tomwaits
Frontier Psychiatrist
Offline
Some of us need to read a book to help us get woke.
Amazon product ASIN B07ZQMYM2C
Amazon product ASIN B07ZQMYM2C
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Some of us need to read a book to help us get woke.
Amazon product ASIN B07ZQMYM2C
Sure. I'll elaborate:Can you elaborate? I’m really not sure how you got to that conclusion from what I wrote
If it doesn't exist then why have gender designations at all? Why not just let the sport dictate who is good enough to compete? You're not tall enough, strong enough, fast enough, developed enough? Too bad. In my mind, allowing mixed gender sports is akin to pitting a professional athlete against high school kids. Sure, there will be a few that can compete, but the vast majority won't stand a chance.I think the other issue is us trying to operate under a idea of ‘fairness’ and ‘level playing field’ - no such thing exists. Someone always has a competitive advantage
"Change" is a key word here. You can change the starting line to put Bolt at a disadvantage, you can change the fence line to allow weaker batters to hit more home runs, they do change the tee box for women golfers and so on. What you can't change is your genetic make-up. You're pre-dispositioned to be taller or have faster reflexes or more natural muscle mass or bone density and so-forth and while yes, those natural traits give some advantages over others, I don't see it as fair to change the rules so to put them at a disadvantage in order to level the playing field simply because of their natural, inherent traits. That change is the problem I have with transgenders competing against natural genders, because then you are changing the rules and putting the rest of the field at a natural disadvantage for the sake of fairness. That's not fairness to me, that's sympathy.Now our impulse is have sports competitive - BUT we don’t make them competitive as possible
We don’t make usain bolt start 2 ft behind the other racers
We don’t change the outfield fence depending on who’s batting
We don’t give disadvantaged schools more money so they can complete with rich schools
And mostly we’re fine with a level of advantage/disadvantage
I think most of us here on the opposite end of the discussion are speaking a lot in the hypothetical and using the situations that have presented themselves as examples, so while you see these as statistically tiny occurrences, we're looking at the overall picture in general. Furthermore, not allowing someone to compete outside of their natural gender is by no means not allowing them to self-identify. It simply means that exceptions aren't being made and choice advantages ignored for a few at the sacrifice of others.But now we’re planting a flag on some statistically tiny disadvantageous events and making them way more important than someone being able to self-identify
And I’m not sure if fairness in sports is our driving concern here
But you are equal in that you both have the same naturally occurring potential. Assume that you are the same age. If you have the dedication and training it's possible to put yourself on an equal playing field with the NFL player, but could a woman of the same size and height do that? It would take many more extenuating circumstances to allow her to be able to complete at that level. In fact, it's never been done and it would take her much more dedication and training than it would you. So that's what you're asking of other women when making them compete against a trans athlete. They have to work and train harder in order to even make it a level playing field.I'm 6'6" 220 lbs. I'm in decent shape. But there are a *lot* of 6'6", 220 lb NFLers who are absolute monsters. So, do we talk about 40 times? Do we talk about verticals? Do we talk about age? Do we talk about body fat percentages? Or is it merely enough to say: Both are Men and Both are Same Size, Therefore Equal.
I'm 6'6" 220 lbs. I'm in decent shape. But there are a *lot* of 6'6", 220 lb NFLers who are absolute monsters. So, do we talk about 40 times? Do we talk about verticals? Do we talk about age? Do we talk about body fat percentages? Or is it merely enough to say: Both are Men and Both are Same Size, Therefore Equal.
I understand the argument. I'm not sure why other people seem to be getting so confused with it.
If the argument starts with fairness (i.e. "We think sport has to be fair, therefore..."), it applies to every factor that affects fairness (which does not mean that every factor is literally the same; only that they all affect fairness).
And if the argument does not apply to every factor that affects fairness, then it's not really about fairness (i.e. it turns out we don't necessarily think sport has to be fair after all).
I'd also add that it would be good if we could discuss this topic without straying into ignorant and offensive prejudice. I don't know if we have any trans posters here, but I don't think they'd appreciate seeing their identity compared to someone pretending to be a dog.
No one is getting confused about anything. You just don't want to accept real life factors, choosing instead to go with social justice.
As for pretending to be a dog, yes, it was silly hyperbole to stress a point.
But if you want something more serious, how about Rachel Dolezal? She identified as an African American. But, could she ever BE African American? Would you think it would be fair if she was able to take advantage of programs that benefit African Americans?
if you don't keep up you are apparently a Nazi.