If the point is to give everyone a chance to compete fairly then breaking the sport into tiers based on ability makes sense and gender segregation would be unnecessary.
If the point is to make space for women to participate in sports, then excluding certain kinds of women because of some personal characteristic outside of their control would defeat the purpose. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
Of course it is. You can instantly tell the sex of 99% of people from a single glance. And it’s pretty simple to clear up that last 1% with a single brief exchange.
The women’s section is separate from the open section specifically so that women can get their place to compete without being dominated by men’s biological advantages over them. Micheal Phelps is competing in the open section, which is… Well… Open. Also please leave strawmanning to the conservatives.
If the argument is that unfair competition due to “biological advantages” should be reduced then I agree. Sports should be segregated by performance classes and open to all genders.
But if the point of segregating sports is to make space for women in sports, then excluding trans women is nothing more than discrimination on par with excluding black or disabled women. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
If the argument is that unfair competition due to “biological advantages” should be reduced then I agree. Sports should be segregated by performance classes and open to all genders.
That’s probably the ideal solution, but the problem is that nobody’s gonna watch anything except the top leagues. I mean watching the kinda good but not really amazing people’s football league just isn’t an appealing prospect, unless I misunderstood what you meant by performance classes. The whole point of this debate (other than conservatives shitting on trans women anyway) is that you need a framework where:
1-trans people can compete,
2-cis women aren’t unfairly disadvantaged and
3-that people would actually watch.
If we can only have two of those three then ditching the commerciality of it all would be my preference. Sports are actually worth watching when they aren’t just an excuse to extract profit from professional and collegiate athletes.
Realistically, we can’t have 3 in any case. Women’s sports gets a tiny fraction of the viewership as it is and I don’t see the inclusion or exclusion of trans women affecting those numbers much.
This is a really stupid argument. The thing that makes athletes special is their biology.
There’s a reason that DK Metcalf towers over all of the cornerbacks in the NFL. He’s a biological specimen that has incredible agility, height, muscle mass, and speed.
The women’s section is separate from the open section specifically so that women can get their place to compete without being dominated by men’s biological advantages over them. Micheal Phelps is competing in the open section, which is… Well… Open.
Removed by mod
So you’re saying that people like Michael Phelps should be excluded from competing in sports due to the famous athelete’s “biological advantages”?
Should Michael Phelps be allowed to compete against 13 year olds?
If they’re allowed to team up on him, sure. XD
So segregating competitors to some extent based on physical ability makes sense?
Depends on what the point is.
If the point is to give everyone a chance to compete fairly then breaking the sport into tiers based on ability makes sense and gender segregation would be unnecessary.
If the point is to make space for women to participate in sports, then excluding certain kinds of women because of some personal characteristic outside of their control would defeat the purpose. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
It’s not segregated by gender, it’s segregated by sex.
If genotype and hormone testing aren’t mandatory then it’s gender segregregated. Sex isn’t a property one can assume from outward appearances.
Of course it is. You can instantly tell the sex of 99% of people from a single glance. And it’s pretty simple to clear up that last 1% with a single brief exchange.
The women’s section is separate from the open section specifically so that women can get their place to compete without being dominated by men’s biological advantages over them. Micheal Phelps is competing in the open section, which is… Well… Open. Also please leave strawmanning to the conservatives.
You missed my point.
If the argument is that unfair competition due to “biological advantages” should be reduced then I agree. Sports should be segregated by performance classes and open to all genders.
But if the point of segregating sports is to make space for women in sports, then excluding trans women is nothing more than discrimination on par with excluding black or disabled women. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
That’s probably the ideal solution, but the problem is that nobody’s gonna watch anything except the top leagues. I mean watching the kinda good but not really amazing people’s football league just isn’t an appealing prospect, unless I misunderstood what you meant by performance classes. The whole point of this debate (other than conservatives shitting on trans women anyway) is that you need a framework where:
1-trans people can compete, 2-cis women aren’t unfairly disadvantaged and 3-that people would actually watch.
I’m frankly not sure such a thing exists.
If we can only have two of those three then ditching the commerciality of it all would be my preference. Sports are actually worth watching when they aren’t just an excuse to extract profit from professional and collegiate athletes.
Realistically, we can’t have 3 in any case. Women’s sports gets a tiny fraction of the viewership as it is and I don’t see the inclusion or exclusion of trans women affecting those numbers much.
This is a really stupid argument. The thing that makes athletes special is their biology.
There’s a reason that DK Metcalf towers over all of the cornerbacks in the NFL. He’s a biological specimen that has incredible agility, height, muscle mass, and speed.
https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/d-k-metcalf-proves-he-s-an-athletic-freak-at-combine
Michael Phelps also has a biological advantage that very few humans have.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/we-celebrated-michael-phelpss-genetic-differences-why-punish-caster-semenya-for-hers/2019/05/02/93d08c8c-6c2b-11e9-be3a-33217240a539_story.html
None of this excludes them over their competition.
I’ll just copy my reply to the other guy.
Thanks for the gibberish. So many words to say absolutely nothing.