In the midst of the oldest track meet in the United States, the paper of record's coverage of running is about... a man who won $10,000 in a marathon with a time just barely faster than the winner of the women's race. Leaving aside the issue of whether non-binary is a legitimate category (it's not). How does it make any sense that gender identity factors into athletic performance. Can anyone explain to me why there should be a separate category for slower men who identify as they/thems to compete in? With transwomen I understand that it's a more complex issue because there are hormonal treatments (read: castration) that lend credence to the argument that they should compete with the women (they shouldn't). But in this case I don't see any science based argument for why this category is necessary other than for providing clout chasing men with an opportunity to leverage their newfound status as a protected class to win money that should otherwise be going to the actual winners of the men/women's races.
-
10719
-
Just how lucrative and how much clout do you perceive is to be gained going this route? I mean, what's stopping you?
1034 -
About $10,000 worth so far- certainly more as more races begin adopting this category. My pride and dignity mostly, it's not even a tough transition- from the looks of it you just have to paint your nails and add they/them to your Instagram bio.
5511 -
You seem intimately familiar, buddy. Good for you that you see little barrier to transitioning, you got this!
1443 -
Kipchoge should just run in this category during retirement until he’s like 60
706 -
#6
This post was removed.
-
Sports are perfect for exposing the grift that all this alphabet nonsense represents.
6114 -
#8
This post was removed.
-
I hate NY Times links. They always require you to register to read them and I refuse to do it. I don't need to get spam email from the NYT.
What marathon did this guy get $10,000 for winning?
242 -
Found it, Brooklyn.
72 -
If it's going to exist, I would rather see the three categories,than some mediocre dude stealing from women.
592 -
I say No, no, no wrote:
Found it, Brooklyn.
this feels like it was written by a bot trained on blog posts from runners world and tumblr
112 -
I read the article and these they'd are still complaining even though they got their new made up category. F em.
253 -
liverpoolrunner00 wrote:
In the midst of the oldest track meet in the United States, the paper of record's coverage of running is about... a man who won $10,000 in a marathon with a time just barely faster than the winner of the women's race. Leaving aside the issue of whether non-binary is a legitimate category (it's not). How does it make any sense that gender identity factors into athletic performance. Can anyone explain to me why there should be a separate category for slower men who identify as they/thems to compete in? With transwomen I understand that it's a more complex issue because there are hormonal treatments (read: castration) that lend credence to the argument that they should compete with the women (they shouldn't). But in this case I don't see any science based argument for why this category is necessary other than for providing clout chasing men with an opportunity to leverage their newfound status as a protected class to win money that should otherwise be going to the actual winners of the men/women's races.
What are you complaining about? Isn’t a separate category what you always maintained was fairer because it didn’t interfere with and take prize money away from your “purebred” women? Well, now you have it. Men, women, and non-binary. What’s your point? Should the non-binary not compete at all?
1920 -
blugh wrote:
liverpoolrunner00 wrote:
In the midst of the oldest track meet in the United States, the paper of record's coverage of running is about... a man who won $10,000 in a marathon with a time just barely faster than the winner of the women's race. Leaving aside the issue of whether non-binary is a legitimate category (it's not). How does it make any sense that gender identity factors into athletic performance. Can anyone explain to me why there should be a separate category for slower men who identify as they/thems to compete in? With transwomen I understand that it's a more complex issue because there are hormonal treatments (read: castration) that lend credence to the argument that they should compete with the women (they shouldn't). But in this case I don't see any science based argument for why this category is necessary other than for providing clout chasing men with an opportunity to leverage their newfound status as a protected class to win money that should otherwise be going to the actual winners of the men/women's races.
What are you complaining about? Isn’t a separate category what you always maintained was fairer because it didn’t interfere with and take prize money away from your “purebred” women? Well, now you have it. Men, women, and non-binary. What’s your point? Should the non-binary not compete at all?
This isn't the Olympics. This is local race directors' decisions to start including "nonbinary" as a registration category. It has very little if anything to do with science, and everything to do with evolving culture. Simply put, an increasing number of people, especially in urban areas, and especially people under 30, identify as nonbinary. It is just giving people what "they" want. Personally, I am fine with that in fun runs.
And it has nothing to do with "trans" people competing fairly or unfairly in races. According to a survey by UCLA's Williams Institute, only about 11% of people who identify as nonbinary are trans. And, in fact, plenty of trans people don't actually self-identify as nonbinary. They use he/him or she/her pronouns to describe themselves.
From a NY race director's perspective, including the self-selecting nonbinary option on race applications might ultimately draw more participants and create a more welcoming atmosphere in a community that is fairly progressive and generally supportive of this sort of thing. I think urban race directors are just adapting to their market.
1613 -
I blame the internet.
73 -
To qualify for the prize money, men had to previously have run 1:10 for a half, women had to have run 1:20, and non-binary runners had to have run 1:15. So it's a category in which slightly slower men can win prize money, and women have no chance.
A male ran 1:12:25, finished 11th, and got no prize money. Another male won the non-binary division in 1:12:48 and got $5000. The women's winner ran 1:18:15Basically, the men got to compete for two different $5000 first place prizes, the women got to compete for one.
592 -
blugh wrote:
liverpoolrunner00 wrote:
In the midst of the oldest track meet in the United States, the paper of record's coverage of running is about... a man who won $10,000 in a marathon with a time just barely faster than the winner of the women's race. Leaving aside the issue of whether non-binary is a legitimate category (it's not). How does it make any sense that gender identity factors into athletic performance. Can anyone explain to me why there should be a separate category for slower men who identify as they/thems to compete in? With transwomen I understand that it's a more complex issue because there are hormonal treatments (read: castration) that lend credence to the argument that they should compete with the women (they shouldn't). But in this case I don't see any science based argument for why this category is necessary other than for providing clout chasing men with an opportunity to leverage their newfound status as a protected class to win money that should otherwise be going to the actual winners of the men/women's races.
What are you complaining about? Isn’t a separate category what you always maintained was fairer because it didn’t interfere with and take prize money away from your “purebred” women? Well, now you have it. Men, women, and non-binary. What’s your point? Should the non-binary not compete at all?
Non-binary runners should compete in the category of their birth sex, unless they are female taking male hormones, or male having taken female hormones for enough years to overcome their male advantages.
124 -
#19
This post was removed.
-
*** wrote:
Sports are perfect for exposing the grift that all this alphabet nonsense represents.
This is so true
224
Of General Interest
-
Matt Fox/SweatElite harasses one of his clients after they called him out
-
Sometimes it seems like Cooper Teare is not that good BUT…
-
Irish gymnast shows you can have sex in the "anti-sex" cardboard beds in the Olympic village (video)
-
Did Cyprus flagbearer and Univ of Georgia HJer post nudes on OnlyFans or is it AI generated?
-
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
-
Finishing a mountain stage in the Tour De France vs running a marathon: Which is harder?
-
Per sources, Colorado expected to hire NAU assistant coach Jarred Cornfield as head xc coach