What do Women think of Men competing in Women’s sports?
Maybe some of the lady gulchers can explain why the left pushes for women’s equality everywhere, while pushing for men to compete in women sports? Does this “frost” you ladies? The reason I ask this of the gulch women is I also wonder what the non-gulch lefty female types really think of this hipocracy ?
Having a "league of their own" isn't going to suffice because, a male that thinks "he" is a female will not back off into the fog of "maybe". That blows their entire scheme.
Now, what exactly does Title 9 say? Are there any details in it that clarifies the biological state of being?
Just creating a specific league will only make the transgender folk be seen as a circus act.
Which maybe......it is...
If your only reason to compete against women is because you aren't man enough to compete with your own, you have bigger issues.
And a sedentary lifestyle....
The sport I compete in is quasi-full-contact. You strike blows that are strong enough to dent 14 gauge stainless steel, but men who are stronger than that have to hold back and cannot use their full strength. There are also rules that keep a bigger person from simply punting his opponent out of the arena.
Skill counts. I can take many guys who are a lot stronger than I am. I do not have to worry about whether my opponent is trans or male or female - I just try to win the fight.
So no, not only does this not 'frost' me, but it is a step in the right direction. If you really want to separate out categories of competition, then do so by a non-gender-based category, such as is used in boxing, ie 'welterweight'; you could even include the strength differential on an individual basis and sort people into categories based on muscle density, which would automatically sort the Y-chromosome trans into higher competitive levels while their therapy was still taking effect, but into lower ones after they had fully transitioned.
The idea that 'all men are stronger than all women' is Victorian and inaccurate. We need to move away from that. It is also good psychologically for women to compete in sports against men, and win or lose depending on their individual skills and abilities.
Jan
You have answered #1 in the negative. Knowing you, you would rather strive to win and never succeed than succeed in a lesser venue. That is worthy of respect. But should we accept that there are some sports where women will never win?
The current women's world record for the marathon is 2:14:04, it was set in the Chicago Marathon in 2019. It was a mixed gender race so everyone was running together. She finished 23rd in that race. It took some effort to find that out because most accounts only publish the top 10. If they didn't keep separate records the top woman in the world would not be listed.
The winners of >70% of the marathons iin the world are generally from the Kalinjin tribe in Kenya. By your logic, there should then be a 'blacks only' marathon, or maybe even a Kalinjin-only marathon.
Jan
And note, in no way do I think that there should be a "mens" only sport. If there is a division that is considered "most challenging", then anyone should be able to enter and compete.
In the fictional series "The Queen's Gambit", when Beth enters her first tournament she is unrated (chess has ratings) they want to put her in the "beginners" division with ratings under 1600. She demands to be in the "open" division and, of course, wins.
The question is whether the "open" division is the only venue. The introduction of Title IX required institutions to support women's sports and spawned opportunities for sports scholarships for women.
We are beginning to see some women play football at the high school level. There is even talk that there might be a female NFL kicker someday.
I've struggled to think of a sport where women have a clear advantage, gymnastics comes to mind -- there are things that can be done with a great muscle to weight ratio that are impressive -- and why it tends to be even young women. But in those sports they tend to use different criteria for men. That trick only applies to sports judged on points.
The most puzzling sports where women have traditionally failed to excel (or just been disqualified) are racecar drivers and pilots.
We are doing well, overall, at eliminating the artificial barriers, but it will probably take a few more generations before we throw off the liabilities of social conditioning and see what women can actually do physically.
Jan
Astronaut has changed. Just over 10% of astronauts who have flown are women, but the last few years have seen the pool become very close to 50/50.
If we restructure the argument into the form of an "open division" and a "women's only" division, how do you feel about that? (I know which division you would enter).
Is it fair for a white male to compete if he knows he can never win, but unfair for a woman to compete if she knows she can never win? Is it fair for a black woman or man to compete if there is a Kalinjin in the race and they know they will not win?
Jan
Similarly, what happens when heavyweight fighters "feel like" they are welterweights?
Another corner case is high altitude. Is it fair to hold competitions at high altitudes, where Andean and Himalayan athletes will have the advantage? Or hold them at lower altitudes, where they will not?
It all comes down to having a sport that is geared for one particular type of exertion, and having a genetic sub-population that is 'good at that'. Our concept of 'fair sports' is based on a village green, where people of the same genetic background are playing against each other.
Jan
https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2021...
It starts by describing the Netfix series and the book, The Queen’s Gambit by Walter Tevis.
Then there is the true story of the three Polgár sisters. They were chess champions, success came from a fanatical father who drove them remorselessly (was the capability/ intelligence there or was it forced in by training?), and from that, a serious competitive instinct, I suggest that is not common in women, except in politics, perhaps it is repressed.
None of the three became world champion, each did beat world champions but not in the competition, regardless all three were extraordinarily good.
However, the argument for women's sports is not that 'all men are stronger than all women'. It's that the strongest men are stronger than the strongest women.
Actually I agree with you that not all sports need to be segregated by sex. Yours is a great example. But in sports where it makes a difference (such as Track, obviously), IF there is going to be a separate category for women, then the reason for creating that category (difference in genetics-based strength) should be the key factor in determining who qualifies.
Should Kalinjins have to compete only against other Kalinjins? Possibly, but anyone who proposed such a thing would be cancelled at best, and probably worse. Women's sports are already here.
They get their kicks from virtue signaling and assuming moral superiority over anyone who disagrees with them, knowing they will be protected by the media, which is true...for now.
I doubt a transgender league would last very long since who else would watch except out of a prurient/perverted sense of curiosity?
.
So you could theoretically have a man who had taken hormone shots for a year, deliver a baby, but otherwise be totally masculine.
Jan
I would assume that at least some individual trans-males would compete in male sports. The two women I can think of who I know who converted to being male definitely had an aversion to being macho and had no interest that I know of in sports.
When I talked with one of them, they said that they did not want to make all the mistakes that men did about being male. They liked the 'trans' part of being trans-male, not just the 'male' part.
Jan
This is argumentative, but I'd love to hear the Rainbow Crowd arguing that men are stronger than women, and it is therefore unfair.