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

Old and really slow wrote:

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.

The only accurate thing in this post is your username.

Jock Semple would be proud wrote:

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?

CONNER MANTZ IS NON NON-BINARY.

See how this works?

Talk about obtuse.

Your question is like asking "what if a 174-pound wrestler competed in the 163-pound division"?

middle ground wrote:

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

Yes. This is the solution except drop the name "women". One should be "open", and the other "restricted" or something related specifically and only to the differentiation in biology, like "xx".

high school xc coach wrote:

middle ground wrote:

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

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

XX chromosomes.

So stupid.

Just have one standard for all and call it a day.

jhihhijbhdd wrote:

This is great

We already have masters and wheelchair categories at WC

Hopefully, they will add a few non binary events

Does this mean there will be television coverage of the non-binary category, further minimizing what used to be thought of as the actual races?

What is really unfair is to have the handicapped racers in a separate division. Those in wheelchairs should be able to compete alongside the other runners. I can't believe these ableist jerk race directors are segregating people based on their disability.

Wowzers wrote:

What is really unfair is to have the handicapped racers in a separate division. Those in wheelchairs should be able to compete alongside the other runners. I can't believe these ableist jerk race directors are segregating people based on their disability.

They can compete alongside them ... and get them disqualified and lose the state title.

My daughter identifies as non-binary but still does female sports in middle school.

1) They have nothing mentally wrong with them. They're smart, don't get in trouble, are funny and have a lot of friends. This is a new norm. Can fight it, lose your child, and be a miserable parent, or you can be supportive and try and guide them to the best of your ability. If it's a fad, then it won't last forever. If it's not, then what's your alternative? Disown your child,m? For what?

2) biologically they are female and should participate in women's sports.

I don't have a problem saying either of those things.

Not a crybaby wrote:

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

Somebody without a Y chromosome.

I know one of these non-binary numbskulls, and seriously, WTF?

We really needed this?

Kvothe wrote:

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.

I don’t get your point.

Why does weekly mileage matter?!

I ran 21 minutes faster than the Boston qualifying time in my first marathon on 30-35 mile per week. I wasn’t obsessed with Boston. I’ve actually chosen never to run it.

You just have several issues you wanted to get off your chest, huh?

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.

I have a feeling the non-binary "women" will not be non-binary the day of the race.

I'm all for someone being themselves and I have no problem with declaring your gender. But it should not be effecting sports.

I don’t get your point.

Why does weekly mileage matter?!

I ran 21 minutes faster than the Boston qualifying time in my first marathon on 30-35 mile per week. I wasn’t obsessed with Boston. I’ve actually chosen never to run it.

You just have several issues you wanted to get off your chest, huh?

I'm with you but I do get tired of Hobby Joggers asking me if I ever BQ'd. I never didn't and I never ran Boston.

runn wrote:

I don’t get your point.

Why does weekly mileage matter?!

I ran 21 minutes faster than the Boston qualifying time in my first marathon on 30-35 mile per week. I wasn’t obsessed with Boston. I’ve actually chosen never to run it.

You just have several issues you wanted to get off your chest, huh?

I'm with you but I do get tired of Hobby Joggers asking me if I ever BQ'd. I never didn't and I never ran Boston.

His point was that these guys who spend hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars on cutting edge equipment could save a whole lot of money by adding an extra hour or two of running. If they're willing to spend such cash to qualify, but unwilling to work a little bit harder, it stands to reason they may see the non-binary category as their "ticket to Boston" regardless of their actual declared gender.

Reference Mike Rossi, the guy cut the course at a local race to run, threatened those who called him out with legal action, and took his kids out of school to watch him at Boston (which he fraudulently qualified for). Telling me this guy wouldn't just punch in his actual time under a non-binary?

Not sure what we are talking about, can someone please define Man, Woman, Non-binary? What 'sexual characteristics' does each have?

Seems like we are moving toward 1 category called human? Or just don't give any awards/money etc.. to anyone so everyone is just a 'participant'

douglas burke wrote:

Old and really slow wrote:

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%

So what you are saying is that either a) you want transgender men (F2M) to run in the women's category because they were born women or b) ban all transgender people from the sport.

So again, what's the solution you are proposing for transgender people? Obviously (b) would never happen because mental disorder or not, people have rights, so I guess you are advocating for (a). That doesn't sound fair to the women in the field who didn't transition.

I want to get into the NYC Marathon by qualfying, but knowing that biological men can qualify using the women's standards makes it less alluring to me.

johnny walker blue wrote:

douglas burke wrote:

Agree 100%

So what you are saying is that either a) you want transgender men (F2M) to run in the women's category because they were born women or b) ban all transgender people from the sport.

So again, what's the solution you are proposing for transgender people? Obviously (b) would never happen because mental disorder or not, people have rights, so I guess you are advocating for (a). That doesn't sound fair to the women in the field who didn't transition.

Nobody cares about F2M running in the men's category.

What we care about is men declaring thwy're M2F and gtting a 20-minute advantage.

Sport is a physiolgical pursuit, as well as a mental one. The physiology has to play a role, just as it does at the Paralympics. They'd never allow someone into the Paralympics who just claimed to have a diability; they have to prove their belong in the category. Thwy shouldn't allow someone onto the women's race, with the advantages it brings, just because they declare they belong there.