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

Well ya, of course I’m talking about someone doing something beyond Nikki Hiltz. That’s the whole point.

Surprised about Semenya, but points for consistency. To me I think it’s a weird territory to get into when you have women who have the testosterone levels of someone who is taking steroids to transition. Which of course begs the question of point 1.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

Not impressed wrote:

This is all backwards. When you allow trans athletes to compete in the gender in which they "live every other aspect of their lives", it is just women running and against biological men and men running against biological women.

I'm sorry if it doesn't fit with the concept of gender fluidity, but phyisiology and gender are not the same thing. Sport is divided by physiology, because the sexes have diferent advantages with regards to physiology, mainly in favor of biological men. It doesn't matter how you identify yourself emotionally; it's a physical division.

I think calling a transwoman a “biological male” is both petty and incorrect. You’re basing your stance on this on a faulty premise.

At the risk of appearing to contradict myself, why is this incorrect? The emphasis on biological male is to anchor in the fact that someone went through puberty as a male and benefited in many physiological ways from basic biology.

For someone born and raised in this way, I have no problem if this person wants me to use the “she” pronoun, dress in skirts or however she pleases, and act as women act. But it’s certainly not correct to say that she has no biological advantage over all the other women who were born and developed differently.

I don’t really follow boxing or rowing, but can’t athletes change classes? Or do they say, “Well, you used to be 150lbs, so even though you are now 220lbs, you can’t just change classes.”

Seems like the weight class argument is in favor of trans athletes competing in their transition genders.

johnny walker blue wrote:

At the risk of appearing to contradict myself, why is this incorrect? The emphasis on biological male is to anchor in the fact that someone went through puberty as a male and benefited in many physiological ways from basic biology.

For someone born and raised in this way, I have no problem if this person wants me to use the “she” pronoun, dress in skirts or however she pleases, and act as women act. But it’s certainly not correct to say that she has no biological advantage over all the other women who were born and developed differently.

I guess it’s semantics. When I hear “biological male” it just seems so nebulous a term. If the person means “anatomically male,” then that’s clearly not always accurate. If they mean “hormonally male,” that’s also usually not accurate.

If people mean, as you say, “went through puberty as a male,” then I can’t argue that it’s incorrect. I’ll concede that one. However, to anyone watching the sport without some kind of agenda, that is such an insignificant aspect of the competition.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

If people mean, as you say, “went through puberty as a male,” then I can’t argue that it’s incorrect. I’ll concede that one. However, to anyone watching the sport without some kind of agenda, that is such an insignificant aspect of the competition.

That’s certainly the root of the disagreement then. I’m unsure why you believe that though. Strongly and longer bones, stronger muscles, larger heart, larger lungs…all of these are consequences of going through puberty as a male and all are things that are highly correlated with increased performance.

While hormone therapy will neutralize future gains vs. the competition, it can’t balance the benefit that a lungs of a person born male will have a much larger capacity to process oxygen.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

not impressed wrote:

1: In most cases, what you call "transitioning" is purely gender-based. So it's not an issue. In cases where it's significant enough to alter reproductive functions, it will also impact their athletic prowess, so if they're willing to go that far, it becomes a non-issue.

2: Nikki Hiltz.

3: Yup.

Nikki Hiltz is non-binary.

JW Blue pointed out correctly that people who hold firmly to the “sex assigned at birth” division are effectively arguing for transmen to compete against women.

That is going to look ridiculous. You could have a man with a full beard and other body hair racing women.

When you allow trans athletes to compete in the gender in which they live every other aspect of their lives, it is just women running and against women and men running against men. That’s the way it should be.

No, Nikki Hiltz is a woman. She can try to say she is non-binary, but that doesn't change biology or her physiology.

Yes, because the change in weight negates their advantage in their division. If you find a way to 100% negate the biological advantage of being born male, i’m open to implement it here.

This came up a few weeks ago. The title wasn’t as clicky baity and it wasn’t topical at the time so no one responded. I think its a pretty good example of an obnoxious title, the mods liking you, the LRC community hating you, and the trolls being bored enough to prop a mundane idea up.

So as it was mentioned before in the previous thread(s), Boston doesn’t care. There isn’t 3 genders because Boston seeds you with the binary gender you identify as. Yeah. Didn’t need 7 pages to find the answer to the OP, but I guess we did.

back on topic wrote:

This came up a few weeks ago. The title wasn’t as clicky baity and it wasn’t topical at the time so no one responded. I think its a pretty good example of an obnoxious title, the mods liking you, the LRC community hating you, and the trolls being bored enough to prop a mundane idea up.

So as it was mentioned before in the previous thread(s), Boston doesn’t care. There isn’t 3 genders because Boston seeds you with the binary gender you identify as. Yeah. Didn’t need 7 pages to find the answer to the OP, but I guess we did.

Not true.

1: Boston requires you to run under the same gender you qualified with. The OP inferred that you could run 3:30, declare yourself a woman, and get into Boston.

2: Boston requires you to provide ID that matches your gender. If you show up to bib pickup and your ID says "M", or the name is different, you're not getting your bib.

So no, it's not the same answer as last time. Boston's rule is "if you say you're a woman, you better have already changed your name, ID, etc before you entered the race you qualified with, because we're not dealing with it."

back on topic wrote:

This came up a few weeks ago. The title wasn’t as clicky baity and it wasn’t topical at the time so no one responded. I think its a pretty good example of an obnoxious title, the mods liking you, the LRC community hating you, and the trolls being bored enough to prop a mundane idea up.

So as it was mentioned before in the previous thread(s), Boston doesn’t care. There isn’t 3 genders because Boston seeds you with the binary gender you identify as. Yeah. Didn’t need 7 pages to find the answer to the OP, but I guess we did.

Wasn't "clicky baity"; it was a legitimate question. Yes, I know Boston CURRENTLY has that policy and so did the NYC Half. But the NYC Half has changed the automatic qualifier standards to add a non-binary qualifying time which is the same time as the women's division for all age groups. Boston is as Blue as New York is so it could follow NYC's example. If Boston does this, a person born a man who fails to meet the male qualifying time could register as "non-binary" and qualify with lots of room to spare. I am asking about the FUTURE of Boston, not the current standard.

Lenny Leonard wrote:

not impressed wrote:

1: In most cases, what you call "transitioning" is purely gender-based. So it's not an issue. In cases where it's significant enough to alter reproductive functions, it will also impact their athletic prowess, so if they're willing to go that far, it becomes a non-issue.

2: Nikki Hiltz.

3: Yup.

Nikki Hiltz is non-binary.

JW Blue pointed out correctly that people who hold firmly to the “sex assigned at birth” division are effectively arguing for transmen to compete against women.

That is going to look ridiculous. You could have a man with a full beard and other body hair racing women.

When you allow trans athletes to compete in the gender in which they live every other aspect of their lives, it is just women running and against women and men running against men. That’s the way it should be.

___________________________

This makes sense if you substitute secular religious beliefs for scientific reasoning.

1. Sex is not "assigned" at birth. This is activist language appropriated from the intersex rights movement (sex "assignment" actually occurred in the US when some medical doctors thought it was a good idea to do surgery on infants with ambiguous genitalia).

2. We can have sex-segregated categories and continue our policy of now allowing people taking exogenous steroids to compete.

3. Being female is not a feeling, and females have no obligation to pretend there is no difference between them and people who live in the social role of the other sex.

4. We could create categories for trans people that are based on objective criteria, not subjective sense of self. Non-binary is an identity, not an embodied physical state. Males (whether taking hormones or not) and females taking hormones would have an advantage over females not taking hormones in any non-binary category based on identity. In facct, trans women (males suppressing testosterone and taking estrogen) have greater strength than trans men (females taking testosterone to masculinize their bodies). I posted the peer-reviewed journal article in several other threads.

The ultimate patriarchy: men deciding what a woman is.

I want to run it in 2024. Might jog in a 3:20 to get it easily

I hate cowardly keyboard warriors that say they’re going to do this, then shut up quit talking tough and do it. I waited until I was old enough that the time came to me and ran Boston. But I wanted to earn my qualifier.

Even if I was lazy and wanted an easy time, I wouldn’t register as non-binary because I believe it would be disrespectful.

You obviously have a different value set so I encourage you to live those values, just know that forever in the results people will know you ran as non-binary and you are going to have to answer to people on both sides. I hope someone actually has the bravery to back up their conviction.