Non-Binary Time Qualification Standards - Is this the future of Boston?

There will be a lot more nonbinaries entrants than there are nonbinary in the race for sure. I know hobby joggers who are obsessed with running Boston, or more qualifying for Boston. These people run 40 miles a week, maybe bumping up to 60 when they put in a couple months of long runs before heading to Steamtown, St George, or another downhill race. Ok, some of them qualify from fair flat races, but you get my point. They spend tons of money to have all the latest and greatest gear and gadgets instead of just training more. Not all of them will use the nonbinary option, but some will. The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Kvothe wrote:

The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Whatever...isn't this what people have been advocating for? It will help elite women's sports if all the non-binary people aren't in there grabbing medals. What's the other solution...just let them run as women? Ban all non-binary completely? Don't see a more viable option.

Kvothe wrote:

The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Already happened. The Philadelphia Distance Run gave equal money ($3,000 for first) to all three categories.

I don't get why we continue to ignore the obvious answer here of dropping the men's divisions in these types of things. 2 divisions: Women's and Open. There done.

This is great

We already have masters and wheelchair categories at WC

Hopefully, they will add a few non binary events

johnny walker blue wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Whatever...isn't this what people have been advocating for? It will help elite women's sports if all the non-binary people aren't in there grabbing medals. What's the other solution...just let them run as women? Ban all non-binary completely? Don't see a more viable option.

What’s the solution? To have 2 divisions based on actual gender - Men and Women. Maybe go back to following actual science and biology? Non-binary is not a gender, or whatever other crap you want to call it. It is a mental disorder. That person is free to run based on their true gender, not this make believe “gender identity” garbage.

No, solution is two divisions. Women's and Open.

middle ground wrote:

No, solution is two divisions. Women's and Open.

but what constitutes entrance into the "women's division"?

That's still subject to some of the same issues as today, but seems to me that it is easier to tighten down on that when you are merely trying to create a women's division that is a subset of the total rather than split people into one of two genders. I'd also be sure to explain that the women's division is completely optional. Any woman would be free to compete in the open if they want. In a small local marathon maybe a top women would rather place 8th in the open than win the women's division by 11 minutes.

You don't realize that you are talking in circles. You say a woman can compete in the open. But what is a woman?

I'm not talking in circles, I'm just trying to get away from the men's and women's paradigm. There is no need for a men's division. It just adds unnecessary noise to the discussion. I don't know the answer on who should be allowed to be in the women's division if they choose to participate there. That is above my pay grade.

Old and really slow wrote:

johnny walker blue wrote:

Whatever...isn't this what people have been advocating for? It will help elite women's sports if all the non-binary people aren't in there grabbing medals. What's the other solution...just let them run as women? Ban all non-binary completely? Don't see a more viable option.

What’s the solution? To have 2 divisions based on actual gender - Men and Women. Maybe go back to following actual science and biology? Non-binary is not a gender, or whatever other crap you want to call it. It is a mental disorder. That person is free to run based on their true gender, not this make believe “gender identity” garbage.

+1. There are only two genders.

johnny walker blue wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Whatever...isn't this what people have been advocating for? It will help elite women's sports if all the non-binary people aren't in there grabbing medals. What's the other solution...just let them run as women? Ban all non-binary completely? Don't see a more viable option.

Exactly. Go onto a thread about trans or intersex athletes and it's full of posters saying they should be pushed out of the women's division and create their own category. Now there's another category and they don't like it.

Jock Semple would be proud wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Already happened. The Philadelphia Distance Run gave equal money ($3,000 for first) to all three categories.

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=10864422

I wonder if there will be PED testing in this "nonbinary" division.

johnny walker blue wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

The real problem will be when it invades elite sport - seperate nonbinary prize purses, non binary races at meets, etc.

Whatever...isn't this what people have been advocating for? It will help elite women's sports if all the non-binary people aren't in there grabbing medals. What's the other solution...just let them run as women? Ban all non-binary completely? Don't see a more viable option.

Non Binary should Compete under The Sex of What The Delivery Doctor said either Immediately after the Baby is Born or when looking at the Sonogram before the Baby is born, Usually Doctors in the field are extremely good at telling what a Baby is (As are almost ALL people since Adam and Eve) They have lots of experience, How many people do you know that said the Doctor looking at the Sonogram and/or When the Baby is Delivered and the Doctor says is is a boy does it urn out to be a girl or vice versa is the Doctor Wrong? Answer is NEVER.

Example Nicki Hiitz would compete as a Women, Which she does so no one should have a problem with that.

Old and really slow wrote:

johnny walker blue wrote:

Whatever...isn't this what people have been advocating for? It will help elite women's sports if all the non-binary people aren't in there grabbing medals. What's the other solution...just let them run as women? Ban all non-binary completely? Don't see a more viable option.

What’s the solution? To have 2 divisions based on actual gender - Men and Women. Maybe go back to following actual science and biology? Non-binary is not a gender, or whatever other crap you want to call it. It is a mental disorder. That person is free to run based on their true gender, not this make believe “gender identity” garbage.

Agree 100%

Tatar... wrote:

Exactly. Go onto a thread about trans or intersex athletes and it's full of posters saying they should be pushed out of the women's division and create their own category. Now there's another category and they don't like it.

Most people do not think they should be competing in their own category. Those who are physically females (like Nikki Hiltz) should compete in the female category. Those that are physically male should compete in the male category. Regardless of what someone "thinks" they are in their brain, the BODY is still the same. If someone has a penis and testicles but believes he is a female in his brain, it doesn't change the fact that his body is a male. Athletic competition is dependent upon physical ability and males are inherently better across the board.

Look at this weekend's NCAA Champs results. The women ran all-out for 6K while the men ran 10K. But if you look at the 6K splits for the men, 251 of 252 men were faster at 6K than the women's winning time, and they were just cruising knowing they had another 2.5 miles to go. Even the last place finisher in the men's race could smoke the female winner with ease in a 6K. Hundreds of high school boys could smoke the women's winner. Would you be OK with one of the men declaring himself "non-binary" and then crushing Whittni Orton for the women's title? What if Conner Mantz did this; he was over two minutes faster at 6K than Orton? The guy from Syracuse who finished last could be "NCAA Champion" with ease next year.

Another poster probably gave the best solution. Two categories, Open and Female. If you are physically a female, you can compete as a female. Otherwise, you compete in the Open category. If a female wants to enter the Open and get destroyed, that is her choice. But men should not be in the female category, regardless of what a person "thinks' he is.

Why bother with gender at all? since there can, apparently, be an infinite number of genders, just have one open division, combine the money that was paid out to 2 separate genders, and be done with it. Isn't that fair to all?