First olympic transgender athlete to compete at Tokyo 2020 MOD NOTE IN OP

One eyed Jack · 02-07-2021 10:43PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

No women would have been involved in elite sport. Likely almost no women would be involved in certain sports at all such as combat sports.

We don’t know and you can’t possibly know what would have been the outcome of women’s equal participation in sports because any sport wouldn’t have developed in the same way. On paper it’s easy to change one single factor and assume all other factors remain the same, but in reality, things just aren’t so simple because multiple factors are changing.

Podge_irl wrote: »

The latter bit is fantasy history. No sporting organisations ever thought they might be in a "spot of bother" due to the popularity of women's sport. Bringing women's sports under their umbrella was not exactly an entirely altruistic exercise but they were not remotely threatened by them either.

Spot of bother was just a turn of phrase on my part, but I accept that women’s sports weren’t viewed as a threat to men’s sports, and equally I say the same of males participating in women’s sports - they just aren’t a threat to women’s sports. I don’t think the organising or governing bodies motivations are entirely altruistic on this occasion either, but the point is to increase participation in sports among young people as an activity, and of course there remains the competitive element which hasn’t been done away with.

Podge_irl wrote: »

Are you willing to acknowledge the reality that if you remove sex segregation women will never win, and more than likely never quality for top level events, in atheletic sports?

No. Otherwise I wouldn’t be bothered my arse arguing against it.

Podge_irl wrote: »

Also mixed gender relays are absolutely not the same as removing sex segregation. They enforce it - you are required to have certain proportion of female participants as otherwise it would just be men.

Took me a few reads to get my head around that one but I see where you’re coming from - identifying males as females in order to game the system. I have no doubt they’ll have thought of that already, but you’re right, it does present something of a conundrum for how sports are organised in their current format

Btw I don’t agree with quotas either, but I understand why they’re necessary to redress a perceived imbalance if the legitimate aim is gender equality and eradicating gender stereotypes in society and all that sort of progressive stuff that appeals to today’s younger generations.

Podge_irl · 02-07-2021 10:52PM

Ok, I'm out.

It is not a "perceived imbalance" it is an actual, biological, factual imbalance. If you refuse to accept that then you are simply refusing to accept reality.

02-07-2021 10:52PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’re making stuff up again.

Audacity is not required when I at least can present evidence to support the arguments I actually do make -

Olympics Shift: IOC Doubles Number Of Mixed-Gender Events, Adds 5 Sports

Okay, now I am going to stick my neck out -- quite a lot, and say that you cannot possibly believe what you believe.

I don't believe you do.

This is an act. At best, you are trying to convince yourself that what you believe is reasonable.

I'm done with this. I've met people like this before; people who just thrive on causing debate over issues that are already settled. They never give up. It's all about the debate for them. It's never serious, not in any real sense. Provoke a debate for the sake of debate, kind of situation.

A la carte deliberate obfuscation may be someone else's cup of tea.

It certainly ain't mine.

Mellor, and others, made some fantastic points.

One eyed Jack · 02-07-2021 11:02PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

Ok, I'm out.

It is not a "perceived imbalance" it is an actual, biological, factual imbalance. If you refuse to accept that then you are simply refusing to accept reality.

That’s not the balance I was referring to, I was referring to the perceived imbalance in social status among all the various identity groups in societies around the world that organisations like the IOC claim can be addressed through sports. It’s brilliant marketing by way of disguising the influence of money and politics involved that goes on off the athletics track that means opportunities for people who wouldn’t ordinarily have opportunities to participate as equals in society.

To argue as though there aren’t multiple social influences influencing sports and sports participation and competitions, is disingenuous tbh.

02-07-2021 11:20PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That’s not the balance I was referring to, I was referring to the perceived imbalance in social status among all the various identity groups in societies around the world that organisations like the IOC claim can be addressed through sports. It’s brilliant marketing by way of disguising the influence of money and politics involved that goes on off the athletics track that means opportunities for people who wouldn’t ordinarily have opportunities to participate as equals in society.

To argue as though there aren’t multiple social influences influencing sports and sports participation and competitions, is disingenuous tbh.

That's just rambling again.

Nobody is talking about money or marketing except you.

This is about biological men having an unfair advantage in the vast,vast majority of sports against biological women and whether it is fair or not to allow biological men compete in women's categories.

The reason for the segregation was to see who is the elite in their respective sexes, allowing trans to cross over completely nullifies the distinction between men and women.

That's it.

It's that ****ing simple.

One eyed Jack · 02-07-2021 11:43PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's just rambling again.

Nobody is talking about money or marketing except you.

This is about biological men having an unfair advantage in the vast,vast majority of sports against biological women and whether it is fair or not to allow biological men compete in women's categories.

The reason for the segregation was to see who is the elite in their respective sexes, allowing trans to cross over completely nullifies the distinction between men and women.

That's it.

It's that ****ing simple.

Exactly, because posters are trying to limit the discussion of fairness in sports in their favour, and ignore the broader aspects of what fairness actually means to people who aren’t them. They claim to want a discussion, but when they’re not being permitted to steer the discussion, then they drop out as if their participation in the discussion is required. It isn’t.

It’s the same in discussions regarding fairness and participation in sports - if they don’t want to participate themselves, fine. But attempting to stop other people from competing against them because it wouldn’t be fair from their point of view, is a different thing entirely.

Your perspective is what it’s about for you, but that’s not just what it’s about for me as far as I’m concerned, and nobody can be compelled to adhere to the terms which suit you and yours. Nobody is being forced to participate in the discussion, so let’s drop the pretence that the discussions won’t continue without them as though their opinions are as important as they think they are.

02-07-2021 11:46PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Exactly, because posters are trying to limit the discussion of fairness in sports in their favour, and ignore the broader aspects of what fairness actually means to people who aren’t them. They claim to want a discussion, but when they’re not being permitted to steer the discussion, then they drop out as if their participation in the discussion is required. It isn’t.

It’s the same in discussions regarding fairness and participation in sports - if they don’t want to participate themselves, fine. But attempting to stop other people from competing against them because it wouldn’t be fair from their point of view, is a different thing entirely.

Your perspective is what it’s about for you, but that’s not just what it’s about for me as far as I’m concerned, and nobody can be compelled to adhere to the terms which suit you and yours. Nobody is being forced to participate in the discussion, so let’s drop the pretence that the discussions won’t continue without them as though their opinions are as important as they think they are.

Ffs.

Shout into the void so Jack. I'm done with even trying to have a conversation with you.

Absolute nonsense

One eyed Jack · 02-07-2021 11:54PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ffs.

Shout into the void so Jack. I'm done with even trying to have a conversation with you.

Absolute nonsense

If you’d said from the outset that you just want to discuss the issue with people who agree with you already, you’d have saved us both the trouble as I wouldn’t have been under the false impression that you were actually interested in hearing from anyone who didn’t share your opinions. I’d just have avoided the thread if I’d known.

03-07-2021 12:03AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If you’d said from the outset that you just want to discuss the issue with people who agree with you already, you’d have saved us both the trouble as I wouldn’t have been under the false impression that you were actually interested in hearing from anyone who didn’t share your opinions. I’d just have avoided the thread if I’d known.

No jack, the parameters are quite clear and logical to most.

Should biological men, who have a genetic advantage over women in the vast majority of sports, which enhances their probability of winning against them immeasurably, be allowed "identify" themselves as the opposite sex and compete in competition?

You go off on bizarre tangents and rants to say preposterous things about sponsorship and how sport segregation is unfair.

God knows that last thing I expect or receive on here is an echo chamber, especially with my views on various topics, but I hope for reasoned, interesting and rational debate. I don't think that's possible with you on this topic.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 12:27AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No jack, the parameters are quite clear and logical to most.

Should biological men, who have a genetic advantage over women in the vast majority of sports, which enhances their probability of winning against them immeasurably, be allowed "identify" themselves as the opposite sex and compete in competition?

God knows that last thing I expect or receive on here is an echo chamber, especially with my views on various topics, but I hope for reasoned, interesting and rational debate. I don't think that's possible with you on this topic.

Right, the parameters of the discussion are limited to your perspective. That’s all you had to say. If I’d known that from the start, I wouldn’t have bothered, because as you rightly point out it’s just not something that interests me either. I avoid whole forums for that very reason - because I expect that the discussion will not be reasoned, interesting or rational. The outcome you get from your idea of the parameters being quite clear and logical to most, is exactly the outcome you say you don’t want - an echo chamber. The only reason it’s not possible is because I’m unwilling to go along with something which makes no sense to me. I’d sooner just avoid people and leave them off to think whatever they want.

03-07-2021 12:40AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Right, the parameters of the discussion are limited to your perspective. That’s all you had to say. If I’d known that from the start, I wouldn’t have bothered, because as you rightly point out it’s just not something that interests me either. I avoid whole forums for that very reason - because I expect that the discussion will not be reasoned, interesting or rational. The outcome you get from your idea of the parameters being quite clear and logical to most, is exactly the outcome you say you don’t want - an echo chamber. The only reason it’s not possible is because I’m unwilling to go along with something which makes no sense to me. I’d sooner just avoid people and leave them off to think whatever they want.

Not true jack and you are being disingenuous.

Quite clearly this topic is about a biological male entering the women's category and whether that is fair enough due to the biological advantages.

It's not my parameters. I don't want an echo chamber but I also don't want to be dragged down a line of conversation which, quite frankly, does not matter with regards to the main thrust of the matter.

It's be like going on the Bill Cosby thread and arguing that he wasn't a very good actor.

Sure, you are entitled to say that, but it adds nothing to the conversation and will frustrate people who are trying to discuss the topic in hand.

Let's leave it there jack, it will only end up with infractions to one or both of us and neither of us deserve that.

Mellor · 03-07-2021 06:25AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The part I’m not understanding is the part where you’re claiming Hubbard is cheating, and when challenged to provide evidence for your claim, you haven’t yet done so.

I’ve outlined quite clearly how the fact Hubbard took Spironolactone and similar drugs is against the rules. There’s your evidence. The fact you choose to ignore those facts doesn’t mean they it wasn’t posted.
The fact you are ignorant of the basic rules, or more likely feigning ignorance, does not change the rules.

You claimed that they test athletes against a limit. Implying a certain amount of these drugs is allowed. That is simply incorrect.

Instead you’ve tried to claim that a lack of evidence doesn’t mean Hubbard is not cheating, but that’s neither here nor there, your claim is that they are cheating, or they have cheated, and without evidence, your claim can be dismissed.

I’ve never claimed that

. Why do you make things up.
I said the fact she hasn’t been sanctioned doesn’t mean she hasn’t cheated.
I never said there was no evidence, I’ve literally outlined the evidence.

At this point I’m beginning to think you are trolling. Nobody could be this reasonable while trying to be progressive.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 11:07AM

Mellor wrote: »

At this point I’m beginning to think you are trolling. Nobody could be this reasonable while trying to be progressive.

What difference do you imagine it should make to me that you think I’m trolling? Making claims without supporting evidence as I’m sure you’re aware, means feckall. It’s why I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and believe in due process rather than expecting a a claim is evidence in itself. That’s more in line with a theocracy than a democracy, nothing to do with being progressive, but if it comforts you to condemn anyone who questions your ideas as progressive, have at it, because it’s of no consequence to me whatsoever.

The IOC are going about it differently than I would, but they’re making baby steps towards the same end, so I’m not required to be an expert, nor have I ever claimed to be an expert in anything. I don’t need to be an expert in anything to know BS when I smell it.

Shield · 03-07-2021 11:40AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Audacity is not required when I at least can present evidence to support the arguments I actually do make -

Olympics Shift: IOC Doubles Number Of Mixed-Gender Events, Adds 5 Sports

Are we talking about what actually happened when men raced against women? Take a minute to look at what happened when elite male athletes competed against elite female athletes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ym42lV1ka8

03-07-2021 12:05PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

Ok, I'm out.

It is not a "perceived imbalance" it is an actual, biological, factual imbalance. If you refuse to accept that then you are simply refusing to accept reality.

Debating some arguments is an impossible task of reasoning with an ever-changing quagmire of deconstructionism - the ignore button is the best postmodern response since ''there is nothing outside of the text''.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 12:12PM

Shield wrote: »

Are we talking about what actually happened when men raced against women? Take a minute to look at what happened when elite male athletes competed against elite female athletes.

No, I was giving an example of how the Olympics are changing events as a means of achieving the legitimate aim of fairness in the Olympics. The events themselves are changing, they’re not excluding anyone and they’re trying to be fair to everyone. It’s not perfect, they will never suit everyone, but those people it doesn’t suit aren’t being forced to participate. They’re more than welcome to self-exclude themselves.

astrofool · 03-07-2021 12:17PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

We don’t know and you can’t possibly know what would have been the outcome of women’s equal participation in sports because any sport wouldn’t have developed in the same way. On paper it’s easy to change one single factor and assume all other factors remain the same, but in reality, things just aren’t so simple because multiple factors are changing.

You see, this line of thinking both underpins and undermines your entire argument, the reams of text you have posted are all undone by this.

We do know this, we do know that for unsegregated elite sports that women would never even qualify, this is something that you need to prove false not whataboutery that it was never tried because it happens every day at the amateur and underage levels.

To have an argument, you need to prove that females can compete remembering that there is usually no barrier for females to compete in the male competitions anyway (and where there is a barrier it's usually down to safety of being seriously injured or dying).

It is why your entire argument entirely fails.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 12:30PM

astrofool wrote: »

We do know this, we do know that for unsegregated elite sports that women would never even qualify, this is something that you need to prove false not whataboutery that it was never tried because it happens every day at the amateur and underage levels.

You claim to know an outcome from presenting two entirely different circumstances as though they are the same and there are no other factors which would influence any outcome? That’s why calculations on paper rarely ever map well to reality, because you’re only considering circumstances which suit your already formed opinion. We don’t need to look too far to see examples of how that strategy’s been working out.

astrofool · 03-07-2021 12:39PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You claim to know an outcome from presenting two entirely different circumstances as though they are the same and there are no other factors which would influence any outcome? That’s why calculations on paper rarely ever map well to reality, because you’re only considering circumstances which suit your already formed opinion. We don’t need to look too far to see examples of how that strategy’s been working out.

Yes, because we have centuries of data in controlled and uncontrolled environments.

You have proven nada.

Go prove that elite women can qualify and compete with elite men.

Football is an easy one, professional, no barrier to entry, pay is very high so everyone motivated to do so, have at it

(I'll even help you out by telling you there was 2 elite women who tried this in Italy, go and research the outcomes).

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 01:19PM

astrofool wrote: »

Yes, because we have centuries of data in controlled and uncontrolled environments.

You have proven nada.

Go prove that elite women can qualify and compete with elite men.

Football is an easy one, professional, no barrier to entry, pay is very high so everyone motivated to do so, have at it (I'll even help you out by telling you there was 2 elite women who tried this in Italy, go and research the outcomes).

I don’t care about proving elite women can qualify and compete with elite men, that’s never been my argument. You’re claiming that they can’t, and you have centuries of data to support your argument, but that’s never been my argument so I don’t have to provide evidence of something I never said.

I outlined my argument in really simple terms - requiring transgender athletes to lower their testosterone levels to compete in women’s events is unfair to them. If you want to argue about comparisons between men’s and women’s performance at elite level in competition, that’s a different argument entirely. It’s not one I’m interested in.

You don’t have centuries of data regarding the performance of transgender athletes in controlled and uncontrolled environments, in fact I’d suggest you had very little data at all, because there’s just not that much research done given people who are transgender represent such a tiny proportion of the population, and even less people among them are known to be elite athletes. It’s precisely for this reason that there is the interest there is in Hubbard’s participation and why the IOC said they would hold off on publishing guidelines for transgender athletes until after this years Olympics in Tokyo. They’re well aware that they cannot be certain as some people here of the impact of the policy in it’s proper context -

IOC to publish transgender guidelines after Tokyo Games

How do you discuss a policy without discussing a policy exactly?

AllForIt · 03-07-2021 01:58PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You don’t have centuries of data regarding the performance of transgender athletes in controlled and uncontrolled environments, in fact I’d suggest you had very little data at all, because there’s just not that much research done given people who are transgender represent such a tiny proportion of the population, and even less people among them are known to be elite athletes. It’s precisely for this reason that there is the interest there is in Hubbard’s participation and why the IOC said they would hold off on publishing guidelines for transgender athletes until after this years Olympics in Tokyo. They’re well aware that they cannot be certain as some people here of the impact of the policy in it’s proper context -

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't see why performance data for transgender athletes in sport would be any different than the performance data for cis-gendered people. Surely it would be exactly the same. Are you suggesting transgender athletes perform in some way different to everyone else and if so in what way exactly and for what reason?

Tilden Katz · 03-07-2021 02:32PM

Will I Am Not wrote: »

If Cristiano Ronaldo retires, identifies as a female and comes back out of retirement at the ripe old age of 45, he will dominate women’s football. And it will be fair :pac:

Jeez, I dunno, Ronaldo’s Adam’s apple is prominent even for a man’s! It needs its own post code. :pac:

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 02:38PM

AllForIt wrote: »

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't see why performance data for transgender athletes in sport would be any different than the performance data for cis-gendered people. Surely it would be exactly the same. Are you suggesting transgender athletes perform in some way different to everyone else and if so in what way exactly and for what reason?

I’m suggesting that they have to hide the fact that they’re transgender in order to perform the same way as everyone else, and that’s why there isn’t much data available with regard to athletes who are open about their gender identity in sports.

The fact that I don’t care about someone’s various identities doesn’t mean I don’t recognise how it is fundamental to who someone else is as a human being, and influences their decisions they make for themselves. It’s important to them in deciding just as an example whether or not to participate in sports at all for fear of being outed, they’re seeing what happens to people like them if they’re open about their gender identity. I would suggest that impression takes it’s toll on their mental and physical health and has an effect on their participation in sports.

Their participation at elite level is something of a red herring tbh when the idea of them being open about their gender identity and participating at all in sports at any level is an affront to some people on the basis of their sex, and all the negative assumptions made about people on the basis of their sex, as if ‘guilt by association’ is a fair standard by which to judge anyone.

AllForIt · 03-07-2021 03:45PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m suggesting that they have to hide the fact that they’re transgender in order to perform the same way as everyone else, and that’s why there isn’t much data available with regard to athletes who are open about their gender identity in sports.

.

Right, so anxiety due to being closeted would/could/may result in under performing. So if you take that anxiety away by creating an environment where the cause for said anxiety is no longer a factor - they would perform to the very same average elite standard for their sex, wouldn't they.

The fact that I don’t care about someone’s various identities doesn’t mean I don’t recognise how it is fundamental to who someone else is as a human being, and influences their decisions they make for themselves. It’s important to them in deciding just as an example whether or not to participate in sports at all for fear of being outed, they’re seeing what happens to people like them if they’re open about their gender identity. I would suggest that impression takes it’s toll on their mental and physical health and has an effect on their participation in sports.

Yes, I can understand how if one had the sense that you have an unfair advantage that would affect you, whether true or not.

Their participation at elite level is something of a red herring tbh when the idea of them being open about their gender identity and participating at all in sports at any level is an affront to some people on the basis of their sex, and all the negative assumptions made about people on the basis of their sex, as if ‘guilt by association’ is a fair standard by which to judge anyone.

When you say at any level do you mean also recreationally? Personally I couldn't care less how people decide to organize their sports recreationally. That's totally up to the individuals involved and also because the outcome of a sporting contest recreationally is of no importance. Kinda like Tennis mixed doubles, it's just for fun.

astrofool · 03-07-2021 04:08PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t care about proving elite women can qualify and compete with elite men, that’s never been my argument. You’re claiming that they can’t, and you have centuries of data to support your argument, but that’s never been my argument so I don’t have to provide evidence of something I never said.

Again, this is what you said, you don't need to be going into whataboutery again (and again):

One eyed Jack wrote: »

We don’t know and you can’t possibly know what would have been the outcome of women’s equal participation in sports because any sport wouldn’t have developed in the same way. On paper it’s easy to change one single factor and assume all other factors remain the same, but in reality, things just aren’t so simple because multiple factors are changing.

We do know this, we have the centuries of data, we know that males will always hold an advantage over female in the area of sports and athletics, changing the terms that define people doesn't change this, the science is there, the data is there, go and disprove it, when you can't, you can continue arguing on fairness and right to compete etc. but you can't argue in the face of scientific data like you seem to be trying to.

And again, you can start with football, open entry criteria, no barrier for entry, all ethnicities and genders represented.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 04:34PM

astrofool wrote: »

Again, this is what you said, you don't need to be going into whataboutery again (and again):

I’m well aware of what I said, you’re just not listening -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t care about proving elite women can qualify and compete with elite men, that’s never been my argument.

…

They’re well aware that they cannot be certain as some people here of the impact of the policy in it’s proper context -

IOC to publish transgender guidelines after Tokyo Games

How do you discuss a policy without discussing a policy exactly?

The subject of this thread, is transgender athletes participation in sports, and the Olympics policy in relation to transgender athletes participation in the Olympics, which will undoubtedly be used as a guideline in determining the status of people who are transgender in relation to their participation in sports.

I’m not going into whataboutery, I just have no interest in your argument which is about something else entirely.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 04:59PM

AllForIt wrote: »

Right, so anxiety due to being closeted would/could/may result in under performing. So if you take that anxiety away by creating an environment where the cause for said anxiety is no longer a factor - they would perform to the very same average elite standard for their sex, wouldn't they.

Anxiety though isn’t the problem, people’s prejudices are the problem, and that’s what needs to be addressed, and can only be addressed through policies, in order to create an environment where prejudice against anyone for any reason is just not tolerated. I’m very much of the school of if someone isn’t interfering with you, leave them alone, don’t go looking for them, don’t go harassing them, don’t interfere with them. Address the issue of other people’s bad behaviours and attitudes towards other people.

AllForIt wrote: »

When you say at any level do you mean also recreationally? Personally I couldn't care less how people decide to organize their sports recreationally. That's totally up to the individuals involved and also because the outcome of a sporting contest recreationally is of no importance. Kinda like Tennis mixed doubles, it's just for fun.

I’ve highlighted the key word in your post. Other people do care that people who are transgender are not permitted to participate in “their” sports. They don’t want people who are transgender to participate at any level. Surely you can’t be oblivious to what is going on internationally with regard to all sorts of policies being implemented to do the exact opposite of what you’re suggesting above? They’re intended to keep people who are transgender out of sports and out of spaces where they’re entitled to be.

I completely get already how some people are of the opinion that acknowledging and upholding the rights of people who are transgender is an infringement upon their rights or in conflict with their rights, but that’s just not the case. It would be no different regarding discrimination against individuals on any other grounds which are recognised in International human rights law - people claiming that other people having the same rights as they do, is an infringement upon their rights and is unfair to them. It’s just not, but I can understand why they need to portray it that way and use someone like Hubbard to make their point - because people looking at Hubbard make all sorts of negative assumptions about their character, based upon the behaviour, of someone else entirely.

Oranage2 · 03-07-2021 05:12PM

If this person was competing as man then they wouldn't even qualify for the olympics.

Laurel Hubbard weighs over 130kg, unfathomable for a natural woman to have such muscle mass.

The highest woman's weight category is 87kg+ whilst the men's is 109kg+

Woman's record total is 335kg
Man's record is 485kg
Hubbard's recent total is 270kg

Nothing personal but letting laurel compete is an absolute joke, luckily there are natural women who can lift heavier than Mrs. Hubbard so hopefully it keeps her out of the medals.

astrofool · 03-07-2021 05:33PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m well aware of what I said, you’re just not listening -

The subject of this thread, is transgender athletes participation in sports, and the Olympics policy in relation to transgender athletes participation in the Olympics, which will undoubtedly be used as a guideline in determining the status of people who are transgender in relation to their participation in sports.

I’m not going into whataboutery, I just have no interest in your argument which is about something else entirely.

So you're purely focused on the fairness and equality aspect rather than the science of sport aspect, fair enough.

The reason I started replying was because you started building your argument on there being no gender differences, this is patently untrue and easily provable, I don't expect further posts trying to compare genders in such ways as you have already conceded this point.

One eyed Jack · 03-07-2021 06:47PM

astrofool wrote: »

So you're purely focused on the fairness and equality aspect rather than the science of sport aspect, fair enough.

Well, more so the fairness aspect, couldn’t care less about the equality aspect, but I believe that involvement in sports are an important aspect of children’s development, and if they have a natural talent for a particular sport, I don’t think it’s unusual to suggest that they should be able to develop that talent free from prejudice and discrimination and so on. The social aspect of sports provide value which it is undeniable contribute to positive mental and physical health and promote tolerance and indeed a spirit of fairness in society. The science? Meh, tbh. I’m not personally interested in that aspect of sports, but it’s also a good area to get into if that’s what interests a child and they want to pursue a career in it as they do in other domains such as employment, education and so on.

astrofool wrote: »

The reason I started replying was because you started building your argument on there being no gender differences, this is patently untrue and easily provable, I don't expect further posts trying to compare genders in such ways as you have already conceded this point.

I get where you’re coming from, but no, that’s not where I was coming from. I certainly never made the argument you think I was making. I know there are differences based upon all sorts of factors, not just gender or sex. I also wouldn’t argue certainties on the basis of a lack of data with an abundance of data which addresses a different question entirely. That’s something I’d expect John Money to do, and we know the outcomes of his experiments regarding gender and sex which are still negatively influencing science and medicine today.

First olympic transgender athlete to compete at Tokyo 2020 **MOD NOTE IN OP**

Comments

First olympic transgender athlete to compete at Tokyo 2020 MOD NOTE IN OP