Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

If biological males were preventing biological females from participating in women’s sports, you might have an actual point.

Same as you might have a point if 30 year olds were campaigning to be permitted to participate in sports with 12 year olds.

I’ve presented the evidence, if you choose to not engage with it, then so be it. Your ideology is clouding your judgement, so as you wish.

There’s no question you presented evidence, the problem is that the evidence you presented has nothing to do with the actual issue it is intended to be addressing.

It would be like presenting evidence that someone who is accused of theft is also a bit of a cnut, based upon the evidence that thieves are, generally speaking, cnuts - the accused is a cnut so therefore they must also be a thief, and on that basis they should be deprived of their liberty.

You can see the problem immediately with that line of argument, at least I hope you can! It’s called an association fallacy, or guilt by association -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

Who claimed they were "campaigning"?

The fact is biological males are participating in biological female sports. This despite many professionals sports having discrete competitions for biological males and biological females to cater for inherent biological and physical differences between the two groups.

Unless you are saying you want those discrete categories removed altogether?

You’re intentionally trying to misrepresent my point. My point is that biological males are not preventing biological females from participating in women’s sports, whereas people are trying to prevent biological males from participating in women’s sports.

I’m not saying I want those discrete categories removed altogether, and they don’t have to be removed at all - the categories can still exist, and they do, and permitting biological males to participate in those categories won’t change what the categories are called.

What's the point of biological male and biological female categories if anyone can compete in either? (and still note, that any capable enough female is generally allowed compete in the biological male category).

If the categories exist, the fair thing is to follow the rules for the category.

If so inclined, campaign for a "Treated as a woman by society" cateogory.

The numbers are low enough right now that it's not really an issue (there's only a handful of examples) but as trans becomes more accepted (a good thing) then the problem in sports grows to the point where it breaks the female categories.

Similarly, I can't believe that some people are espousing people to be allowed to take PED and still compete (which is what a trans-man on testosterone competing in the female category would amount to, drop the PED and compete all you want).

Now, there is a future problem looming, medical science can only emulate the outward appearance of a chosen gender right now (and the surgical options generally have drawbacks and side effects), this is likely to get more advanced in the future, is body modification going to be allowed in competitors (body building has been heading down this road already, though not really a sport in the traditional sense), Lasek/Lasik is allowed, inhalers are allowed, where does the line get drawn and how does sport adapt in the future (Tom Dempsey was an interesting case where a prosthetic was required by rules to be fair even though he was better without it).

Not at all. I'm attempting to clarify with point you're making. No one claimed anyone was preventing biological females from participating in their own sports categories.

But where you do allow biological males to participate in biological female sports competitions, then that negates the reason that any such discrete categories exist in the first place viz to cater for the biological and physical differences between biological males and females.

Ergo I presumed you are advocating that these discrete categories should be got rid of entirely.

The point is that it isn’t just anyone can compete in either category. In order to ask what’s the point of maintaining categories segregated by sex, you would have to ignore the fact that the categories are actually based upon sex stereotypes based upon gender. You would also have to note that strict adherence to biological differences between the sexes means that biological females are prohibited from competing in biological male categories. As an example -

https://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/18802987/mack-beggs-transgender-wrestler-change-laws-watch-wrestle-boys

You might reasonably respond by pointing out that wrestling is a niche sport when compared to the prevalence of football, or soccer, depending upon whom you ask -

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-americans-call-it-soccer-2014-6?r=US&IR=T

But that sport too, includes rules which prohibit biological females from participating in competition with biological males, reasoning that it is for the protection of biological females as they are at greater risk of injury if they are permitted to participate in the men’s game. They’re also at greater risk of earning a lot more than they do in the women’s game, but that point doesn’t seem to be a factor in justifying their exclusion from competition involving men.

The increasing number of people who are transgender participating in sports is only an issue for the tiny number of people who insist on making it an issue. It’s not actually an issue for the sports in question, and it would be presumptuous to assume that the participation of people who are transgender in sports is an issue which will only increase with increasing acceptance of people who are transgender in wider society, if by your own standards, the increasing numbers of people who are open about being transgender is a good thing. You can see why the argument in the first instance doesn’t support the argument in the second instance.

Nobody is espousing that anyone be permitted to take PED, that would be arguing that people who are currently cheating should be permitted to do so. Nobody is arguing that anyone who is transgender should be permitted to cheat just because they are transgender.

Anyone, regardless of whether they are transgender or not, is not permitted to cheat. Everyone is able to apply for a therapeutic medical exemption. WADA already exist as the authority with oversight in this area, they’re the organisation the Court of Arbitration in athletics turns to when someone is suspected of doping, protesting their innocence and blaming the result of the test on Mexican immigrants in an attempt to engender sympathy for their plight from a general public which they’re fairly certain contains nuts.

There isn’t any future problem looming, any more than there wasn’t a future problem looming when Renee Richards right to participate in sports was upheld when they sued the USTA for discriminating against them on the basis that they are a biological male and therefore ineligible to participate in competitions aimed at promoting women’s sports. You’re again looking to create problems where they don’t exist, by using the slippery slope argument to hold people who are transgender to a different standard than everyone else based upon the objections of a tiny minority of the general population who agree with your personal beliefs.

People’s personal beliefs, no matter how strongly held they are in their conviction, no matter how popular those beliefs are shared among the majority of the population, have never been regarded as legitimate justification to uphold discrimination which disproportionately applies to a tiny, vanishingly small percentage of the population. Regardless of however many there are and regardless of however many there will be, their numbers simply have no relevance whatsoever to any decision as to whether they are deserving of the same rights as everyone in society in accordance with the aim of everyone having an equal right to participate in society and no group holding another group to ransom, disabling them from exercising their human rights, which they are fully entitled to do in accordance with their status as equal members of a democratic society.

A good example of this in practice is that people do not have the right to use their religious beliefs to justify discrimination against anyone on the basis of their beliefs -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.G._%26_G.R._Harris_Funeral_Homes_Inc._v._Equal_Employment_Opportunity_Commission

It would be equally prejudicial, and just as wrong, to presume on the basis of anyone’s religious affiliation, that they support such blatant discrimination and dehumanising treatment of anyone on the basis that science insists they exhibit such ignorance, disrespect and disregard for other human beings. Blaming science for their behaviour and attitudes towards other people is equally unjustifiable as blaming religion to absolve themselves of taking any responsibility for their opinions, opinions which they are hoping find favour among the majority of people, and they are rewarded, instead of it being pointed out to them why their opinions of other people just don’t amount to any kind of credible argument to justify their belief that people should be treated unfairly because it would be unfair to them if those people were treated fairly too!

astro with the greatest of respect to you, and I do mean that because you’ve been more than fair in this discussion, but I would urge you to do some research before making an assessment like this, because if there’s one thing there is no shortage of, it’s evidence of rules that prohibit women from participating where they don’t belong in the beautiful game.

Soccer is a good example that you bring up, there is no bar that stops a female competing against males other than their ability, given the wage rates on offer, if this were at all possible, it would have happened by now.

The reason it hasn’t happened by now, and the reason you’re not aware of it happening, is precisely because it’s not just the rules are doing what they’re intended to do, it’s because of the tiny minority of people who are intent on punishing anyone who they perceive as needing to be taught a lesson that they don’t belong in the sport -

It wasn’t easy back then when girls in a “schoolboys” soccer squad were an even more unusual sight than today. Striker Stephanie did make the Valeview team but had to endure some rough treatment by defenders with a point to prove against a girl cheeky enough to take them on. “My shins used to be black and blue after some games. I’ll never forget it. But the only way to get back at them was to score. It made me a better player.”

Stephanie underplays her bravery with a cheerful positivity that almost has you believing that those sexist hackers were doing her a favour. She also values the loyalty of her team mates back then. “I played on the streets with those boys for years. They were my friends and they always stood up for me when things got rough.”

Stephanie had to give up playing mixed football almost as soon as she’d started due to the rule against mixed teams over 12. Though she found the standard slightly lower she went on to play for several seasons with Cabinteely Girls before catching the eye of Noel King, coach of the Irish women’s senior team. “I just missed out in the final trials for Ireland under 15s and I was really heartbroken. But then I made the team at under 17s.”

https://archive.ph/20120327182154/http://www.shankillfc.ie/stephanie-roche.html

The equivalence you refer to is based upon a false premise. It’s the organisations responsibility to ensure the safety of all participants, not the participants responsibility if they are injured by another participant.

It’s also unfair of you to characterise anyones argument as though they are suggesting anyone be permitted to cheat. You’re undoubtedly aware of the context in which they are granted an exemption from the rules which would normally apply on the grounds of having a legitimate medical reason for taking drugs which are not taken with the intent of increasing their performance, but are part of their treatment for an entirely separate medical issue. It’s as disingenuous as Iran claiming that there are no homosexuals in Iran - there aren’t if you insist on anyone who is homosexual undergoing unnecessary medical procedures in order to maintain the illusion that your claim is true - it does not address the fact that there are homosexuals in Iran, it addresses the issue of anyone’s ability to refute your argument! 😳

You wouldn’t accept anecdotal evidence in support of a claim, yet here you are relying on anecdotal evidence in support of your already held beliefs about biological males who are transgender participating in women’s sports, that they have an unfair advantage. There’s a reason I can’t be arsed with the COVID forum on here, for that very reason - people relying on anecdotal evidence based upon their already held beliefs. It’s simply impossible to overcome that level of deeply held prejudice. The probability of changing their opinions is far lower than the probability of Lia Thomas competing in the Paris Olympics in 2024, so I don’t get too wrought up about it. The impact of either upon the wider population, is limited.

It’s why I stated from the outset of my participation in this particular thread that focusing on individual athletes is not credible evidence of anything one way or the other, it isn’t - it just leads to a situation much like the effect of the “bathroom bills” farce where the greater impact it has is increased scrutiny of biological women who do not conform to the individual’s stereotype of what constitutes woman in their opinion. There are already enough voyeurs in women’s bathrooms without making the practice an acceptable way to behave in public for people who claim their behaviour is justified on the basis that they only wanted to protect biological females and children from biological males who might make them feel uncomfortable! 🙄

Probably showing my knowledge of the sport (or more likely Channel 4 Italian soccer) but there was female players in the Italian league at the turn of the century, it was more of a publicity stunt, but they were registered to play and from memory, came on a few times for one of the lower division teams, dutch football has started the same and fact is that if a player like Rapinoe was good enough, a multitude of male teams would take her on, the marketing money alone would make it worthwhile.

Female athletes cannot compete with male athletes in the vast majority of sports, that is scientific fact that has been proved over and over, arguing against it would be akin to arguing that water is not wet, the end point of your argument is that male and female categories cease to exist completely just at the time when female sports are turning professional and sponsorship money is coming in.

I was a big fan of Roche and she did well initially, but foundered in most of the leagues she played in due to other females being better than her, while I'd disagree that she should have had to move to segregated sports, to imply she would have kept pace as puberty kicked in is disingenuous (many other countries don't forcefully segregate but it happens anyway beyond training sessions). This is not down to lack of effort by females, this is down to biology.

What goes on in Iran and toilets is tangential to this topic (what goes on in Iran being particularly horrific).

For contact sports the trans man signs the waiver of risk, the biological male opponent does not, this is the organisation saying they cannot ensure the safety of all participants (well, they can never ensure the safety anyway, accidents happen, the level of risk is higher than the organisation can reasonably cover in these cases).

What you're attempting to do (and I don't think it will convince anyone) is that there is no differences between males and females that would explain the performance differences in sports, it is an interesting side to take (and one you have backed away from before, so I'm unsure why you're pursuing it now, although I had noticed the difference in responses that led me to believe you were trying to argue this, hence my line of questioning).

It is a line of argument that belittles all of the achievements of female athletes on the basis that they should have tried better and thus competed against males. It also goes beyond the transgender argument (where sports implement hormone limits to try and get to fair competition for trans-women).

The fact is that there are many sports that don't purposely segregate but it instead occurs to encourage females into the competitive nature of the sport.

The divorce scenario is again irrelevant as the segregation doesn't exist for many sports that end up completely male dominated.

While I do understand your interpretation of my actions, I feel obligated to inform you that your assumptions are incorrect. I didn’t back away from a stance that I still maintain in the face of an immovable object. I simply went around the block - takes a bit longer and I know it looks like I’ve given up, but while the object remains in place satisfied that it has achieved it’s objective, in reality it hasn’t.

That’s why the same arguments you’re using that were used to justify discrimination against women on the basis that they were inferior to men as a consequence of the biological differences between men and women, and men’s proven superiority in activities where they dominated, and the same arguments that were used again to demonstrate white societies superiority over blacks, again using specious argument, which it was claimed were based upon scientific evidence and couldn’t be disputed, and any attempt to do so was an indignity to the achievements of women or black people and whatever the case may be, as an attempt to elevate your argument beyond criticism.

That whole nonsense about “the fact that sports don’t purposely segregate” is the same nonsense argument that the legacy athletes are using to suggest that Lia Thomas should be prohibited from competing, but they would “allow Thomas to be an exhibition so they could enjoy the atmosphere of what it feels like to compete at the highest levels in women’s sports”. It’s nothing more than condescending BS used to disguise their contempt for other people who they don’t want to allow to contaminate the “purity” of “their” sport 🙄

Same arguments which were used against them, are the same arguments which they use against people who they regard as being beneath them too. Dress it up however you like, the intended effect is the same, it just takes a bit longer to overcome the existing prejudice as your prejudices are more difficult to maintain with each iteration.

Well, they are?

The reasons for the existing discrimination as it is now is because historically, women were prohibited from participating in sports which were regarded as male pursuits. Women who tried to participate in sports were shut down and shut out of the sport and didn’t receive wider support in society because it was thought they were incapable of participating in sports and it wasn’t very ladylike and all the rest of it.

It’s why still to this day women’s sports do not enjoy the same status in society as men’s sports - not because men are superior or women are inferior or any of the rest of it, but because of the perception that they are, a perception that is maintained by the rules which exclude their inclusion, coupled with the lack of support for the idea that they should be participating in sports at all -

The principle as it applies to women participating in men’s sports:

https://www.newindianexpress.com/sport/football/2021/mar/24/women-dont-belong-on-a-football-pitch-german-coach-apologizes-for-sexist-remarks-to-female-refs-2280857.amp

The same principle as it applies to biological males who are transgender participating in women’s sports:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/male-bodies-dont-belong-in-womenssport-n5ghggrpk

.