Lenny Leonard wrote:
I think calling a transwoman a “biological male” is both petty and incorrect. You’re basing your stance on this on a faulty premise.
I'm not doing it to be a prick. i'm doing it to diffrerentiate between someone who identifies as a woman, and someone who was physiologically female at birth.
The premise isn't faulty. The basis of athletic competitions has always been physiological. In boxing there ae diffeent weight classes because thereare advantages at each weight. Same as rowing. In equestrian sports, it isn't necessary to separate the athletes, because physiology doesn't infer an advantage. There are other sports where it doesn't matter as well - watching Jeanette Lee kick men's asses at pool was awesome. Not every sport requires division, but most do.
In most sports, there's an inherent advantage to being male. Regardless of how you identify, being physiologically - or biologically - male, is an advatage. Since we're talking about those athletes competing in athletic events against comprtitors wihout those advantages, it's nether petty, nor incorrect. Awkward, maybe, but also necessary.