I just watched a special about women in sport for International women's day and the universal emphasis from the women on why promoting women's sport is important is for exposure, so that young girls and women could be encouraged to participate, and attempt to excel if they choose and are capable. Growing up in a household of boys, I had pretty much zero appreciation for this. Even though every little boy I played hockey with were obviously inspired by seeing NHLers on TV (Canadian), I did not appreciate how that was lacking for women. Now as the husband of a very athletic wife and a father of three girls I am beginning to better understand that in our culture, sport has more value than just as a commercial entertainment venture. For health and fitness, as well as just for societal participation, visible examples of women excelling and competing is inspirational.
Oh, this I agree with. Visible examples and role models are important. But that is somewhat different than saying that it's only about winning. In fact you said it yourself 'excelling and competing' but I believe they can still excel and compete in a world where transwomen also participate.
And you know what the weird thing, a lot of the faces arguing to exclude transwomen here are the same ones that will tell you if you switch topic to STEM employment (for example) than role models don't matter, that removing barriers doesn't matter and that it's just tough that women don't have the attitudes/aptitudes required to succeed.
You seem to be able to be able to comprehend arguments so this is not for your benefit but I will spell it out clearly for the hard of thinking - I do not advocate for a system in which transwomen completely dominate sport, in which ciswomen don't have a chance to compete, in which no ciswomen ever can win anything.
And if the only way to achieve that was to exclude them entirely then I would reluctantly agree that its for the best. I just don't agree that we are at that point, and I have given an example of the kind of situation where it seems to be working OK.
I agree that the thread title puts the discussion into an unfortunate combative framework and I can understand your choice to take a defensive/protective stance. I can see you acknowledge the inherent challenge in the situation, but I feel like you may feel hesitant to concede any main points lest it appear that you are failing to defend a vulnerable group. I can appreciate that, but I feel like even compassionate reason will conclude that having trans-women compete with females is not the best solution. As you mentioned, some examples can be found where it hasn't been problematic, but as you also acknowledge, it can be inappropriate and I do feel it is likely to generate considerable difficulties for females if it becomes generally accepted.
I think we can all imagine scenarios where it would generate considerable difficulties, and some of us at least can imagine scenarios where it wouldn't. My question has always been whether there are ways we can manage things that would allow us to steer it to the latter. The counter arguments have generally been screaming nonsense about men in bras, Roger Federer identifying as a woman on a Tuesday, or 0.3% of a population entirely displacing 50% (through mathematical magic apparently). Of course there have also been the non-readers.
One must concede the point that biological sex cannot be chosen, even if the point is raised in a bigoted fashion. This does not me one abandons compassion and advocacy, just that one pursues it within the limits of reality.
Well indeed. And what I have asked is to discuss biological and social realities rather than invented nonsense. And I have said at least once that I don't know what the actual magnitude of difference between a transwoman and a cis woman is in terms of biological advantage. And nobody else has been forthcoming with this. The transwoman in my example speaks about how hormone therapy significantly changes their biological advantage. And I have not seen anyone speak out to say they feel that they have an unfair advantage or that they don't want to play alongside her. I haven't heard any reports that she is making a mockery of the sport, or her league or the games she participates in.
And yet people here insist that she needs to be banned from competing. And I haven't seen anyone offer a single reason for that other than that she belongs to a group that they want to exclude.
And yes it's just 1 example, but nobody is seriously trying to argue that she is unique are they? There must be hundreds or thousands of people like her who could all participate happily in women's sports without causing any problems whatsoever.
Are there other situations where it doesn't work as well? Undoubtedly. Could things become an issue in future if the numbers skewed significantly? Quite possibly. But that is an argument to address those issues, not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
