Nothing to see here: Kiwi weight lifter is Olympic bound and may win medal at age 43 after transitioning to women's competition

That's Armstronglivs.

Crazy.

The medal will be worth about the same as one obtained by cutting a course.

Again I ask how we got to the point of "gender identified as", rather than "biological sex" being the determinant of which category you compete in?

Very good. It shows how ridiculous equality of outcome is.

I'm as open minded, liberal, and pro-equality as you can get. I know a trans person, I think they should have the right to a happy and judgement free life.

Cant imagine being born feeling like I was the wrong gender. It must be so hard and terrible and confusing and painful at times along the way.

But this is different, and I only think serious athletes get it. It's not fair to the biological women who train their whole lives to reach the highest level. It sucks and it must suck for any Male who transitions to female because in their heart that's who they are, but they have an unfair advantage just like anyone using PEDs.

Hope she has a great rest of her life being herself. But she shouldn't be allowed to compete as a woman. =/

Why not? The womens category was just arbitrarily done to give this sub division of people the same prices as the best humans in the world even though they are much worse. I dont see in what world a human who runs 100m in 11s should get the same price as another who does it in 10s. Trans people perfectly show how stupid this equity concept is

zvdxa32 wrote:

Crazy.

The medal will be worth about the same as one obtained by cutting a course.

Again I ask how we got to the point of "gender identified as", rather than "biological sex" being the determinant of which category you compete in?

Here's the answer to your question:

It hasn't been litigated since then.

The Olympics are just a circus.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

zvdxa32 wrote:

Crazy.

The medal will be worth about the same as one obtained by cutting a course.

Again I ask how we got to the point of "gender identified as", rather than "biological sex" being the determinant of which category you compete in?

Here's the answer to your question:

https://www.leagle.com/decision/197780693misc2d7131654

It hasn't been litigated since then.

And its amazing it has not been.

Per wikipedia, Richards later had a different opinion even

Richards has since expressed ambivalence about her legacy, and came to believe her past as a man provided her with advantages over her competitors, saying "Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I'd had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I've reconsidered my opinion."[22][23]

Come back at this again once you've worked out how to compete as an athlete and carry the equipment necessary to sustain a baby for 9 months.

"Oh but Michael Phelps has very long arms" I hear the cry of the under-achiever say. Not 7 x longer than his next nearest competitor though, does he?

The only way we will ever get any rules about who can compete as a female will be having a bunch of transwomen walk away with the competition.

I am not anti-trans. I believe they should be free to live their lives as they see fit, use the restroom as they see fit, identify as the gender they feel, and anyone discriminating against them normal life should be held accountable.

I do, however, feel in the narrow field of athletics it is an unfair advantage and they should not be able to compete.

perennial Oz snoozer wrote:

The Olympics are just a circus.

I'm so upset, I don't even want to watch Kipchoge and Bekele go at it.

Brad Avenue Runner wrote:

Come back at this again once you've worked out how to compete as an athlete and carry the equipment necessary to sustain a baby for 9 months.

"Oh but Michael Phelps has very long arms" I hear the cry of the under-achiever say. Not 7 x longer than his next nearest competitor though, does he?

I think the original poster was being sarcastic, that is to say that if we don’t recognize the fallacy of ignoring biological sex and allowing transgender women to compete against females, we might as well not even have separate categories.

Gender identity is not the reason for the separate categories. Having the “equipment necessary to sustain a baby for 9 months” captures the real reason a bit better.

jujfueyyy wrote:

The only way we will ever get any rules about who can compete as a female will be having a bunch of transwomen walk away with the competition.

I am not anti-trans. I believe they should be free to live their lives as they see fit, use the restroom as they see fit, identify as the gender they feel, and anyone discriminating against them normal life should be held accountable.

I do, however, feel in the narrow field of athletics it is an unfair advantage and they should not be able to compete.

Is she a better lifter now than she was as a male? A quick Google has the winner at the WC up at 330kg which is a lot more than 285. I would postulate that the main reason she made olympic team is because of total lack of depth in female lifting.

Another world-gone-crazy thread to draw out the crazy Democrats to air their wokehood.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Another world-gone-crazy thread to draw out the crazy Democrats to air their wokehood.

So you don't know but just jump to conclusions because it matches your world view? How good should a male junior record holder be as a tranwoman a couple decades later?

I’m not “woke” by any stretch, but this doesn’t bother me. She’s a lady, have her compete against the ladies.

Hey Rednecks, just ignore them if you don't like them. They are only a very, very small percentage of humans. Do you like being judged??

Lenny Leonard wrote:

I’m not “woke” by any stretch, but this doesn’t bother me. She’s a lady, have her compete against the ladies.

1000% Lady.

Who are we to judge? It's not like ours sport hasn't already had podium(s) swept by Y-bearing humans, to a chorus of "So Brave!"