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

That’s the decision the new Biden rule takes

which one is this?

I know of the case in West Virginia where the trans kid “has lived as a girl in all aspects of her life for years and receives puberty-delaying treatment and estrogen hormone therapy, so has not experienced (and will not experience) endogenous puberty,” In that case I'd have no problem, and I'd say the vast vast majority of people would have no problem with her competing with / against other girls.

I saw another trans girl from Texas mentioned, not sure what sport they play, if any. If they're on puberty blockers they should be able to play with the girls, if not they should play with the boys, or if there's no boys team choose a different sport.

You mean the Biden rules discussed here

Basically they seem to align with the way most sports are going anyway. It would seem to allow banning biological males who have gone through puberty from female categories of sport on competitive or risk of injury grounds.

…have YOU read the Biden rule draft

historically the little people being discriminated against win in the end.

The white folk who 'feel it's unfair they have to compete against negros' lost their appeals in the end, too.

Money locked website.

"As the governing body, we acknowledge we’re still on a path of education and understanding."

As I've said before, eugenicists etc thought they had a lot figured out a century ago. A lot of poor decisions were made as a result.

A lot of plebes similarly think they are armchair experts about gender-specific lung capacity etc. today.

Seems comparable to me.

Here the body indicates they are making a decision on shaky principle that is open to being changed in the future. Hell they don't actually give any specificity on the nature of their ruling ("accounting for and balancing a range of factors"). History, as I said, will eventually repeat itself.

Many millennia fewer's worth of information on trans athleticism however.

You're the only one getting emotional. I simply pointed out the rhythm of history, citing modern example.

As I said you're the only one being emotional about this, I simply stated my observation on historical rhythm, and you insist on continuing to dig at nothing.

That's a fine strawman but that's clearly not what I said.

"In other news, there is now a non-inclusive World Transplant Games starting today and an ultra-runner of previous good standing has been disqualified for use of a car to come third in a competition."

He'll be on the right side of history, you'll see..😀

To give your argument one final shove into oblivion:

You’re not shoving the argument anywhere though, you’re completely avoiding it by claiming it’s absurd, and then not addressing it at all. The point of making the comparison is on the basis of protection from discrimination against people in in society on the basis of their characteristics or membership of a particular group, in Western society anyway, particularly what have become known as the grounds of discrimination in human rights law.

In other news, there is now a non-inclusive World Transplant Games starting today and an ultra-runner of previous good standing has been disqualified for use of a car to come third in a competition.

You made that facetious analogy before, but couldn’t stick the landing then, and it’s still not any way comparable. You’d have to go the opposite way - an athlete who competes in the World Transplant Games who wants to compete in the Olympics, and whether or not they would have an unfair advantage over other competitors from other countries. That argument was floated when Oscar Pistorius competed in the Olympics.

I have no doubt that similar arguments would be made if an athlete wished to compete in a sporting event where they were perceived to have an advantage on the basis that they had a fresh set of pre-loved organs transplanted only a year earlier, if they started winning competitions.

Arguments opposed to their participation wouldn’t be based upon scientific evidence, no more than the arguments to prohibit athletes who are transgender from competing in sports with athletes who aren’t transgender, are based upon scientific evidence. They’re based entirely upon the assumption that permitting athletes who are transgender to compete in accordance with their preferred gender would be detrimental to the sport. Same tired old arguments that were used against women, against anyone who isn’t white, against anyone who is perceived in some way to have an advantage, which fuels accusations of doping, when just plain sexism, racism and homophobia don’t make for credible arguments worthy of being considered legitimate, incontrovertible scientific evidence, as opposed to just bullshìt excuses.