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

Fred.

So nothing then okay.

Are women safer (or better, or worse) drivers because of their sex?

It was very relevant, proven by the need to expand to point (2). There is no desperation here, you are free to ignore me on thread and carry on discussing aspects of this topic in a way that has nothing to do with me or attacking my personality with frivolous claims?

So TLDR, no authority, constitution, law of nature even, etc. actually asserts what you tried to assert.

I'm not blind to your attempts at humor, and I appreciate the humor in them, you're not bereft of wit, but I treat this issue with a different wavelength and gravitas personally, I apologize if my response was curt but I think it no less true what I said.

There has been an awful lot of effort to undermine my arguments today with efforts like that though, 'oh you're embarrassing yourself' 'go away' 'grow up' 'you're distracting us' 'just ignore him' etc. but I'm not seeing any consensus-building and I'm not seeing any tackling of the central arguments.

Hadn't heard of that one, but reportedly it already died a death because Formula 1 stepped in to place with F1 academy.

Another reason I asked was that since *checks notes* 2012, it's been illegal in Ireland to charge drivers a separate premium for drivers based on gsex, in spite of 'common wisdom' 'stereotypes' 'statistical arguments' etc. about who are better at the activity by a condition of their sex.

It's a conundrum, because if the sports remain so staunchly segregated based on moral arguments about gender, no young trans persons will similarly start playing sports. They all have the same rights to be included in the commons.

I don't believe bans will solve anything. I genuinely believe the calls for a ban are being stoked by political establishments, elected politicians and their campaign strategists, to agitate votes, pump out news articles freaking out about kids identifying as cats and men in womens locker rooms, or 'groomers in girls bathrooms' then offer people an expedient solution to a deeply uncomfortable moral conflict: just ban it all and make it go away.

Per-competition basis, there must be other ways to ensure fairness without sacrificing inclusion, testosterone screening is one example sports bodies have used, Enduro referenced another org that took an exhaustive look at the topic, without proposing the political erasure of trans women. In some competitions like eSports or motoracing it might be functionally irrelevant, so no need to sweep competitors up or out with such sweeping bans (which, as I pointed out, is still a sometimes casualty of this movement in time). Weight classes in boxing was one example where a sport has tried to ensure safety and fairness by matching up competitors to other similarly specced competitors to ensure a truly sporting event, and several tiers where competitors can achieve accolade (belts). There's nothing technically stopping a swimming race from not having gender divisions but division by height and weight or stroke-force/length and drag coefficient etc.

Right - therefore obviating the argument that these exclusions are about "obvious physical differences" between the sexes. It is clearly more than about safety or fairness or physical matchup, I assert it is about a politically motivated moral panic, because competitors wish to disacknowledge the existence of trans women (ie. 'trans women are women'). Is there any evidence to show that the player being trans had any negative impact on the other players ability to compete fairly?

Generally, based on what?

This study for example reinforces what you're saying but it's quite limited, and seems to point out that there could be a bias in the research for who exercises more frequently and who is more sedentary (eg. am I woman who does Pokemon Go, or am I a crossfit bro)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4456887/

Reaction times are critical in eSports, so if there was an RT difference I would expect gender division in eSports to account for that but it doesn't?

"not because of any advantage or disadvantages that the female or trans-woman had over each other" for an eSport but "faster reactions" for racing?

Is it sex or gender?

According to this the eu directive was in relation to gender.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_12_1430

Maybe Irish politicians were unaware of the difference in 2012 if Irish law refers to sex.

By the way getting car insurance is not considered a sport by most people.

I'm still unclear about how you assert reaction time differences in the sexes for racing, but not reaction time difference for the sexes for eSports? Have you seen an eSport tournament? Reaction time matters..

"Brussels, 20 December 2012 – Under new rules which enter force tomorrow, insurers in Europe will have to charge the same prices to women and men for the same insurance products without distinction on the grounds of sex. This means that insurance prices could rise or fall in the short term for certain categories of customers while they are likely to balance out over time. The change comes after the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that different premiums for men and women purely on the grounds of sex were incompatible with the principle of unisex pricing included in EU gender equality legislation, and with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights."

So, there's that. :)

So now we are comparing formula 1 racing with the average Joe getting car insurance, ffs🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.

I think the intended meaning of sex there is gender as gender equality was the fundamental right being addressed.

Gender equality is a fundamental right in the European Union and the Court of Justice made clear that this also applies to insurance pricing," said Vice-President Reding, the EU's Justice Commissioner. "The insurance sector has had over a year to prepare the switch over to unisex pricing and the European Commission has helped the industry to adapt during this period. The Commission will monitor how the industry will implements these new rules in practice.