When it's a cis woman you're worried about against other cis women? No? I'm starting to think that we should have civics tests to use the Internet.....
It seems that, going forward, a stricter definition and (private and respectful) testing of cis categorisation would reduce the pain and suffering (from armchair commentators like ourselves) of all future competitors at top levels of womens sports.
Umm is the person in the correct weight class for this event? Yes. Okay next!
For the "men's" event, yes. Weight is the only restriction. Women should be able to fight in the men's event if they qualify.
For the women's classification there must be a clear line drawn somewhere between "has given birth" and "changed their name to Sue".
(I have no preference exactly where that line is drawn)
The youngest Olympian this year is a 12-year-old from China competing as a skateboarder. The youngest ever was an 11-year-old who competed in gymnastics.
Should we be letting those young girls know whether or not they count as girls through some sort of unspecified genetic test?
Why do you think women need to be protected by having to prove they're women? Do you really not get that tons of women would be discouraged from competing if they felt they had to satisfy some white knight's genetic criteria?
Should we be letting those young girls know whether or not they count as girls through some sort of unspecified genetic test?
If there is no gender advantage there is no need.
Do you want to go further and say for skateboarding and gymnastics there should be no segregation?
Women do need segregation, for saftey more than anything. There needs to be a clear line otherwise these arguments will continue to occur.
If there is no gender advantage there is no need.
So there's no need?
Do you want to go further and say for skateboarding and gymnastics there should be no segregation?
So there is a need?
Women do need segregation, for saftey more than anything.
Women do not need your protection, nor have they asked for it.
Of course woman need the protection of their sporting governing bodies. That's their job.
You think women need protection and men don't. That's the issue here. You're being a white knight.
Governing bodies also provide safety regulations for men.
And yet you have never once mentioned how men need this same sort of protection. In fact, you've made it very clear that women need your protection.
That is an excellent question that the Olympic committee should answer clearly and definitively.
You are the one claiming she's not a real woman. It's up to you to define it.
They already have an answer, you just don't like it.
I've not claimed anything about any individual.
I'm saying that a male/female checkbox on a passport is an inadequate test for a top level sporting event. The Olympic Committee need a better answer to avoid similar discussions in the future.
Fine. What is the test they should use? You don't like their criteria, so what should the criteria be?
The test should be repeatable, definitive and standardised.
It should also satisfy the majority of members of that governing body.
This is the final time I will ask you, because you are now setting off my troll alarm: What should the criteria be? You have a lot of very strong opinions unless anyone challenges them, and then you try to weasel out of it.
You are also very much skirting the trans bigotry line and I'm going to keep letting you do that if you wish to remain here.
Not for me to decide the criteria.
There must be a line somewhere, and that line needs to be much more consistent, clearer and well defined than a field on a passport.
And you’re done.
I'm saying that a male/female checkbox on a passport is an inadequate test for a top level sporting event.
When it's a cis woman you're worried about against other cis women? No? I'm starting to think that we should have civics tests to use the Internet.....
It seems that, going forward, a stricter definition and (private and respectful) testing of cis categorisation would reduce the pain and suffering (from armchair commentators like ourselves) of all future competitors at top levels of womens sports.
Umm is the person in the correct weight class for this event? Yes. Okay next!
For the "men's" event, yes. Weight is the only restriction. Women should be able to fight in the men's event if they qualify.
For the women's classification there must be a clear line drawn somewhere between "has given birth" and "changed their name to Sue".
(I have no preference exactly where that line is drawn)
The youngest Olympian this year is a 12-year-old from China competing as a skateboarder. The youngest ever was an 11-year-old who competed in gymnastics.
Should we be letting those young girls know whether or not they count as girls through some sort of unspecified genetic test?
Why do you think women need to be protected by having to prove they're women? Do you really not get that tons of women would be discouraged from competing if they felt they had to satisfy some white knight's genetic criteria?
If there is no gender advantage there is no need.
Do you want to go further and say for skateboarding and gymnastics there should be no segregation?
Women do need segregation, for saftey more than anything. There needs to be a clear line otherwise these arguments will continue to occur.
So there's no need?
So there is a need?
Women do not need your protection, nor have they asked for it.
Of course woman need the protection of their sporting governing bodies. That's their job.
You think women need protection and men don't. That's the issue here. You're being a white knight.
Governing bodies also provide safety regulations for men.
And yet you have never once mentioned how men need this same sort of protection. In fact, you've made it very clear that women need your protection.
I've not talked about horses or dogs either.
And now I am almost certain you're trolling.
What convinced you of this?
Do tell us what makes a woman a real woman.
That is an excellent question that the Olympic committee should answer clearly and definitively.
You are the one claiming she's not a real woman. It's up to you to define it.
They already have an answer, you just don't like it.
I've not claimed anything about any individual.
I'm saying that a male/female checkbox on a passport is an inadequate test for a top level sporting event. The Olympic Committee need a better answer to avoid similar discussions in the future.
Fine. What is the test they should use? You don't like their criteria, so what should the criteria be?
The test should be repeatable, definitive and standardised.
It should also satisfy the majority of members of that governing body.
This is the final time I will ask you, because you are now setting off my troll alarm: What should the criteria be? You have a lot of very strong opinions unless anyone challenges them, and then you try to weasel out of it.
You are also very much skirting the trans bigotry line and I'm going to keep letting you do that if you wish to remain here.
Not for me to decide the criteria.
There must be a line somewhere, and that line needs to be much more consistent, clearer and well defined than a field on a passport.
And you’re done.
Why does there need to be a test?