Ooooh that’s a tough one, we’ll get back to you in 20 years or so when we have the data.
In a paper published today in BMC Psychology, researchers recommend that "until there is direct and consistent scientific evidence supporting the notion of transgender competitors having an advantage, transgender individuals should be allowed to compete […] without restrictions… pic.twitter.com/OWXzxDhYFE
“… until there is direct and consistent scientific evidence supporting the notion of [male] competitors having an advantage [over female competitors], [male] individuals should be allowed to compete [wherever they want] without restrictions…”
There really isn’t special about TiM athletes compared to other male athletes, except that the TiM athletes claim to be female and demand to be allowed to compete in divisions restricted to female athletes. If they want the female division to be mixed-sex, or rather if they want to do away with the sex-based divisions, they should be prepared to admit that.
Really, the questions shouldn’t focus on “do they have a competitive advantage?” but rather “is there reason to have a category for female athletes?” and “are these athletes female?”. Because they don’t want to answer “no” to the second question, and because they can only think of “performance advantage” for the first one, they get all confused. There are age groups, there are leagues for people who are students at particular schools, and there are few cases where anyone says “Well, this person doesn’t fit the eligibility criteria, but he doesn’t have a performance advantage, so let him participate”.
If sports were just invented, nobody but nobody would consider that there should be a separate division for people who “act in a feminine manner” or “wear dresses” or similar.
This makes it sound like scientists just discovered some piece of genetic code that roughly half of the population has, seemingly at random, and some people are jumping to the conclusion that these two groups shouldn’t compete in the same sporting events. In that situation, it would absolutely make sense to say let’s keep the status quo until there’s some actual evidence of a substantial competitive advantage.
But that’s not our situation. We’re not coming to this with a clean slate. It is blatantly obvious that biological sex confers many physical advantages relevant to most if not all sports, and we have a wealth of hard data to confirm this. (Just look at times and distances in women’s and men’s categories, or how head-to-head matches have gone in sports that can’t be measured so precisely.) To pretend like we just have no gosh-darned idea whether someone who went through male puberty might have an advantage is exceedingly disingenuous.
If they don’t think there’s any evidence that males have an advantage over females, what is their rationale for the existence of female sports in the first place?
Really, the questions shouldn’t focus on “do they have a competitive advantage?” but rather “is there reason to have a category for female athletes?” and “are these athletes female?”. Because they don’t want to answer “no” to the second question, and because they can only think of “performance advantage” for the first one, they get all confused. There are age groups, there are leagues for people who are students at particular schools, and there are few cases where anyone says “Well, this person doesn’t fit the eligibility criteria, but he doesn’t have a performance advantage, so let him participate”.
This is very well put. Why are the governing bodies of so many sports assisting men in performing an end run around the eligibilty criteria that they themselves establish and enforce? Why are they so keen on finding or creating loopholes for men who claim to be women? It should be these authorities who have created this sitation who should be held accountable and forced to answer these questions; it shouldn’t be up to the women to point out and object to cheating men in order to protect their sports. The commisions and federations in question should have been standing up to keep women’s sports safe for women, not bending over backwards to find ways of letting men in. It’s really not that hard. Watch. Humans can’t change sex. Men can’t be women. If you’re a man, you’re not eligible, so fuck off. Was that hard? No. There’s no nuance present, no soul-searching or deliberation required, and anyone who thinks otherwise is going to sell out women’s sport and should not be on any such regulatory or governing body at any level whatsoever. Not grade school, not high schoool, not college or university, not amateur, professional, recreational or Olympic. Anyone in any of these positions who has proposed, voted for, supported, or enforced the inclusion of men in women’s sport (or boys in girls’ sport) should be struck off in disgrace. “Inclusion” is bullshit. This is as reprehensible and corrupt as doping, cheating, or deliberately losing. It should be as scandalous and reputationally ruinous as all these other offences because it is cheating and doping (via hormonal construction of male muculoskeletal structures and metabolisms) put together.
Even if there is no competitive advantage (!), there would be a compelling reason for most sports to be sex-segregated. The fact that men view women as objects for sex, and treat them in that manner, is reason enough to segregate by sex. Creating a hostile environment for women does as much to discourage women from partaking of an activity where they will be groped, ogled, leered at, catcalled, and, if there is the slightest option, watched in changing and showers.
For all those who want to put down women’s continued preference for ‘caring’ careers, this is also a potential explanation. If there is a place where you are most likely to be surrounded by other women, that place can become more attractive merely because of the absence of men. While I have on occasion been ‘hit on’ by lesbian women, when they realize I am not interested, they have respected my boundaries and remained friends. Men, on the other hand, have created no end of trouble for not only me, but for most of the other women I know.
This is reason enough to maintain sex segregated sports. The reports coming out of the locker room behavior of these so-called ‘women’ suggests there is little that changes when they identify as a woman.
While I have on occasion been ‘hit on’ by lesbian women, when they realize I am not interested, they have respected my boundaries and remained friends.
Is that really true? In my experience lesbians don’t go around randomly hitting on straight women. Why would they?
It was in college, and it is quite possible they didn’t know I was straight, because I didn’t date. It wasn’t much, really, just sort of putting a toe in the water.
On the other hand, a lot of men assumed I’m straight and that I want them.
There is evidence of males retaining physical advantages after undergoing puberty even when testosterone is suppressed, and it’s old news by now:
https://nitter.net/FondOfBeetles/status/1368174222992961547#m
“… until there is direct and consistent scientific evidence supporting the notion of [male] competitors having an advantage [over female competitors], [male] individuals should be allowed to compete [wherever they want] without restrictions…”
There really isn’t special about TiM athletes compared to other male athletes, except that the TiM athletes claim to be female and demand to be allowed to compete in divisions restricted to female athletes. If they want the female division to be mixed-sex, or rather if they want to do away with the sex-based divisions, they should be prepared to admit that.
Really, the questions shouldn’t focus on “do they have a competitive advantage?” but rather “is there reason to have a category for female athletes?” and “are these athletes female?”. Because they don’t want to answer “no” to the second question, and because they can only think of “performance advantage” for the first one, they get all confused. There are age groups, there are leagues for people who are students at particular schools, and there are few cases where anyone says “Well, this person doesn’t fit the eligibility criteria, but he doesn’t have a performance advantage, so let him participate”.
If sports were just invented, nobody but nobody would consider that there should be a separate division for people who “act in a feminine manner” or “wear dresses” or similar.
BMC Psychology.
Now what does psychology mean?
Well, most definitions claim it is the scientific study of the mind and behavior.
I have known people in what are called the “hard sciences” to sneer at even calling psychology a science.
What do we play sports with? Well, yes, our minds and behaviors are used in sports, but we use our BODIES to facilitate all that to play.
So, why am I supposed to give two figs about what a pseudo-science hack says about males and females regarding sports?
Yeah, this is all too cute by half.
This makes it sound like scientists just discovered some piece of genetic code that roughly half of the population has, seemingly at random, and some people are jumping to the conclusion that these two groups shouldn’t compete in the same sporting events. In that situation, it would absolutely make sense to say let’s keep the status quo until there’s some actual evidence of a substantial competitive advantage.
But that’s not our situation. We’re not coming to this with a clean slate. It is blatantly obvious that biological sex confers many physical advantages relevant to most if not all sports, and we have a wealth of hard data to confirm this. (Just look at times and distances in women’s and men’s categories, or how head-to-head matches have gone in sports that can’t be measured so precisely.) To pretend like we just have no gosh-darned idea whether someone who went through male puberty might have an advantage is exceedingly disingenuous.
If they don’t think there’s any evidence that males have an advantage over females, what is their rationale for the existence of female sports in the first place?
This is very well put. Why are the governing bodies of so many sports assisting men in performing an end run around the eligibilty criteria that they themselves establish and enforce? Why are they so keen on finding or creating loopholes for men who claim to be women? It should be these authorities who have created this sitation who should be held accountable and forced to answer these questions; it shouldn’t be up to the women to point out and object to cheating men in order to protect their sports. The commisions and federations in question should have been standing up to keep women’s sports safe for women, not bending over backwards to find ways of letting men in. It’s really not that hard. Watch. Humans can’t change sex. Men can’t be women. If you’re a man, you’re not eligible, so fuck off. Was that hard? No. There’s no nuance present, no soul-searching or deliberation required, and anyone who thinks otherwise is going to sell out women’s sport and should not be on any such regulatory or governing body at any level whatsoever. Not grade school, not high schoool, not college or university, not amateur, professional, recreational or Olympic. Anyone in any of these positions who has proposed, voted for, supported, or enforced the inclusion of men in women’s sport (or boys in girls’ sport) should be struck off in disgrace. “Inclusion” is bullshit. This is as reprehensible and corrupt as doping, cheating, or deliberately losing. It should be as scandalous and reputationally ruinous as all these other offences because it is cheating and doping (via hormonal construction of male muculoskeletal structures and metabolisms) put together.
[…] a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on When in doubt, let the men […]
Even if there is no competitive advantage (!), there would be a compelling reason for most sports to be sex-segregated. The fact that men view women as objects for sex, and treat them in that manner, is reason enough to segregate by sex. Creating a hostile environment for women does as much to discourage women from partaking of an activity where they will be groped, ogled, leered at, catcalled, and, if there is the slightest option, watched in changing and showers.
For all those who want to put down women’s continued preference for ‘caring’ careers, this is also a potential explanation. If there is a place where you are most likely to be surrounded by other women, that place can become more attractive merely because of the absence of men. While I have on occasion been ‘hit on’ by lesbian women, when they realize I am not interested, they have respected my boundaries and remained friends. Men, on the other hand, have created no end of trouble for not only me, but for most of the other women I know.
This is reason enough to maintain sex segregated sports. The reports coming out of the locker room behavior of these so-called ‘women’ suggests there is little that changes when they identify as a woman.
Is that really true? In my experience lesbians don’t go around randomly hitting on straight women. Why would they?
It was in college, and it is quite possible they didn’t know I was straight, because I didn’t date. It wasn’t much, really, just sort of putting a toe in the water.
On the other hand, a lot of men assumed I’m straight and that I want them.