Belz...
Fiend God
I'll take that as a no then.
Except that I already have and you ignored it. As I said, pretending to not understand the basics of the discussion is a tired old trick, known now as bobbing, which won't endear you to anyone.
I'll take that as a no then.
I don't know. I imagine their are plenty 15 year olds who could outbox many 26 year olds. I wouldn't put one in the ring with the world champion though
But then Federer v Williams would be fair
It's not irrelevant in the least. You just can't see the point because you are tied into an old paradigm and happy to throw transwomen under the bus thanks to bad maths.
It's not irrelevant in the least. You just can't see the point because you are tied into an old paradigm and happy to throw transwomen under the bus thanks to bad maths.
No more so than you are throwing cis-women under the bus.
Your ideal world, no matter how much you demand we just don't notice, would have little to no cis-women being able to functionally compete.
Again your argument would leave us with a functioning "Biological Men Who Identify as Men" League and a league that would be dominated by biological men who identify as women, with cis-women a statistical anomaly at best.
You're worldview excludes a lot more people then the one you are railing against.
But you would be perfectly happy with the current heavy weight champion of the world facing the womens
Would I? Where did I say that?
When we're talking about women being excluded or trans people being included, obviously we're not talking about those who don't qualify for the competition.
then it's not 50 v 0.3 then.
It's more like 0.01 vs 0.01
No more so than you are throwing cis-women under the bus.
Your ideal world, no matter how much you demand we just don't notice, would have little to no cis-women being able to functionally compete.
Again your argument would leave us with a functioning "Biological Men Who Identify as Men" League and a league that would be dominated by biological men who identify as women, with cis-women a statistical anomaly at best.
You're worldview excludes a lot more people then the one you are railing against.
But then again I haven't been arguing for a particular solution.
But then again I haven't been arguing for a particular solution.
I really don't get how it is such a big issue
Just have 3 categories instead of just men and women
Men
Women
Trans Women
*Very slowly*
Okay... let me know where I lose you here because I'm starting to agree with Belz that it's seeming more and more like you're doing this on purpose.
If the top .01% of female athletes, the ones competing at high level professional, Olympic, stuff like that levels are overwhelmingly dominated by trans-female athletes, it excludes cis-women athletes from top level competition.
Why not catch every fish by having another category?I really don't get how it is such a big issue
Just have 3 categories instead of just men and women
Men
Women
Trans Women
Why not catch every fish by having another category?
Trans Men
It's a big issue to the LGBTQI community that's trying to improve society's tolerance and respect for transsexuals.
And it's a big issue for all of us who want an inclusive society that treats minorities as first-class citizens, just as deserving of our support and accommodation as the majority.