The women’s section is separate from the open section specifically so that women can get their place to compete without being dominated by men’s biological advantages over them. Micheal Phelps is competing in the open section, which is… Well… Open. Also please leave strawmanning to the conservatives.
If the argument is that unfair competition due to “biological advantages” should be reduced then I agree. Sports should be segregated by performance classes and open to all genders.
But if the point of segregating sports is to make space for women in sports, then excluding trans women is nothing more than discrimination on par with excluding black or disabled women. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
If the point is to give everyone a chance to compete fairly then breaking the sport into tiers based on ability makes sense and gender segregation would be unnecessary.
If the point is to make space for women to participate in sports, then excluding certain kinds of women because of some personal characteristic outside of their control would defeat the purpose. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
Of course it is. You can instantly tell the sex of 99% of people from a single glance. And it’s pretty simple to clear up that last 1% with a single brief exchange.
Admitting that you can only get 99% accuracy is an admission that sex isn’t what you’re seeing when you try to guess someone’s gender, and that you think that the existence of trans and gender-nonconforming people is something that can be ignored because our lives are less important than the convenience of your assumptions.
So you’re saying that people like Michael Phelps should be excluded from competing in sports due to the famous athelete’s “biological advantages”?
The women’s section is separate from the open section specifically so that women can get their place to compete without being dominated by men’s biological advantages over them. Micheal Phelps is competing in the open section, which is… Well… Open. Also please leave strawmanning to the conservatives.
You missed my point.
If the argument is that unfair competition due to “biological advantages” should be reduced then I agree. Sports should be segregated by performance classes and open to all genders.
But if the point of segregating sports is to make space for women in sports, then excluding trans women is nothing more than discrimination on par with excluding black or disabled women. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
Should Michael Phelps be allowed to compete against 13 year olds?
If they’re allowed to team up on him, sure. XD
So segregating competitors to some extent based on physical ability makes sense?
Depends on what the point is.
If the point is to give everyone a chance to compete fairly then breaking the sport into tiers based on ability makes sense and gender segregation would be unnecessary.
If the point is to make space for women to participate in sports, then excluding certain kinds of women because of some personal characteristic outside of their control would defeat the purpose. Trans women deserve not to have to play with the boys too.
It’s not segregated by gender, it’s segregated by sex.
If genotype and hormone testing aren’t mandatory then it’s gender segregregated. Sex isn’t a property one can assume from outward appearances.
Of course it is. You can instantly tell the sex of 99% of people from a single glance. And it’s pretty simple to clear up that last 1% with a single brief exchange.
Admitting that you can only get 99% accuracy is an admission that sex isn’t what you’re seeing when you try to guess someone’s gender, and that you think that the existence of trans and gender-nonconforming people is something that can be ignored because our lives are less important than the convenience of your assumptions.
https://www.advocate.com/news/lesbian-mistaken-transgender-arizona-walmart