A handicap system would also only be applicable to certain sports. There’s many where that wouldn’t make sense.
I've addressed that, just give out more scholarships to make up for any cis girls who might miss out. It's better to increase the access to education than to ban a group of people from something as important and healthy as school sports.
I'm not saying there's enough leeway for trans women to qualify as biologically female, I'm saying there's more to it than "was born with female reproductive organs" or "has XY chromosomes". Hence it's complex. Caster Semanya is, in one sense, biologically male. But by different criteria, she's biologically female. And she's far from unique in women's sports.
Because, last I checked, the rules say nothing about chromosomes?
No one wants to ban anyone. There just needs to be a solution that works for all parties not just transgender women
If they are prevented from playing sports then it's effectively a ban. People can dance around the word all they want but it's the practical effect.
Yes, those are the certain sports I referenced. I’m simply pointing out that it would only be a partial solution.
Well here you’re changing the goalposts now to include intersex, which is a different context altogether. You started off going on about trans so you’re obviously falling over yourself to make a point which you know has no sound logic. ‘Feeble mind’ good one.
Nope, I'm talking about the complexities of defining biological sex, since there's no one characteristic that you can point to and say "this makes a biological man/woman."
Well, it is complex, but at the end it can be defined on a genetical level. That would be quite clear.
There aren't any complexities defining biological sex. It can be tested, it can be observed, it can be explained. You're looking for some rope to make an idiotic point when there is none.
Because it's men who want to dictate what men transitioning into women should be included in. Who gives a shit about women, or women transitioning into men. It's misogyny, plain and simple. We've even had a poster literally say 'those poor wee cis women' trying to justify the stance.
The other depressing part is there are people who have genuine questions and are not transphobic but their question might be interpreted that way. Its been turned into an issue where some will ask questions just to cause argument and others wont ask questions for fear of being thought of as transphobic.
Of course there are.
Yes, that too. I'm talking about those who come out with things like "they are not real women", and then just say "oh I was talking about in a sporting sense". Happens with all types of transgender discussions. People take all sorts of difficult edge cases as a way to smear the whole community. We're still figuring out how we as a society can help transgender people live more comfortably and freely, and yet there are so many people determined to undermine this.
No there aren't. You've literally listed a couple. There's nothing complex about it.
The complex thing is which measurement to use when you have several that are available - and these measurements will not always lead to the same results. Otherwise we would not have a discussion here.
You might not have understood the problem. But it's okay. If you are interested read up on it, otherwise stay on the level you are atm.
That's complex? Maybe to someone that doesn't understand basic science. Do you fit into that category?
Sorry, I should have phrased it better. It is complex, but for the simple minds less so.That's complex? Maybe to someone that doesn't understand basic science. Do you fit into that category?
Using biological markers would give a binary answer every time. Most athletes in the build up to races/events are swab tested, or tested in some capacity to confirm if they've taken any PEDs. That same info would give the answer whether they're biologically male of female. Again, nothing complex there.
Because of self-identification in the last decade, this has muddied the waters because we'll have biologically male athletes, who identify as female, wanting to compete in female only sporting events. Again, there was no complexity / issues in the previous decades/centuries up to that point. (Yes, intersex, etc cases like Caster Semenya did / do exist, but these were exceptions).
Ah that explains why you’re posting then. Do you get it now? Or do you need more help?
I mean, you literally kicked this off with a post about transgender women, so people talked about transgender women. Now it's misogyny because the issue of transgender men wasn't discussed? I mean...
Eh? It started with a Scarlett Dracarys a post about 'the fastest girl in Connecticut'.
Ups, my bad. Point still stands, why would people talk about something that was not the topic? Accusing them of misogyny because of that is pretty silly, no?
Do you think every post after Scarlett's was about the 'fastest girl in Connecticut' or do you think the discussion moved to more broader elements?
It did, but centered about transgender girls in sports, so again, accusing someone of misogyny for not mentioning transgender men is at best silly, at worst offensive.
