Western States transgender policy seems to be a good one

Non-assignee wrote:

... You can call that biological sex or sex assigned at birth or whatever, but you can't call that gender.

Actually, sex is usually determined these days by the doctor (much) BEFORE birth. ...

Indeed, why do you think sex-selective abortion is so common in various places in the world?

broken arrow wrote:

You are either a male or female at birth, regardless of what crazy plastic surgery or hormonal therapy you have had.

Yes, that is the case, and should be the end of the issue.

It is not that difficult to account for borderline cases, for example with chromosome testing.

Here’s a little history for you high school biology xx and xy theorists.

The IOC used to test women athletes for XY. They stopped because many cisgender women have XY but also have androgen insensitivity or other conditions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1992/01/06/tests-on-athletes-cant-always-find-line-between-males-and-females/cdfa352c-10a4-46d1-a22e-1e356e4c2d30/?utm_term=.43bee42173cd

death of female sports wrote:

Not surprising the male benevolent dictators would take this approach. This is not right for the female athletes, it isn't unlike competing against someone who had the advantages of doping etc. There are skeletal differences that are not changed by hormones. I believe you should have XY chromosomes to compete as a female. This is totally wrong for female athletics!!

Exactly. I absolutely agree with this.

So IOW, Western States doesn't have a non-binary category?

How can California tolerate this?

Y group and No Y group wrote:

Much simpler approach - two groups based on chromosomes:

1. The "Y" group (if you have a Y you're in this group)

2. The "No Y" group (everyone else)

Right. Plus any in the Y group who have typically male advantageous traits, not normal for women, would go in the open division.

Here’s a little history for you high school biology xx and xy theorists.

The IOC used to test women athletes for XY. They stopped because many cisgender women have XY but also have androgen insensitivity or other conditions

Indeed, I'd have to say this is historically when the train went off the rails.

But Patino has sold her sobstory well the next 3+ decades, and look where we are now.

Having sports (IOC) return to the Barr Body test would make complete sense, a clear of a redline criterion as possible, but unfortunately too many people want to fudge "exceptions" like androgen insenstivity, and they've won the day (creating an army of "gender theorist" positions in their wake).

How hard is to simply say: no offense to them, but XY-women can't compete in the female division?

dunes runner wrote:

death of female sports wrote:

... I believe you should have XY chromosomes to compete as a female. This is totally wrong for female athletics!!

Exactly. I absolutely agree with this.

Except for the confusing of XY with XX...

dunes runner wrote:

Y group and No Y group wrote:

Much simpler approach - two groups based on chromosomes:

1. The "Y" group (if you have a Y you're in this group)

2. The "No Y" group (everyone else)

Correction, plus any in the non Y group who have typically male advantageous traits, not normal for XX women, would go in the open division.

Only ZW's in the female-avian division pls wrote:

Except for the confusing of XY with XX...

Typo... sorry. : )

Moo Goo wrote:

Another layer of protection is if it has a penis, it cannot enter as a female. That alone will white out 80% of the fakers.

Yep, that's what stopped the Russians.

These screening processes did influence participation in female events, however. The Press sisters of the Soviet Union, Irina and Tamara, had combined to win ten medals at Olympic and European Championships between 1960 and 1966. However, the introduction of compulsory physical screening saw their immediate retirement from all athletic competition, amid widespread allegations that they were men masquerading as women.

Sadly, many of the current arguments conveniently forget that already in 1932 Olympics there were complaints about men pretending as women. They would "trust" but not "verify".

Chromosomally speaking wrote:

Here’s a little history for you high school biology xx and xy theorists.

The IOC used to test women athletes for XY. ...

... Having sports (IOC) return to the Barr Body test would make complete sense, a clear of a redline criterion as possible, but unfortunately too many people want to fudge "exceptions" like androgen insenstivity, and they've won the day (creating an army of "gender theorist" positions in their wake).

How hard is to simply say: no offense to them, but XY-women can't compete in the female division?

The first Olympic athlete to be disqualified using these new molecular techniques was a Polish sprinter, Ewa Kłobukowska. A multiple Olympic medal winner in 1964, and a world record holder in the women’s 100 m in 1965, she was banned from competing in professional sports after failing the early molecular tests, although her chromosomal anomaly was never revealed.

So how would the "Western States" model work here?

Genetics > Hormones wrote:

Here’s a little history for you high school biology xx and xy theorists.

The IOC used to test women athletes for XY. ...

... Having sports (IOC) return to the Barr Body test would make complete sense, a clear of a redline criterion as possible, but unfortunately too many people want to fudge "exceptions" like androgen insenstivity, and they've won the day (creating an army of "gender theorist" positions in their wake).

Maybe not the Barr body, but (say) polymerase chain reaction for the Y-linked SRY gene, as used by IOC in Albertville 1992.

There were a bunch (8?) of exceptions given both there and at Atlanta 1996.

CA Democrats divide Gender into "Self-identified Female" and "Other than Self-Identified Female",

why can't Western States do the same?

(In keeping with CDP Policy, Gender shall mean one being either “self-identified female” or “other than self-identified female.”

https://tableau.the-pdi.com/t/CampaignTools/views/AssemblyDemocratsSearchable/AllCandidates

Either, or wrote:

CA Democrats divide Gender into "Self-identified Female" and "Other than Self-Identified Female",

What you said makes no sense.

Either, or wrote:

CA Democrats divide Gender into "Self-identified Female" and "Other than Self-Identified Female",

why can't Western States do the same?

(In keeping with CDP Policy, Gender shall mean one being either “self-identified female” or “other than self-identified female.”

https://tableau.the-pdi.com/t/CampaignTools/views/AssemblyDemocratsSearchable/AllCandidates

That's interesting. So there is no male gender anymore. Just "female" and "other". And anyone is completely free to choose which they are. Life is like a videogame now.

Don’t men have straighter hips, usually taller, more muscle mass, lower body fat, larger hearts, greater blood volume than biological women? Does taking hormones really change these advantages?

Honest questions. wrote:

Don’t men have straighter hips, usually taller, more muscle mass, lower body fat, larger hearts, greater blood volume than biological women? Does taking hormones really change these advantages?

Hormones remove all advantages, it is 100% scientific fact.

You clearly are unfamiliar with elite track. The issue of elite level intersex competitor(s) in the 800m is an extremely well-known one, and we're not just talking elite level, we're talking world-dominating level.

So... you are unaware that the issue has risen to the level of world championships and Olympic championships. Well, it is okay to be ignorant; we are all ignorant at first, and often. But it is better to educate yourself when you discover your ignorance, especially when it contradicts blanket assertions you are using as an excuse for throwing insults and ad hominem attack against opinions you disike.