No it is not OK because it is fundanentally unfair and because it directly infringes on the right that women should have to be able to participate in their own sports. And again, if it is so unimportant, then why is it so important for athletes like Thomas to compete against women and not men? You cannot have it both ways.
astro wrote:
No it is not OK because it is fundanentally unfair and because it directly infringes on the right that women should have to be able to participate in their own sports. And again, if it is so unimportant, then why is it so important for athletes like Thomas to compete against women and not men? You cannot have it both ways.
why should women have a right to that? should small people also have their own basketball category?
real brain differences wrote:
That’s so cute you found a study from a marginal pro sport.
Now, to prove your point you just need to find proof that:
High school girls dope more than boys
Female NFL players dope more than male NFL
Female NBA dope more than male NBA
Female pro golfers dope more male pro golfers
Female MLB players dope more than male MLB
Female pro soccer players dope more than male pro soccer players
Female gym rates dope more than male gym rats
Etc, etc, etc
Men lie, cheat, steal, kill, injure, pollute, rape, pillage, destroy, declare war, fight wars, create weapons, own weapons, fight, speed, drive drunk, bully others, go to whores, do drugs, go to jail, join outlaw motorcycle gangs, join street gangs, destroy the environment for profit, and commit all manner of nasty deeds at rates that far outnumbered those committed by women.
Men have committed every major atrocity that has been perpetrated on planet. Females have stood to the side and largely let men do all manner of evil.
Now I can see where you're coming from: women "good", men "evil". Agreeably simplistic but not the truth.
slaaa wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
An average male is better in most areas than the best women. This means that most women don't stand a chance. You don't think that suggests a problem?
How good is the average man when supressing test and taking estrogen? From what I have seen, nope it isnt much of a problem.
How many average men do you know suppressing testosterone and taking oestrogen?
nooneisthegoat wrote:
astro wrote:
No it is not OK because it is fundanentally unfair and because it directly infringes on the right that women should have to be able to participate in their own sports. And again, if it is so unimportant, then why is it so important for athletes like Thomas to compete against women and not men? You cannot have it both ways.
why should women have a right to that? should small people also have their own basketball category?
They could if they pressed for it. There are size(weight) categories in sports like wrestling and boxing. Women are likewise a biological category and so it is perfectly consistent for them to have their own competition.
astro wrote:
No it is not OK because it is fundanentally unfair and because it directly infringes on the right that women should have to be able to participate in their own sports. And again, if it is so unimportant, then why is it so important for athletes like Thomas to compete against women and not men? You cannot have it both ways.
You have hit it on the head. It doesn't matter that women will lose to biological males - what is important is that biological males be given the opportunity to beat them. Only one group stands to benefit from this. It isn't women.
astro wrote:
No it is not OK because it is fundanentally unfair and because it directly infringes on the right that women should have to be able to participate in their own sports. And again, if it is so unimportant, then why is it so important for athletes like Thomas to compete against women and not men? You cannot have it both ways.
Show me the woman that is unable to swim because Thomas swims.
I’m not asking to have it both ways. Thomas is only competing as a woman. One way.
You mean other than the female members of the team not making the starting roster because their place was taken by a biological male? Or do you mean female athletes from other teams denied any realistic chance to win because we somehow decided it was noble to allow a male athlete with gender dysmorphia to trounce them? Or the former record holders whose records are being "beaten" in this farce? And apparently the feelings of the female athletes being coerced into having to compete in what should be their own sport with a biological male do not count to you. I get it, you feign being utterly obtuse when defending your silly vision quest. Over and over. Well ok. Sorry but this is a travesty.
astro wrote:
You mean other than the female members of the team not making the starting roster because their place was taken by a biological male? Or do you mean female athletes from other teams denied any realistic chance to win because we somehow decided it was noble to allow a male athlete with gender dysmorphia to trounce them? Or the former record holders whose records are being "beaten" in this farce? And apparently the feelings of the female athletes being coerced into having to compete in what should be their own sport with a biological male do not count to you. I get it, you feign being utterly obtuse when defending your silly vision quest. Over and over. Well ok. Sorry but this is a travesty.
No one is entitled to a “realistic chance to win.” No one is entitled to records.
Seriously, have you ever competed in a race before? Do you cry “unfair!” any time you don’t win?
When Thomas became a woman, did they cut another female athlete from the team? You seem to think they did, but I have not seen it reported anywhere.
malarko wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Please quit with the mindreading. I rooted against Eastwood and was pleased that she ended up being no more competitive as a female athlete.
I don’t know if I remember that situation in quite the same way. June had a rough outing at XC regionals (maybe on purpose) which is what I think a lot of people focus on, but then won the conference mile indoors, which Jonathan hadn’t done. COVID came along right about then and nerfed the rest of that season. From what we got to see though, June was definitely more competitive than Jonathan.
As a guy, June ran the equivalent of a 4:08 mile and never broke 4:40 as a woman. The reason she was more competitive was because her conference's women's division was far less competitive than the men's side.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
No one is entitled to a “realistic chance to win.” No one is entitled to records.
Seriously, have you ever competed in a race before? Do you cry “unfair!” any time you don’t win?
When Thomas became a woman, did they cut another female athlete from the team? You seem to think they did, but I have not seen it reported anywhere.
How do you justify that, having physically developed through adolescence as a male, Thomas has physical advantages over biologically-female-at birth women? This is the issue I am unable to get my head around.
Sure, female swimmers like Katie Ledecky got lucky and won the genetic and biological lottery and are physically superior to almost all other biologically-female-at birth women. However, that's luck of the draw. Ledecky didn't manipulate biology.
Now you've got a non-biologically-female-at birth woman with physical advantages of being born male that is inching closer to Ledecky's records. To me, there seems to be something inherently and intuitively wrong with this.
It does not seem like the cost of treating folks like Thomas fairly should not come at the cost of discriminating against biologically-female-at birth women.
astro wrote:
You mean other than the female members of the team not making the starting roster because their place was taken by a biological male? Or do you mean female athletes from other teams denied any realistic chance to win because we somehow decided it was noble to allow a male athlete with gender dysmorphia to trounce them? Or the former record holders whose records are being "beaten" in this farce? And apparently the feelings of the female athletes being coerced into having to compete in what should be their own sport with a biological male do not count to you. I get it, you feign being utterly obtuse when defending your silly vision quest. Over and over. Well ok. Sorry but this is a travesty.
Very few people are calling what Thomas is doing noble. Travesty or not, there is currently only one transgender athlete and it might be be years before another one shows up in N.C.A.A. sports that can compete at her level.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
astro wrote:
You mean other than the female members of the team not making the starting roster because their place was taken by a biological male? Or do you mean female athletes from other teams denied any realistic chance to win because we somehow decided it was noble to allow a male athlete with gender dysmorphia to trounce them? Or the former record holders whose records are being "beaten" in this farce? And apparently the feelings of the female athletes being coerced into having to compete in what should be their own sport with a biological male do not count to you. I get it, you feign being utterly obtuse when defending your silly vision quest. Over and over. Well ok. Sorry but this is a travesty.
No one is entitled to a “realistic chance to win.” No one is entitled to records.
Seriously, have you ever competed in a race before? Do you cry “unfair!” any time you don’t win?
When Thomas became a woman, did they cut another female athlete from the team? You seem to think they did, but I have not seen it reported anywhere.
What you are arguing for is the equivalent of a heavyweight boxer being able to compete in a lower-weight division. But, hey - they are all boxers so let's just be inclusive and not worry about what is fair.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
astro wrote:
No it is not OK because it is fundanentally unfair and because it directly infringes on the right that women should have to be able to participate in their own sports. And again, if it is so unimportant, then why is it so important for athletes like Thomas to compete against women and not men? You cannot have it both ways.
Show me the woman that is unable to swim because Thomas swims.
I’m not asking to have it both ways. Thomas is only competing as a woman. One way.
It is quite clear that you don't understand why there have long been separate categories for male and female competition in the first place. Women cannot compete as equals with men. Thomas is a male competing as a female. His/her self-description doesn't change that fact.
Democrats are “funny”
Armstronglivs wrote:
It is quite clear that you don't understand why there have long been separate categories for male and female competition in the first place. Women cannot compete as equals with men. Thomas is a male competing as a female. His/her self-description doesn't change that fact.
UPenn and the NCAA disagree with you. I do too.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Lenny Leonard wrote:
No one is entitled to a “realistic chance to win.” No one is entitled to records.
Seriously, have you ever competed in a race before? Do you cry “unfair!” any time you don’t win?
When Thomas became a woman, did they cut another female athlete from the team? You seem to think they did, but I have not seen it reported anywhere.
What you are arguing for is the equivalent of a heavyweight boxer being able to compete in a lower-weight division. But, hey - they are all boxers so let's just be inclusive and not worry about what is fair.
No, I'm not.
I'm saying that if a heavyweight boxer loses enough weight to compete in a lower weight division, then he should compete in the lower weight division.
You are saying that a lower weight boxer could put on 100 lbs of muscle but still compete in the lower weight class because "they used to be 100 lbs. lighter."
I don't care what someone used to be. I care what they are.
NCAA are temporarily allowing this to happen. Much like World Athletes with Semenya. First it was just her, then the 2016 Olympic women’s 800m podium consisted of individuals with testes (you don’t get male levels of testosterone with them), and they knew they needed to act.
If enough people let the NCAA know how they feel about allowing males to compete in female competitions, then things will change.
This is temporary. Hopefully, trasgendered people will have their own categories in the future, perhaps at the para Olympic level even.
cam johnson wrote:
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1470978594256130050?s=20Democrats are “funny”
The democrats have nothing to do with N.C.A.A. transgender policies. It's a judge that ruled on the Renee Richards lawsuit back in '70s, that was "funny".
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
What you are arguing for is the equivalent of a heavyweight boxer being able to compete in a lower-weight division. But, hey - they are all boxers so let's just be inclusive and not worry about what is fair.
No, I'm not.
I'm saying that if a heavyweight boxer loses enough weight to compete in a lower weight division, then he should compete in the lower weight division.
You are saying that a lower weight boxer could put on 100 lbs of muscle but still compete in the lower weight class because "they used to be 100 lbs. lighter."
I don't care what someone used to be. I care what they are.
And in this case, the person still is a male. If you really care what they are, then case closed.
Does not wanting my kids to watch a bisexual threesome at the Olympics make me a bigot?
No scholarship limits anymore! (NCAA Track and Field inequality is going to get way worse, right?)
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Gudaf Tsegay will not race the 10000m? Just to spite the federation?