Getting rid of gender (sex, really) segregation in sports would, of course, create the problem of severely reducing good opportunities for cis females.
The “just play with your competitive peers” angle keeps ignoring the fact that at levels beyond casual, males do not have competitive peers among females once puberty hits. If there is no segregation by sex or gender, just competition levels, all competitors beyond intramural and rec leagues will be male.
Yes it does. Which is brings us back round to such females seeking to ring-fence their competition in some way. There is no perfect solution.
A case could be made that you run as many teams as there are interested competitors and let the chips fall where they may but yes, the top levels that people would be interested in will definitely all be male.
To what problem? There doesn’t seem to be an actual problem that needs a solution.
Like^
I generally buy into this line of thinking. It’s my Index Card Theory of National Importance. If you can list all the people involved in the problem on one index card, it isn’t of national importance.
OTOH, if a problem crops up in this area, it could be one that is of ridiculous proportion. I mean Secretariat at the Belmont level of destroying the competition. Maybe the best approach is to just let them be who they are, let them compete as who they are and take these potential problems as simply potentials and deal with it if they actually happen.
That sounds like the sort of case that would mostly be made by men. I’m not sure telling half the human race “too bad so sad” is a progressive approach here.
Right? It’s like, we all agree that there’s no actual problem yet, but let’s figure out how to radically design everything to deal with this non-problem anyway.
In adult sport there is certainly a need for a solution, that’s what the UK sports council report was about.
In high school sport? perhaps not yet but I would expect that sooner or later the challenges seen in adult sport will have to be faced there as well and I expect it’ll be no more straightforward.
That’s probably true but then a decent enough proportion of that population half aren’t necessarily convinced that the current situation leads to the best outcomes either.
Let’s solve it if and when the problem arises. And let’s keep in mind that the goals for adult sport (create a highly lucrative entertainment industry) are completely different from the goals for children’s sport (create an enriching, fun, healthy, character-building social structure for children).
Yes. If someone wants to create “blond goddess mud wrestling”, and only allows tall, blonde, busty women to compete in their sport, I really don’t care. But I would sure as hell care if they tried to start up a team in my child’s school.
I think that’s officially off-topic for this thread, as per the mod note in post 4 or 5.
I suspect that will be the approach taken
I have to disagree with such a clear distinction. The vast majority of adult sports that I’m aware of are done with no financial gain in mind and are very much done for the reasons you give as relating just to children. I think of the sports I take part in and none are part of the entertainment industry and all are governed by singular bodies that set rules for adults and juniors alike.
“Vast majority” by what metric? Number of participants? Number of distinct sports?
If you’re just referring to participation by adult amateurs in athletic activities for “an enriching, fun, healthy, character-building social structure”, then we’re back at not needing to worry whether a tiny minority of athletes who are transgender have an “unfair advantage”. Because whether they do or they don’t, it’s not really interfering with anybody else’s enrichment, fun, health or character-building.
And all the sports I’ve taken part in as an adult were coed, so there’s really no issue at all.
But
let’s get back to kid’s sports.
all of the above
Sure, if that remains the case for all the people involved then there is no problem. At the point where enough of those involved are concerend with those factors then there will be.
It’s OK because I presume they’re both cis-girls. It’s OK for the same reason it’s OK for one kid to win the youth (18 or younger) amateur singing competition and another kid who can’t hit the same notes to lose. It wouldn’t be OK for that kid to lose to a 25 yr old professional singer who was allowed to enter the competition.
What are your thoughts about this part of my post?
Because the boy lost fair and square. We don’t live in a perfect world where everything is 100% fair, so maybe some people believe that it isn’t fair that one male can run faster than another male, but fairness in sports doesn’t mean protection from losing. It means that we try to make the playing field as level as possible, and segregation by sex is one of the ways that we do that…therefore a male losing to another male isn’t unfair.
I don’t agree that it’s not zero sum…there are only so many spots on the team. More teams would be great, but I doubt that most schools can afford it. If it’s economically possible, maybe it would help if it became standard for every high-school to have an open team, a female team, and a co-ed team.
I think the thing that most people who oppose trans girls in girl’s sports want to avoid is a transgirl who can’t play competitively on the boy’s side because they’re not talented enough, but can play competitively against the girls because of the advantages from their male body.
So, my scenario assumed that this transgirl can do well against the boys because otherwise it would be “unacceptable” in my, and a lot of other people’s, opinion for them to play against cis-girls. It’s unacceptable for the same reason that most people would oppose allowing 35 yr olds to compete in the spelling bee, or enroll in 3rd grade, or compete in little league.
So, to summarize, you think it’s okay if the transgirl can’t play with the girls, but you think it’s horribly unfair if a cis girl gets bumped from varsity to jv.
And you don’t think it’s important that there be enough sports opportunities for all the kids to play on some team – that’s not the policy you want to lobby for. Instead you want to lobby for keeping the trans girls away from the girls teams.
Is that fair?
I don’t think it’s fair if a cis girl gets bumped down to JV or loses her spot on the team altogether to a transgirl. I think it’s perfectly fine for a cis girl to be bumped down to JV or lose her spot on the team altogether to a cis girl.
How did you come to the conclusion that I don’t think it’s important to create enough sports opportunities for all kids from me suggesting that we create a third co-ed team? More teams = more opportunities for more kids to play. I said that idk if it’s economically possible to add another team not that I oppose adding more teams.
You ignored my first question. Do you think it’s okay that transgirls get excluded from girl’s sports? No cost there?
Because you ignored that in many sports, especially at the lower levels, there aren’t hard limits on the number of kids who can join. Instead, you want to create an economic hardship to make sure that we can exclude the trans girls from the girls teams. That felt like a throwaway suggestion that will be dismissed as economically infeasible.