only—there is currently not a professional nonbinary category.
There is currently no prize money for the top men and women who aren’t pros or aren’t in any other specific category, such as NYRR members or masters."
Thoughts on this? Seems like a ploy to show how woke the sport is.
I think its great. males are better athletes than females by far in any category. Splitting the price money 50/50 was always unfair. Now its 66/33 which is way closer to a fair distribution.
But no prizes for goodness sake, especially not cash. You can't have prizes when there is no WA or USATF guidance on non-binary. You can't give prizes in a unitary division that includes both birth-males and birth-females. You can't give prizes when some members of the group will be using drugs to assist their chosen gender transition.
Why not? It's their race; they can do whatever they want and give whatever awards they want. If you don't like it, you don't have to run.
As someone active in the LGBT+ community I can tell you this category doesn't solve the issue of people competing outside their birth sex. Some non binary people do call themselves trans but many transgender people aren't non binary.
I really do wish the large prize money would stop. Im afraid it's hurting the community more than it helps. My friends who are non binary runners don't seem to want to win money, they just want to be able to sign up under the non binary category, run an average time, challenge themselves, and have fun. Just like anyone else.
Instead of just flying under the radar the community is mocked on letsrun because of what is presumably a few people are pressuring these races to do. I wish this prize money stuff would just stop. Let's find a solution that works for both sides.
Thanks for engaging.
I'm all for people feeling inclusive.
If the checkbox for races asked for your sex instead of your gender would your non binary friends be upset?
What if there was the "Open" and "Female" thing as menioned above.
I think we've asked people for their "gender" for ages, but it was really a proxy for sex.
Creating a separate division for those with a particular niche gender identity might "feel inclusive" to some people. But in practical effect, it can easily end up being a way to other and ostracize non-binaries on the one hand, and to elevate and privilege them (or some of them) on the other.
The new non-binary category strikes me as a gender identity ghetto, a special area set up to separate out enbies from "normies" for the purpose of creating the false impression that enbies are so fundamentally different from normies that there's no way enbies could ever fit in with the normies and vice versa.
Alternatively, creating a special category and awarding prizes for people with a non-binary gender identity, and that particular gender identity alone, ends up creating a new hierarchy in which people who claim to have a non-binary gender identity are held up as special and superior to people with other gender identities and to people no gender identities - and where the people with the non-binary identities are also given a special chance to be financially rewarded for having a non-binary identity.
What about all the people who have or claim to have all the other gender identities that are popular today?
What about the large proportion of the population who don't have a gender identity of any kind?
What about all the people who think gender identity ideology is a bunch of regressive, sexist and nonsensical hooey being pushed on the population by the elite?
Also, you can't ignore the fact that the new non-binary category has been set up in such as way as to favor and benefit male non-binaries over female non-binaries. Nine times out of 10, the podium places and prize money in the non-binary category will go to males.
How on earth is it "inclusive" to create a new category where it's a sure bet that female participants will always or almost always be excluded from the winners' podiums and prize money?
Well-intentioned though the new non-binary category might be, the thinking behind it IMO reflects the puerile, pigeonholing mindset of middle-school and high school. I don't think the new non-binary category is a solution devised by a truly diverse set of adults with a breadth of experience in crafting policies that are truly inclusive and which really do promote fairness and acceptance for all.
"The top five athletes in the new nonbinary category will earn a cash prize, with the top finisher receiving $5,000. The nonbinary category is for general runners only—there is currently not a professional nonbinary category.
There is currently no prize money for the top men and women who aren’t pros or aren’t in any other specific category, such as NYRR members or masters."
If the checkbox for races asked for your sex instead of your gender would your non binary friends be upset?
What if there was the "Open" and "Female" thing as menioned above.
I think we've asked people for their "gender" for ages, but it was really a proxy for sex.
What about all the people who have or claim to have all the other gender identities that are popular today?
What about the large proportion of the population who don't have a gender identity of any kind?
There is not a large proportion of the population that doesn't have a gender idendity. thre isn't even a large proportion that isn't male or female. Stop making it sound like there are millions of people out there who need ther own categories.
The most inclusive policy is to create a category for each unique individual. Then everyone can identify as themselves and have a guaranteed first place prize to boot.
What about all the people who have or claim to have all the other gender identities that are popular today?
What about the large proportion of the population who don't have a gender identity of any kind?
There is not a large proportion of the population that doesn't have a gender idendity. thre isn't even a large proportion that isn't male or female. Stop making it sound like there are millions of people out there who need ther own categories.
Huh? You are making it sound as though people with non-binary gender identities all have vanishingly rare DSDs that make it hard to discern if they are male or female. This isn't the case. All the people with non-binary gender identities that I know and have heard of are people with normal sex development who are very clearly either male or female.
To the larger point: whilst I agree that pretty much everyone on earth is clearly male or female, and most of us are aware that we are male or female, I don't agree that most everyone has a gender identity.
Gender identity, according to Oxford and many other sources, is "an individual's sense of having a particular gender." But what "gender" means varies widely.
Some people grew up thinking the word gender means sex, male or female. This is particularly the case for people born in the US and some other predominantly Anglophone countries during the last 30 or so years, because it was in the 1990s that the word gender began to be widely used in English as an anodyne euphemism for sex.
But many other English-speakers who are older as well as people from other language traditions grew up regarding gender solely in the narrow classic linguistic sense - as a term used in grammar that denotes masculinity or femininity.
"Gender identity" as a concept and term were first invented in the 1960s by American sexologists Robert Stoller and John Money - and Money especially popularized the term in the introductory psychology college textbooks he co-authored in the 1970s.
Stoller and Money initially came up with the the concept and term gender identity to describe the psychological states of adults they treated and studied who desperately wished they were the opposite sex. The adults Stoller and Money based their theories on used to be known in scientific literature and everyday parlance as transvestites, fetishistic transvestites, cross-dressers and transsexuals. Now all the distinctions between those groups have been collapsed and they are all regarded as simply trans or transgender.
But neither Stoller nor Money, nor any of the people who helped popularize the idea of gender identity in their wake had studied child and adolescent development or had expertise in how humans develop a sense of self.
The term gender identity as it's commonly used today means something very different to a person's awareness of his/her own biological sex. Gender identity in today's parlance is usually used to describe the extent to which a person has, or doesn't have, an affinity for the sex stereotypes and sex stereotyped roles traditionally associated with their own sex or the opposite sex.
Many people bridle at the idea that everyone must have a gender identity because whilst we are certainly aware that we are either male or female, we do not base our sense of self on sexist sex stereotypes and sex roles.
Many women especially bridle at the view that everyone has a gender identity in the way the term is commonly used today because in classic feminist theory, gender is a hierarchal value system created by men to establish and maintain male dominance and female subjugation.
"The top five athletes in the new nonbinary category will earn a cash prize, with the top finisher receiving $5,000. The nonbinary category is for general runners only—there is currently not a professional nonbinary category.
There is currently no prize money for the top men and women who aren’t pros or aren’t in any other specific category, such as NYRR members or masters."
Thoughts on this? Seems like a ploy to show how woke the sport is.
How does this personally affect you OP?
Did it personally affect you when the US Women's soccer team was underpaid relative to the men? Probably not directly, but it may have led you to quesiton whether the system of rewards was unfair or sexist.
There is not a large proportion of the population that doesn't have a gender idendity. thre isn't even a large proportion that isn't male or female. Stop making it sound like there are millions of people out there who need ther own categories.
Huh? You are making it sound as though people with non-binary gender identities all have vanishingly rare DSDs that make it hard to discern if they are male or female. This isn't the case. All the people with non-binary gender identities that I know and have heard of are people with normal sex development who are very clearly either male or female.
To the larger point: whilst I agree that pretty much everyone on earth is clearly male or female, and most of us are aware that we are male or female, I don't agree that most everyone has a gender identity.
Gender identity, according to Oxford and many other sources, is "an individual's sense of having a particular gender." But what "gender" means varies widely.
Some people grew up thinking the word gender means sex, male or female. This is particularly the case for people born in the US and some other predominantly Anglophone countries during the last 30 or so years, because it was in the 1990s that the word gender began to be widely used in English as an anodyne euphemism for sex.
But many other English-speakers who are older as well as people from other language traditions grew up regarding gender solely in the narrow classic linguistic sense - as a term used in grammar that denotes masculinity or femininity.
"Gender identity" as a concept and term were first invented in the 1960s by American sexologists Robert Stoller and John Money - and Money especially popularized the term in the introductory psychology college textbooks he co-authored in the 1970s.
Stoller and Money initially came up with the the concept and term gender identity to describe the psychological states of adults they treated and studied who desperately wished they were the opposite sex. The adults Stoller and Money based their theories on used to be known in scientific literature and everyday parlance as transvestites, fetishistic transvestites, cross-dressers and transsexuals. Now all the distinctions between those groups have been collapsed and they are all regarded as simply trans or transgender.
But neither Stoller nor Money, nor any of the people who helped popularize the idea of gender identity in their wake had studied child and adolescent development or had expertise in how humans develop a sense of self.
The term gender identity as it's commonly used today means something very different to a person's awareness of his/her own biological sex. Gender identity in today's parlance is usually used to describe the extent to which a person has, or doesn't have, an affinity for the sex stereotypes and sex stereotyped roles traditionally associated with their own sex or the opposite sex.
Many people bridle at the idea that everyone must have a gender identity because whilst we are certainly aware that we are either male or female, we do not base our sense of self on sexist sex stereotypes and sex roles.
Many women especially bridle at the view that everyone has a gender identity in the way the term is commonly used today because in classic feminist theory, gender is a hierarchal value system created by men to establish and maintain male dominance and female subjugation.
This is just you being a nutjob. Threre are many different characteristics within one gender. Whether a girl prefers ballet or football or Barbies or skirts or pants or ponytails or short hair doesn't make not a girl. Trying to equate the stereotype to a gender, and therefore nullifying the gender because one doesn't fit the stereotype, is just reaching for an excuse to pretend there are more people in the gender-fluid category than there actually are.
I don't have a "gender identity." I respect other people's right to claim a gender identity like other people's right to claim a religion, but I don't participate in the ideology.
Yes, they are. The number one reader recommended comment on the article:
“Nonbinary runners have been here this whole time,” Harris said. “We’ve been forced to run in categories that don’t match our gender identities, and now we’re seeing a shift in sports to actually recognize us.” Yes, you've been here the whole time, but if you're a male-bodied non-binary person, you've got a physical advantage beating the female non-binary bodies, so not sure how proud you can feel racing against them. Non-binary is a state of mind, not a sex class. Males do not belong in women and girls' athletic competitions. We separate sports by sex class, not subjective identities about the self.
The number two reader recommended comment: I struggle with how the NYT is normalizing the language of the trans ideology. This language has been created to erase women. Non-binary, "cis", etc are the building blocks being used to wall off a conversation about a woman's right to exist without another man showing up to claim her place in the world. Men have their categories, so let women have ours. I don't feel like a woman, I am one, whether I like it or not. I have not agreed to have a man take my place just because of a feeling.
The rest of the comments follow suit, with very few defending the concept of a non-binary prize in a race and those that defend it receiving few “recommends”.
Note that in order to comment on a NYT article, you need to be a subscriber. So the population of commenters skews to the left. The comments and their distribution are actually not that dissimilar from what is posted on LetsRun (except on average a little more tactful than some that make it here). Someone even referenced Kenyans showing up to win all the prizes in the category.
The point is that if NYT readers are this much against it, then it really is a small group of people pushing this. Let this be a sign of encouragement for race directors of all stripes to come up with something better. The ideas are out there (eg, having an open division and a restricted division for biological females), they just need to be put into practice to drive out the bad ideas.
Also, the NYT has been relentless about printing articles about various transgender "issues." The comments due tend to oppose whatever absurd transgender issue NYT is trying to push, usually by a wide margin. But NYT and the far left is persistent. I suspect they'll keep going until they get their way. It's only a matter of time.
Not if everyone who objects simply unsubscribed from NYT, Twitter, Facebook, and every other platform and publication pushing this BS. Then these hack ‘journalists’ and ‘activists’ will just be pissing in the wind / jerking off their own tiny cohort. If a platform wants to push some kind of harmful agenda (something clearly disliked by even its own readers) then why are people sticking around? If the NYRR is promoting this (and paying people to engage in it), then why participate in their event? I’m not in contention for prize money these days and can easily run 26.2 on any weekend without paying some garbage organization to make it seem like a big deal. Hard to stop your tax money from going to subsidize corn production and kill people halfway around the world, but easy to totally unsubscribe from corporate media and ‘woke’ organizations. If LetsRun started pushing this stuff I’d be gone pretty quickly.
I don't have a "gender identity." I respect other people's right to claim a gender identity like other people's right to claim a religion, but I don't participate in the ideology.
I AM female.
This is like saying I don't have religion because I am an atheist. But atheism IS a religion, beause one has to BELIEVE that God does not exist. (The absence of God cannot be proved.)
Even agnosticism is a religion if one actively believes in agnosticism.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.