Friendly reminder. Please keep posts in all threads on topic. Two posters went off about gun violence in cities. All of those posts have been deleted. This is a post about the unfortunate case in MA where yet another biological male is winning HS girls state titles. #sexnotgender
This, however, is nonsensical. To believe this you have to believe that, if only society had been more gender-equal when sports were really beginning to get organized in the modern sense in the late 19th to early 20th centuries, that the effect would be almost no women in sports today, because they would have just thrown open every league to all participants regardless of gender, the result being almost no women could make the cut.
"We created a second category because the best people at sports were all biologically male"
No, that isn't what happened! Sports organizations didn't want women in sports so separate women's associations were founded.
You can't revise history to fit your argument.
But if you’re correct, they would have implemented mixed-gender leagues after the gender equality fights of the 70s. You’re asking people to believe that people circa 1900 had no idea that men were stronger, faster, etc than women, they were just randomly prejudiced against women or against them playing sports at the very least, and that we only discovered the gaps in athletic ability more recently. Don’t be daft. If it was all just evil misogyny, why perpetuate that misogyny by maintaining separate categories today?
To the extent that men may have been against the idea of women’s sports, the known and obvious ability gap would have been part of their “reasoning.” It’s not that you’re per se wrong about men not liking the idea of woman athletes back in the day, but you ARE wrong about why separate gender categories were considered essential. Women were allowed into the Olympics starting in the second games (1900) and they were already in separate categories from the men. That wasn’t because of misogyny, that was just sensible given known gaps in ability. It was sensible then and it’s sensible now.
Elaine and Shelley-Ann are also rans, though. Track is one of the sports where we equate men's and women's champions, but it's kinda weird that we do. Do you think Chelsea Gray is as much of a champion as Steph Curry? One is WNBA Finals MVP, the other is the NBA Finals MVP. You'd be telling a pretty tall tale to act like you view both of those players in the same light.
Anyone who is not competing for the top male championship is an also-ran. In a road race of 10,000 people, outside of the top-10 overall, you have 1000s of men and women who are all in the same position, running hard with no chance of winning. As long as they have a chance to cross the start and finish lines, then the sport is accomplishing what I believe is the goal: opportunity to compete. But if there is no impact on the overall finish, then what difference does it make if a runner is a man or a woman?
Ask yourself this: If a woman transitioned to a man and then ran 1:52 for 800m, would you consider them the "woman-born" World Record holder? If you truly believe that birth gender is the only thing that matters, then you would have to say. I would say "no" because that runner would then be a man, and a man can't have the women's WR.
Nice try on that last part. The woman wouldn’t be eligible because the testosterone she took to “become” “male” is an illegal performance enhancer, as to sports (not as to her transition in other aspects of life obviously).
As someone else said, you’re not a good debater. You have repeatedly posted thinking you’re catching the other side in some clever logical trap but as the kids would say, your arguments “ain’t it.” If anything, it looks like you’re the one stuck defending absurdities that arise naturally from your starting position on this issue, not your opponents.
One girl could not reach the final because of this nonbinary athlete.
Another girl did not qualify for "Meet of Champions" (the meet where schools from all divisions compete together).
So that's where the unfairness is.
A poster back on page one quite literally predicted people would make the claim Femboi did. But it’s worth it to push the counterargument all the way to the truth: in sex-segregated sports, it is ALWAYS unfair to let boys compete in the girls events. You rightly point out the knock-on effects of letting the boy compete even though he didn’t take the top spot. That can be helpfully rhetorically but it should even be necessary, it is unfair to let a boy into the girls event even if he came in last.
I don't think they want to compete in an "open" division though, the problem is that these boys are hell-bent on competing as females. They want the attention and want to displace the girls in the competition. Seems like a sick joke, actually.
Nice try on that last part. The woman wouldn’t be eligible because the testosterone she took to “become” “male” is an illegal performance enhancer, as to sports (not as to her transition in other aspects of life obviously).
As someone else said, you’re not a good debater. You have repeatedly posted thinking you’re catching the other side in some clever logical trap but as the kids would say, your arguments “ain’t it.” If anything, it looks like you’re the one stuck defending absurdities that arise naturally from your starting position on this issue, not your opponents.
Is it in debate class that they teach you that saying “your arguments ain’t it” is a counter argument? That could really save me some time in the future if so.
I’m not defending absurdities. I am saying that getting upset about a transgender athlete running a race is an overreaction regardless of the level. If you’re weeping for the girl that finishes one spot lower, get over it. If you’re upset that someone might not win a women’s medal because of it, get over it. It is not as dire a situation as you make it out to be.
Girls got to take a stand, I can't do it for them. Refuse to race. Line up and walk off the track after the gun. That happens just a few times, and things will change.
A Vermont girls' high school that withdrew from a tournament last month after refusing to play against a team that had a transgender player is no longer able to participate in future Vermont Principals' Association activities...
I agree with your take on postmodernism, but your argument that the only solution is to return to traditional gender roles is not compelling. I believe it is possible to fight against postmodern transhumanism without a return to tradition; in fact, it's impossible to turn back time, culturally or otherwise.
I do think we have to acknowledge sex differences and create a social system that supports the sometimes different talents of men and women (average differences) while maximizing personal freedom.
Those feminists who argued that women could only be free once they were liberated from childbearing and rearing were wrong. This will lead to the annihilation of women. This is what "trans" is currently doing. The capacity to bear children and rear children is the source of female power, whether women choose to have children or not. This capacity is economically devalued in a liberal system (this is a tricky problem to solve), even while poor women's bodies are commodified by the rich for this very capacity (surrogacy, egg donation, nannys).
You’ve contradicted yourself. To acknowledge sex differences by definition limits “personal freedoms” instead of maximizing them. Why stop at limiting people from chopping off their genitals if that’s what they want to do? By your definition of goal the of politics to maximizing “personal freedom” that should be allowed. That is why this false notion of freedom is a false idol and must be stopped. Why shouldn’t allow people do anything they want and in fact must restrict them if we are to have a society and laws at all. What we need is to get back to society that properly understands “freedom” not as the ability to be licentious and do whatever you want, but as the ability to pursue the good. That is what West was built on from the ancient Greeks until the last few hundred years and that’s why it’s falling apart now
No, recognition of sex differences doesn't contradict personal freedom as a social principle, and I never said that people should be free to do whatever they want. I'm advocating for basic liberal principles while understanding that different people have different temperaments and talents, and different conceptions of a good life.
It's unfair. I would be ashamed to do this and it should not be allowed. Boys are boys and girls are girls. Anyone with the real title to an exception is 1 in a 1000, and most of those cases can join the boys (open) category for fair competition.
If they don't meet the guidelines, they can be allowed to compete in women's sports but should be scored separately. In the case of the hurdler mentioned above, that person would get fourth place and the person in fifth place would get scored as fourth place. Easy to figure out and easy to understand.
Is this a joke? Your solution is to have a runner in the race and then in the results have two 4th places? And the 10th place runner is now the 9th place runner? And one of the 4th place runners does not factor into team scoring?
Do they announce it before each race so that the runners and spectators know?
"Attention fans, in this race, the runners in lane 4 and 6 will not count in the scoring, but we will still record their place so that they can say they earned a placing in the race, but really they are in a separate race taking place concurrently with the scored race that you are about to witness. Easy to figure out. Easy to understand. Runners to your marks! Set!"
Yes, we do it all the time with age categories, paralympics categories and wheelchair racers. Everyone gets it. Just announce that the one competitor is in a separate category. Why is it you can’t understand it when it comes to trans athletes?
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
I don't think they want to compete in an "open" division though, the problem is that these boys are hell-bent on competing as females. They want the attention and want to displace the girls in the competition. Seems like a sick joke, actually.
How do you gain such insights into the motivations of people you don’t know? Or are you just hell-bent on smearing trans people?
Girls got to take a stand, I can't do it for them. Refuse to race. Line up and walk off the track after the gun. That happens just a few times, and things will change.
Besides, if I were one of the three girls who beat the nonbinary hurdler in this race, I would not want to be told to boycott the race.
Yes it doesn't work. In Vermont a school refused to compete against a team with a transgender player and forfeited the game.
The result? The principals association basically kicked the school out of the conference permanently. Girls are being forced to choose between standing up for themselves or losing their opportunity to play at all.
You’ve contradicted yourself. To acknowledge sex differences by definition limits “personal freedoms” instead of maximizing them. Why stop at limiting people from chopping off their genitals if that’s what they want to do? By your definition of goal the of politics to maximizing “personal freedom” that should be allowed. That is why this false notion of freedom is a false idol and must be stopped. Why shouldn’t allow people do anything they want and in fact must restrict them if we are to have a society and laws at all. What we need is to get back to society that properly understands “freedom” not as the ability to be licentious and do whatever you want, but as the ability to pursue the good. That is what West was built on from the ancient Greeks until the last few hundred years and that’s why it’s falling apart now
No, recognition of sex differences doesn't contradict personal freedom as a social principle, and I never said that people should be free to do whatever they want. I'm advocating for basic liberal principles while understanding that different people have different temperaments and talents, and different conceptions of a good life.
Recognition of sexual differences restricts person freedom though. Acknowledging reality and telling people they have to conform to it restricts them. As for not saying people should be able to do what they want, you sure implied it and unless you have a vision of the good and virtue that is good no matter what people think.
"We created a second category because the best people at sports were all biologically male"
No, that isn't what happened! Sports organizations didn't want women in sports so separate women's associations were founded.
You can't revise history to fit your argument.
But if you’re correct, they would have implemented mixed-gender leagues after the gender equality fights of the 70s. You’re asking people to believe that people circa 1900 had no idea that men were stronger, faster, etc than women, they were just randomly prejudiced against women or against them playing sports at the very least, and that we only discovered the gaps in athletic ability more recently. Don’t be daft. If it was all just evil misogyny, why perpetuate that misogyny by maintaining separate categories today?
To the extent that men may have been against the idea of women’s sports, the known and obvious ability gap would have been part of their “reasoning.” It’s not that you’re per se wrong about men not liking the idea of woman athletes back in the day, but you ARE wrong about why separate gender categories were considered essential. Women were allowed into the Olympics starting in the second games (1900) and they were already in separate categories from the men. That wasn’t because of misogyny, that was just sensible given known gaps in ability. It was sensible then and it’s sensible now.
I think you're reading too much into this. Women's sports did not come into existence because they were getting beaten all the time by men, they were founded because the sports organizations did not think they should do sports at all.
Women's sports organizations had to start their own competitions and were often subject to hostile action by the men's organizations. Women's soccer in England was severely hampered because until the 1970s the men's association banned members from allowing women's teams to use their pitches.
If you don't want transgender participation in women's sports, use other arguments. The birth of women's sports should not be retrospectively changed or whitewashed to fit a modern day argument, that is all.
Girls got to take a stand, I can't do it for them. Refuse to race. Line up and walk off the track after the gun. That happens just a few times, and things will change.
Besides, if I were one of the three girls who beat the nonbinary hurdler in this race, I would not want to be told to boycott the race.
This will only work if a large majority of girls teams refuse to participate. They can ban one school; they won't ban over half the schools in the state. It will need to be something in the public eye, too. Just reading about it online doesn't do anything. People read it, think "That is unfair," and then go onto the next article. Thirty minutes later they will barely even remember reading it. Perfect situation would be the NCAA championships. Gun goes off, all the competitors (except the trans one) remail at their blocks and demand a second race. Pull a Jon Drummond and just lay down on the track and refuse to leave until a second race is run. The meet is in a no-win situation. Either they cave to the athletes or they try to have security remove them. Imagine security grabbing women and trying to drag them off the track. Not a good image for the meet. Something like that would make serious media headlines and the video would be all over youtube.
Perfect situation would be the NCAA championships. Gun goes off, all the competitors (except the trans one) remail at their blocks and demand a second race. Pull a Jon Drummond and just lay down on the track and refuse to leave until a second race is run. The meet is in a no-win situation. Either they cave to the athletes or they try to have security remove them. Imagine security grabbing women and trying to drag them off the track. Not a good image for the meet. Something like that would make serious media headlines and the video would be all over youtube.
Part of the reason it does not get through is a media blackout on covering a lot of these issues when they come up.
But, with regards to students taking a big stand, it's not practical. That is a fantasy. The adults need to solve it and not the young HS students or student- athletes. Athletes can also be kicked out of NCAAs for being un sportsmanlike and all this stuff, they could lose scholarships. The leaders in power at the governing sports bodies, NCAA and local level need to step in and protect women's sports.
Friendly reminder. Please keep posts in all threads on topic. Two posters went off about gun violence in cities. All of those posts have been deleted. This is a post about the unfortunate case in MA where yet another biological male is winning HS girls state titles. #sexnotgender
Real Runners, Real Reviews
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.
