Yes to Claire and DP Synder -- this has crossed yet another red line. I had hoped that this issue would have resulted in the combining of all genders into one category instead of switching between the traditional two. The idea that all men are biologically stronger is a myth. Societal constraints that have long handicapped women are beginning to breakdown. More girls are training in the same way and at the same age as boys with the result being a more even playing field. Women no longer have to deal with "modesty" issues or with using "women's" equipment which is deliberately inferior in its quality and performance (especially golf here). The largest obstacle is misogynistic and transphobic men who will do anything to keep people other than cisgender men from beating them in competition. It will take at least a few more generations to get to fully integrated sports. Perhaps naively, I believe we will eventually get there.
Totally agree with you about gender categories--why not ability categories? On the one hand, we want to promote the idea of women as "champions"--on the other, the idea that in head to head competition that with anyone who has every been male they will always lose. It is the contradiction at the center of this whole thing.
Do you think transwomen who have been through male puberty have no advantage over female athletes? The evidence of male superiority in sports in regards to women is incontrovertible. Why don't you address this issue? Because the number of TW athletes is so small? (The number of TW in women's sports is growing exponentially.) Or you don't want to have to address the reality that males are stronger, faster, etc in almost every category of sport compared to females? It is entirely legitimate for women to be concerned and alarmed at the prospect of biological males taking our trophies, scholarships, records, etc.
As a former competitive athlete, I would say that the natural differences *among* women are also very significant, and I don't see any evidence that the number of trans women athletes is "growing exponentially." There are very few, and if they are growing exponentially, and are so dominant, why is it that we hear about exactly one--Lia Thomas?
But that also wasn't the point of the post: the point was--are you really ready to support terrorizing all women and girls with invasive gender tests that are indistinguishable from sexual assault because there *might* be a trans girl or woman sneaking into competition?
Of course there are natural difference among female athletes, but my point is the overwhelming differences between male and female athletes overall. If those differences are negligible why segregate sports by sex? Why have Title IX applied to athletics at all? And Lia Thomas is the one transgender woman most people in the U.S. have heard of, but there are many more and their numbers are growing enough to skew competitions and unfairly bump high performing women from wins, prize $, scholarships, etc. Martina Navratilova has written about this issue as have many others (and no, not just right-wingers.) The moral panic and invasive exams you describe do indeed sound horrific. However, telling male from female is something we are hard-wired to discern starting in infancy. It sounds like a moral panic to me to think people won't be able to tell who is female from male *without* an invasive exam. (btw people with DSDs - who have regrettably been subjected to humiliating exams, etc - are not trans and their situation is not the same as TW in women's sports.)
I htink why segregate sports by sex--rather than ability--is an excellent question. But my real point is this: this anti-trans thing is not about preserving the integrity of women's sports for those who are promoting it, and endless conversations about one or two athletes who are controversial leaves the mistaken impression that there are many transwomen who are competing as athletes, when that simply isn't true--and almost none of them are champions. The track and field folks managed to get Caster Semenya thrown out because of higher testosterone levels (which were also in the realm of normal female variation), even though she was actually not a man, and never had been one. Is this really what we want women's sports to look like? Doesn't seem like equality to me. And making girls and women subject to testing and invasive exams is not just an unpleasant detail that must be endured in order for women's sports to be "fair."
I do not think you read my comment closely. I never said those things. Semenya has a DSD - of course she’s female. DSD’s are sexed and have nothing to do with gender id.
My point is not that *you* said those things--but it is where the stigmatization of trans women will inevitably go--this Ohio law is only the most extreme example. But if this kind of invasive approach to women's sports continues, there will be lots of girls and women who end up in exactly that position. About 15% of the population has xxy chromosomes for example: they present as women. But that y chromosome will get them tossed out in Ohio.
Everyone with Klinefelter Syndrome (XXY) is male. According to Journal of European Genetics only .023% males have it, not 15%. Some, but not most have some feminine characteristics (lack of body hair, some breast tissue, small testicles)and many males with Klinefelter are mentally/physically disabled and many never know they have it. There will be no epidemic of people being unable to tell (usually at a glance) who is male or female. My concern is protecting girls and women's sports, safe spaces like prisons, and refuges for victims of trauma (usually perpetrated by males). I find the idea of genital exams abhorrent and if it happened I would be against it.
Yes to Claire and DP Synder -- this has crossed yet another red line. I had hoped that this issue would have resulted in the combining of all genders into one category instead of switching between the traditional two. The idea that all men are biologically stronger is a myth. Societal constraints that have long handicapped women are beginning to breakdown. More girls are training in the same way and at the same age as boys with the result being a more even playing field. Women no longer have to deal with "modesty" issues or with using "women's" equipment which is deliberately inferior in its quality and performance (especially golf here). The largest obstacle is misogynistic and transphobic men who will do anything to keep people other than cisgender men from beating them in competition. It will take at least a few more generations to get to fully integrated sports. Perhaps naively, I believe we will eventually get there.
Totally agree with you about gender categories--why not ability categories? On the one hand, we want to promote the idea of women as "champions"--on the other, the idea that in head to head competition that with anyone who has every been male they will always lose. It is the contradiction at the center of this whole thing.
Do you think transwomen who have been through male puberty have no advantage over female athletes? The evidence of male superiority in sports in regards to women is incontrovertible. Why don't you address this issue? Because the number of TW athletes is so small? (The number of TW in women's sports is growing exponentially.) Or you don't want to have to address the reality that males are stronger, faster, etc in almost every category of sport compared to females? It is entirely legitimate for women to be concerned and alarmed at the prospect of biological males taking our trophies, scholarships, records, etc.
As a former competitive athlete, I would say that the natural differences *among* women are also very significant, and I don't see any evidence that the number of trans women athletes is "growing exponentially." There are very few, and if they are growing exponentially, and are so dominant, why is it that we hear about exactly one--Lia Thomas?
But that also wasn't the point of the post: the point was--are you really ready to support terrorizing all women and girls with invasive gender tests that are indistinguishable from sexual assault because there *might* be a trans girl or woman sneaking into competition?
Of course there are natural difference among female athletes, but my point is the overwhelming differences between male and female athletes overall. If those differences are negligible why segregate sports by sex? Why have Title IX applied to athletics at all? And Lia Thomas is the one transgender woman most people in the U.S. have heard of, but there are many more and their numbers are growing enough to skew competitions and unfairly bump high performing women from wins, prize $, scholarships, etc. Martina Navratilova has written about this issue as have many others (and no, not just right-wingers.) The moral panic and invasive exams you describe do indeed sound horrific. However, telling male from female is something we are hard-wired to discern starting in infancy. It sounds like a moral panic to me to think people won't be able to tell who is female from male *without* an invasive exam. (btw people with DSDs - who have regrettably been subjected to humiliating exams, etc - are not trans and their situation is not the same as TW in women's sports.)
I htink why segregate sports by sex--rather than ability--is an excellent question. But my real point is this: this anti-trans thing is not about preserving the integrity of women's sports for those who are promoting it, and endless conversations about one or two athletes who are controversial leaves the mistaken impression that there are many transwomen who are competing as athletes, when that simply isn't true--and almost none of them are champions. The track and field folks managed to get Caster Semenya thrown out because of higher testosterone levels (which were also in the realm of normal female variation), even though she was actually not a man, and never had been one. Is this really what we want women's sports to look like? Doesn't seem like equality to me. And making girls and women subject to testing and invasive exams is not just an unpleasant detail that must be endured in order for women's sports to be "fair."
I do not think you read my comment closely. I never said those things. Semenya has a DSD - of course she’s female. DSD’s are sexed and have nothing to do with gender id.
My point is not that *you* said those things--but it is where the stigmatization of trans women will inevitably go--this Ohio law is only the most extreme example. But if this kind of invasive approach to women's sports continues, there will be lots of girls and women who end up in exactly that position. About 15% of the population has xxy chromosomes for example: they present as women. But that y chromosome will get them tossed out in Ohio.
Everyone with Klinefelter Syndrome (XXY) is male. According to Journal of European Genetics only .023% males have it, not 15%. Some, but not most have some feminine characteristics (lack of body hair, some breast tissue, small testicles)and many males with Klinefelter are mentally/physically disabled and many never know they have it. There will be no epidemic of people being unable to tell (usually at a glance) who is male or female. My concern is protecting girls and women's sports, safe spaces like prisons, and refuges for victims of trauma (usually perpetrated by males). I find the idea of genital exams abhorrent and if it happened I would be against it.
This is the creepiest information that has come my way in a while, and that's saying something. Thank you for writing about it.
Isn't it? It puts paid to any protests on the part of Republicans that what they really care about is women.
Yes. We might even say that they have "crossed the red line".