Arkansas Governor signs new executive law to protect women.

[Slimshandy]

I don't think the challenges of grouping athletes by size and ability are insurmountable, forever.

Does that mean that you believe at some point we will be able to get rid of weight classes in boxing?

How are they going to be able to be overlooked in the future while maintaining a fair sport?

No, exactly the opposite. I think weight, strength and ability classes should be created right now for every sport where people of vastly different sizes participate. The featherweight swimming class might be all female, or it might include some really small males or FTM competitors who are of about the same size and ability. So what?

Because a guy who’s 5’4 and 120 pounds will have a physical advantage over a girl who’s 5’4 and 120 pounds.


Again, heart size, red blood cell count, body fat, ect…



It’s just plain unfair to the girls.

[Slimshandy]

Does that mean that you believe at some point we will be able to get rid of weight classes in boxing?

How are they going to be able to be overlooked in the future while maintaining a fair sport?

No, exactly the opposite. I think weight, strength and ability classes should be created right now for every sport where people of vastly different sizes participate. The featherweight swimming class might be all female, or it might include some really small males or FTM competitors who are of about the same size and ability. So what?

I think this sounds like a truly fair way to do it. Splitting sports by gender is so ambiguous. What really matters is speed, size and strength. So why not, in all sports affected by those factors, test those factors on all students and put them in a class based on those factors. You might end up with one class that is mostly males but a few females and a few trans, another class that is mostly females but a few males and a few trans, and maybe a class somewhere in the middle that's more evenly split. But it would be fair, and everyone would be competing against others on the same level with them regardless of gender so it would be more of a measure of who's worked harder to be better.

It wouldn’t be fair…


And we would have to deny scientific realities in order to call it fair.

[highlandmum]

Does that mean that you believe at some point we will be able to get rid of weight classes in boxing?

How are they going to be able to be overlooked in the future while maintaining a fair sport?

No, exactly the opposite. I think weight, strength and ability classes should be created right now for every sport where people of vastly different sizes participate. The featherweight swimming class might be all female, or it might include some really small males or FTM competitors who are of about the same size and ability. So what?

I think this sounds like a truly fair way to do it. Splitting sports by gender is so ambiguous. What really matters is speed, size and strength. So why not, in all sports affected by those factors, test those factors on all students and put them in a class based on those factors. You might end up with one class that is mostly males but a few females and a few trans, another class that is mostly females but a few males and a few trans, and maybe a class somewhere in the middle that's more evenly split. But it would be fair, and everyone would be competing against others on the same level with them regardless of gender so it would be more of a measure of who's worked harder to be better.

Do you know how many levels this would be? The pool would be so diluted it would no longer be competitive. How are you planning on doing this? Age, weight, height, times. So now at the Olympics we have 100 meter butterfly - under 5'-4" and between certain ages, and over a certain time, 100 meter butter fly - under 5'-4", between certain ages, and under a certain time then do the same for other heights. Kind of defeats the purpose of competing when you do this. Would you do the same for team sports?

[Traci_Momof2]

No, exactly the opposite. I think weight, strength and ability classes should be created right now for every sport where people of vastly different sizes participate. The featherweight swimming class might be all female, or it might include some really small males or FTM competitors who are of about the same size and ability. So what?

I think this sounds like a truly fair way to do it. Splitting sports by gender is so ambiguous. What really matters is speed, size and strength. So why not, in all sports affected by those factors, test those factors on all students and put them in a class based on those factors. You might end up with one class that is mostly males but a few females and a few trans, another class that is mostly females but a few males and a few trans, and maybe a class somewhere in the middle that's more evenly split. But it would be fair, and everyone would be competing against others on the same level with them regardless of gender so it would be more of a measure of who's worked harder to be better.

Do you know how many levels this would be? The pool would be so diluted it would no longer be competitive. How are you planning on doing this? Age, weight, height, times. So now at the Olympics we have 100 meter butterfly - under 5'-4" and between certain ages, and over a certain time, 100 meter butter fly - under 5'-4", between certain ages, and under a certain time then do the same for other heights. Kind of defeats the purpose of competing when you do this. Would you do the same for team sports?

To be honest, I don't know and I don't really care. But I don't see how separating by S*x is creating more fairness than separating by any other factor.

Maybe we should get rid of separations entirely. If you are human and want to compete you have to be as good as these other humans who want to compete. End of story.

[Slimshandy]

I think this sounds like a truly fair way to do it. Splitting sports by gender is so ambiguous. What really matters is speed, size and strength. So why not, in all sports affected by those factors, test those factors on all students and put them in a class based on those factors. You might end up with one class that is mostly males but a few females and a few trans, another class that is mostly females but a few males and a few trans, and maybe a class somewhere in the middle that's more evenly split. But it would be fair, and everyone would be competing against others on the same level with them regardless of gender so it would be more of a measure of who's worked harder to be better.

Do you know how many levels this would be? The pool would be so diluted it would no longer be competitive. How are you planning on doing this? Age, weight, height, times. So now at the Olympics we have 100 meter butterfly - under 5'-4" and between certain ages, and over a certain time, 100 meter butter fly - under 5'-4", between certain ages, and under a certain time then do the same for other heights. Kind of defeats the purpose of competing when you do this. Would you do the same for team sports?

To be honest, I don't know and I don't really care. But I don't see how separating by S*x is creating more fairness than separating by any other factor.

Maybe we should get rid of separations entirely. If you are human and want to compete you have to be as good as these other humans who want to compete. End of story.

Muscle mass, bone mass, fat stores, heart size, red blood cell amounts…


Men and women have differences in FAR MORE different ways that just penis/vagina…and whether women like it or not, it means men are physically stronger, and will have more stamina when trained.


Going by your “ human” criteria, men win and women lose.

[highlandmum]

I think this sounds like a truly fair way to do it. Splitting sports by gender is so ambiguous. What really matters is speed, size and strength. So why not, in all sports affected by those factors, test those factors on all students and put them in a class based on those factors. You might end up with one class that is mostly males but a few females and a few trans, another class that is mostly females but a few males and a few trans, and maybe a class somewhere in the middle that's more evenly split. But it would be fair, and everyone would be competing against others on the same level with them regardless of gender so it would be more of a measure of who's worked harder to be better.

Do you know how many levels this would be? The pool would be so diluted it would no longer be competitive. How are you planning on doing this? Age, weight, height, times. So now at the Olympics we have 100 meter butterfly - under 5'-4" and between certain ages, and over a certain time, 100 meter butter fly - under 5'-4", between certain ages, and under a certain time then do the same for other heights. Kind of defeats the purpose of competing when you do this. Would you do the same for team sports?

To be honest, I don't know and I don't really care. But I don't see how separating by S*x is creating more fairness than separating by any other factor.

Maybe we should get rid of separations entirely. If you are human and want to compete you have to be as good as these other humans who want to compete. End of story.

Then you would practically destroy women's sports. Just look at the world records in Track and Field and that is enough to tell you why there are men's and women's divisions. My friends daughter plays hockey, extremely good at it but there is no way she would want to play in a game with my son. He is bigger, and stronger than she is. He is 6'-2" and 225 lbs, she is 5'-8" and I would say about 150 lbs, he would destroy her if he did a open ice body check on her.

Women have fought to get their own leagues in soccer, basketball, and hockey, and you now want to take that away from them.

[WellPreserved]

I think this sounds like a truly fair way to do it. Splitting sports by gender is so ambiguous. What really matters is speed, size and strength. So why not, in all sports affected by those factors, test those factors on all students and put them in a class based on those factors. You might end up with one class that is mostly males but a few females and a few trans, another class that is mostly females but a few males and a few trans, and maybe a class somewhere in the middle that's more evenly split. But it would be fair, and everyone would be competing against others on the same level with them regardless of gender so it would be more of a measure of who's worked harder to be better.

Do you know how many levels this would be? The pool would be so diluted it would no longer be competitive. How are you planning on doing this? Age, weight, height, times. So now at the Olympics we have 100 meter butterfly - under 5'-4" and between certain ages, and over a certain time, 100 meter butter fly - under 5'-4", between certain ages, and under a certain time then do the same for other heights. Kind of defeats the purpose of competing when you do this. Would you do the same for team sports?

To be honest, I don't know and I don't really care. But I don't see how separating by S*x is creating more fairness than separating by any other factor.

Maybe we should get rid of separations entirely. If you are human and want to compete you have to be as good as these other humans who want to compete. End of story.

Or we could continue to separate sports by men and women, recognize that transgender women are women, and a sometimes a transgender women who represents 0.025% of women athletes may possibly win, lol. Sometimes transgender men win too.

[Slimshandy]

Do you know how many levels this would be? The pool would be so diluted it would no longer be competitive. How are you planning on doing this? Age, weight, height, times. So now at the Olympics we have 100 meter butterfly - under 5'-4" and between certain ages, and over a certain time, 100 meter butter fly - under 5'-4", between certain ages, and under a certain time then do the same for other heights. Kind of defeats the purpose of competing when you do this. Would you do the same for team sports?

To be honest, I don't know and I don't really care. But I don't see how separating by S*x is creating more fairness than separating by any other factor.

Maybe we should get rid of separations entirely. If you are human and want to compete you have to be as good as these other humans who want to compete. End of story.

Or we could continue to separate sports by men and women, recognize that transgender women are women, and a sometimes a transgender women who represents 0.025% of women athletes may possibly win, lol. Sometimes transgender men win too.

There is a huge difference between someone who feels like a woman, and someone who has the physical body of a woman.



To deny that is to deny science…
To take the fairness aspect away from women means that you’re valuing inclusivity more than you value fairness to women in sports.

[WellPreserved]

To be honest, I don't know and I don't really care. But I don't see how separating by S*x is creating more fairness than separating by any other factor.

Maybe we should get rid of separations entirely. If you are human and want to compete you have to be as good as these other humans who want to compete. End of story.

Or we could continue to separate sports by men and women, recognize that transgender women are women, and a sometimes a transgender women who represents 0.025% of women athletes may possibly win, lol. Sometimes transgender men win too.

There is a huge difference between someone who feels like a woman, and someone who has the physical body of a woman.



To deny that is to deny science…
To take the fairness aspect away from women means that you’re valuing inclusivity more than you value fairness to women in sports.

I don't define a woman based on her chromosomes or external genitalia and am loath to disqualify transgender and intersex women (less than 1% of the population) from all sport based on perceived advantage when the science is not decided.

"A new study financed by the International Olympic Committee found that transgender female athletes showed greater handgrip strength — an indicator of overall muscle strength — but lower jumping ability, lung function and relative cardiovascular fitness compared with women whose gender was assigned female at birth.

That data, which also compared trans women with men, contradicted a broad claim often made by proponents of rules that bar transgender women from competing in women’s sports. It also led the study’s authors to caution against a rush to expand such policies, which already bar transgender athletes from a handful of Olympic sports.

The study’s most important finding, according to one of its authors, Yannis Pitsiladis, a member of the I.O.C.’s medical and scientific commission, was that, given physiological differences, “Trans women are not biological men.”

The authors cautioned against the presumption of immutable and disproportionate advantages for transgender female athletes who compete in women’s sports, and they advised against “precautionary bans and sport eligibility exclusions” that were not based on sport-specific research."
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/worl ... =url-share

I also find this fear mongering about transgender women taking away scholarship opportunities from "real" women absurd. As I posted before, out of 200,000 NCAA women athletes, 50 are women and to date, no transgender woman has received a NCAA athletic scholarship. The fact that parents are in a tizzy about this reflects more about our lack of free education which is a MUCH bigger issue than a few women with a Y chromosome or a couple of women with testes.

Arkansas's restrictive abortion laws makes it clear that they don't care about or protect women. I find the headline laughable.

[Slimshandy]

Or we could continue to separate sports by men and women, recognize that transgender women are women, and a sometimes a transgender women who represents 0.025% of women athletes may possibly win, lol. Sometimes transgender men win too.

There is a huge difference between someone who feels like a woman, and someone who has the physical body of a woman.



To deny that is to deny science…
To take the fairness aspect away from women means that you’re valuing inclusivity more than you value fairness to women in sports.

I don't define a woman based on her chromosomes or external genitalia and am loath to disqualify transgender and intersex women (less than 1% of the population) from all sport based on perceived advantage when the science is not decided.

"A new study financed by the International Olympic Committee found that transgender female athletes showed greater handgrip strength — an indicator of overall muscle strength — but lower jumping ability, lung function and relative cardiovascular fitness compared with women whose gender was assigned female at birth.

That data, which also compared trans women with men, contradicted a broad claim often made by proponents of rules that bar transgender women from competing in women’s sports. It also led the study’s authors to caution against a rush to expand such policies, which already bar transgender athletes from a handful of Olympic sports.

The study’s most important finding, according to one of its authors, Yannis Pitsiladis, a member of the I.O.C.’s medical and scientific commission, was that, given physiological differences, “Trans women are not biological men.”

The authors cautioned against the presumption of immutable and disproportionate advantages for transgender female athletes who compete in women’s sports, and they advised against “precautionary bans and sport eligibility exclusions” that were not based on sport-specific research."
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/worl ... =url-share

I also find this fear mongering about transgender women taking away scholarship opportunities from "real" women absurd. As I posted before, out of 200,000 NCAA women athletes, 50 are women and to date, no transgender woman has received a NCAA athletic scholarship. The fact that parents are in a tizzy about this reflects more about our lack of free education which is a MUCH bigger issue than a few women with a Y chromosome or a couple of women with testes.

Arkansas's restrictive abortion laws makes it clear that they don't care about or protect women. I find the headline laughable.

In the nicest way possible, if their lung function is lower, then they’re been physically harmed by the medical interventions they’ve taken.


If their cardiovascular fitness is worse, they’ve been harmed so much that their lifespan will be lessened.


If you’re ok with that so be it, but being that most transgender athletes aren’t undergoing that level of change, it’s irrelevant.



If you are ok with sports being unfair to women, so be it… that’s your own prerogative. But I know for a fact that you can at the least, understand why others might not be ok with it.