Somehow I thought this thread was going to be about the wardrobe choice of one of the more well -known ultra runners at Javalina 100. He is older and not competitive now, but he was running in an outfit that seemed inappropriate for any gender. I must be getting older and more conservative, because I used to love booty shorts and usually don't care what people choose to wear or not wear, but after seeing the photos of this gentlemans completed exposed rear end, I feel like every runner, be they male, female, or non-binary, should probably have at least a little bit of coverage of their bum cheeks. This old man was running in just a thong with only a thin string between his rear cheeks. Somehow it seemed much worse in the photos than if he'd just been running naked. Imagine if you were passing them or behind them during a race - and this was a loop course. Booty shorts ok. Speedo type shorts ok. Dental floss in back - probably not ok in my book even for Halloween if kids or anyone else is forced to look.
" Javelina Jundred is an R-rated event (with some exceptions). We love the family-feel but that doesn’t mean it’s totally kid-friendly. There will be explicit music played at Jeadquarters and other aid stations, and possibly some risqué costumes (NOTE: frontal nudity/exposure is NOT permitted)*. The bottom line is this is an adult ultra-marathon party in the desert. *We have a best ass award… so expect some bare butts. You’ve been warned."
Ah, ok. Thanks for the clarification regarding Bob and his bare bum. I had seen a number of disturbing pictures on social media and had no realized that this was an r-rated event. I thought the best ass award was a joke but congratulations to him on his victory. Perhaps it would be better and we could resolve some of this confusion if everyone just ran naked with no vaporflys and certainly no 50mm On shoes. (Also, somehow the g-string seemed worse to me than running naked. Seems a bit silly that the race only goes half-ass in allowing nudity.)
I think race should just ask for you name when you sign up. Then have a box saying, "Do you want to compete in the protected xx category?" So we have two categories. Open and xx. No one can be offended as we aren't talking about man, woman, male, female, female bodied, etc.
This is the way it will eventually have to shake out. Race organizations are kind of in the awkward teenager years right now with this stuff. Some good ideas will get proposed, some debacles will happen, some people will game the system, etc. But this is the only way to not exclude anyone.
I suppose the only time a system like "Open and XX" gets murky is when an XX person wins the overall. But those procedures can be delineated beforehand.
I think the easiest answer to this is to put a whole new racing category.
You have men's division, women's division, and an overarching broad category LGBTQ+. That way, we keep men believing they are women out of the pure women's division. Records are kept safe from men.
I think the easiest answer to this is to put a whole new racing category.
You have men's division, women's division, and an overarching broad category LGBTQ+. That way, we keep men believing they are women out of the pure women's division. Records are kept safe from men.
And then have a bunch of men in skirts winning that division and claiming Golden Tickets, bumping out deserving lottery winners all because people got confused by an app.
I think race should just ask for you name when you sign up. Then have a box saying, "Do you want to compete in the protected xx category?" So we have two categories. Open and xx. No one can be offended as we aren't talking about man, woman, male, female, female bodied, etc.
This is the way it will eventually have to shake out. Race organizations are kind of in the awkward teenager years right now with this stuff. Some good ideas will get proposed, some debacles will happen, some people will game the system, etc. But this is the only way to not exclude anyone.
I suppose the only time a system like "Open and XX" gets murky is when an XX person wins the overall. But those procedures can be delineated beforehand.
When race organizations, US athletics organizations and other institutions like US schools and school districts had rules in place specifically barring female people from participating in road running events - and prohibiting us from having/being able to participate in school sports in many places in the US as well - none of the officials in charge seemed to have had any difficulty at all discerning who was female, speaking plainly about sex and human sex differences, and crafting policies which said that female people were to be excluded and unfairly discriminated against because of our sex.
After female people finally won the right to run in US road running events 50 years ago, the men at the helm of the AAU and individual race organizations in charge of events like the NY and Boston marathons had no problem figuring out and pointing out who the female runners were. Because if they hadn't been able to tell the sex of the female runners, then the men in charge of US race orgs wouldn't have been able to put in place rules which required female marathon runners to be corralled off apart from male runners at the start and made to begin races at an separate, earlier starting time - so that the women running wouldn't wouldn't get in the way of, take attention from, break the concentration of, slow down or otherwise be an issue for any the men.
When a women's division was added in road racing and other sports to allow persons of the previously excluded female sex to participate, finally, it was widely understood and agreed on that the women's division was meant for people whose sex is female. Not for people whose appearance, affect and self-concepts are "feminine." Which is why when buccal swab DNA sex testing first became possible in the mid-1960s, the IOC and IAAF made such testing mandatory for all athletes seeking eligibility to compete in elite international women's events.
Why are so many people today pretending that none of this well-documented and still pretty recent history ever happened?
Why are so many nowadays trying to make it seem as though longstanding establishment sports organizations with well-documented records of unfairly excluding and mistreating female people based on our sex over many, many decades have all of a sudden in 2022 been reborn as inexperienced, clueless, incompetent outfits run by nitwits so inept and unpracticed at distinguishing males from females - and so brand new to crafting rules of fair play - that "they are kind of in the awkward teenager years with this stuff"?
Your mixing up transgender and non-binary up. There is a difference, non-binary don't identify with male or female and transgender want to switch between the 2. Non-binary "women" don't want to identify as such but want the perks offered. The problem is if they start offering special perks to a non-binary in sports you will just have males dominating that category.
I was following the competitive Javelina Jundred 100-mile ultramarathon race yesterday, which is a Golden Ticket race (the Top Two Men and Top Two Women earn automatic entry into the Western States 100).
During the race coverage online, it was reported that females Heather Jackson, Devon Yanko, Nicole Bitter, Kaci Lickteig, and Kathryn Drew were racing fairly close together around miles 40-60. However, there was a non-binary category runner by the name of Riley Brady that was also very close to them. Leaderboard graphics for the top-10 women did not include Riley Brady during that time in the race.
At the finish line, Devon Yanko won as first female. However, Riley Brady finished 9 minutes later and was announced as the "first non-binary runner" on the race's Instagram story. However, a bit later in the official race results it now has Brady listed as the "second Female."
If it wasn't clear that Brady was competing in the women's race, that likely would have impacted how Nicole Bitter ran -- was she even aware that she was racing Brady?
Can gender change mid race? The race also had a non-binary division that one could sign up to compete in at registration; which category was Brady registered to compete in? Will Brady get the auto entry and golden ticket into Western States 100 now instead of Nicole Bitter?
I was following the competitive Javelina Jundred 100-mile ultramarathon race yesterday, which is a Golden Ticket race (the Top Two Men and Top Two Women earn automatic entry into the Western States 100).
During the race coverage online, it was reported that females Heather Jackson, Devon Yanko, Nicole Bitter, Kaci Lickteig, and Kathryn Drew were racing fairly close together around miles 40-60. However, there was a non-binary category runner by the name of Riley Brady that was also very close to them. Leaderboard graphics for the top-10 women did not include Riley Brady during that time in the race.
At the finish line, Devon Yanko won as first female. However, Riley Brady finished 9 minutes later and was announced as the "first non-binary runner" on the race's Instagram story. However, a bit later in the official race results it now has Brady listed as the "second Female."
If it wasn't clear that Brady was competing in the women's race, that likely would have impacted how Nicole Bitter ran -- was she even aware that she was racing Brady?
Can gender change mid race? The race also had a non-binary division that one could sign up to compete in at registration; which category was Brady registered to compete in? Will Brady get the auto entry and golden ticket into Western States 100 now instead of Nicole Bitter?
I'd say, in a 100 mile race and with a good surgeon, anything is possible.
This conversation loves to veer to whether there should/shouldn't be a non-binary division, or if there should be an open and women division, etc etc. Let's stay on topic!
Here's what we know:
- Javelina had a non-binary division.
- During the race, the livestream and live results did not indicate that Riley was in contention for the Women's Golden Ticket, even though she was in the non-binary category. The race has since apologized for this and admitted that this was an error.
- The race director was notified by Riley that they were racing for the Golden Ticket.
Open Questions:
- Were the elite women in contention for the Golden Ticket notified by the race that Riley was competing against them for a Golden Ticket?
- Is the burden on other elites to independently verify which race everyone is competing in?
- Is Zach Miller the most clueless person in the world?(if as "not complicated" suggests he is the only person who was unaware of this) or is he a sore loser?
I think the point is if Brady was in the "non-binary" category then They actually weren't in the "Womens" category. Non-binary could have an individual that is a biological Male or Female or Transgender, correct?. They chose what category to race and compete in and they won that category. But mainly, the live race results and race tracking updates were showing the Womens category rankings only despite Brady being in the mix. As the rules state: it is the top 2 Women that are eligible to win Golden Tickets to Western States. Bitter should get a Golden Ticket.
You've completely misunderstood the entire situation.
Golden Tickets go to qualifiers for Western States. Western States qualifications are determined by sex, not by however a race decided to sort them. There's no qualifier in the Golden Ticket eligibility for "category you entered your race in." It's by sex, and that's it.
The top 2 in each sex get Golden Tickets.
Brady was the 2nd female by sex in the race. Brady gets the Golden Ticket.
Now, as for the race:
However the leaderboard was defining people was immaterial, same as if it glitched and didn't show Devan Yanko's result. Nobody would be complaining she shouldn't get her GT because she wasn't on the scoreboard.
Everyone should have known who Riley was: 93% UltraSignup score, won 8 of 9 races, 6th at Bandera earlier this year, and the ONLY non-binary entrant in the race. If hubby couldn't figure out to sort his tracking by overall results, or ask the RD in advance what he implications were, that's a coaching error.
The irony here is, this is what people want. They don't want men to say "I'm a female" and be able to sign up in the women's division. They want it determined by their sex. That's what happened here. and people still can't figure out that it worked.
not just the leaderboard, but all the race coverage including social media feeds for aravaipa and the javelina did not mention riley in the top 3 females during any of the coverage and only retroactively did the mea culpa on "thems" status in the race.
i bet you cash money had they not been in the top 3 golden ticket results they would have gladly collected whatever schwag prize for the top non binary finisher that hoka was giving out. this was mismanaged by aravaipa and javelina on how the race was going down in regards to the female golden ticket spot.
It's been suggested in this thread that Zach Miller should have asked. I would have assumed that asking a non-binary athlete "are you really competing as a female?" would have been perceived as offensive and insulting to their identity. I wouldn't have asked.
It's been suggested in this thread that Zach Miller should have asked. I would have assumed that asking a non-binary athlete "are you really competing as a female?" would have been perceived as offensive and insulting to their identity. I wouldn't have asked.
It doesn't matter . He did ask. So it's a mute point.
Why are so many nowadays trying to make it seem as though longstanding establishment sports organizations with well-documented records of unfairly excluding and mistreating female people based on our sex over many, many decades have all of a sudden in 2022 been reborn as inexperienced, clueless, incompetent outfits run by nitwits so inept and unpracticed at distinguishing males from females - and so brand new to crafting rules of fair play - that "they are kind of in the awkward teenager years with this stuff"?
I think your rant is misdirected. You're talking about the history of sex discrimination, and the awkward teenager comment seems to be referring to accommodating gender issues. They are not the same thing.
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.