Guess you haven't talked to any scientists then. Is this like the belief that mainstream science thought an ice age was coming in the 70's?
Lia Thomas barred from Olympics
- Thread starter Phil C. McNasty
- Start date
Except there are. For example, mothers quite often take their biologically male children into women's washrooms when they are too long to be left alone. There are always exceptions. It's just up to society to determine which exemptions are warranted.
Elite women's sports are far from the discussion of bathrooms.
The science says that the vast majority of people are 100% male or 100% female. The science also says there are people genetically or biologically intersex with primary sexual characteristics of both sexes. There is also lots of research into the genetics of secondary sexual characteristics (which are things like Jenner being a 'chunk') which shows that it is somewhat common for at least some of those genes being typical of the other biological sex.
In addition there are studies on brain structures that show many trans individuals have developmental brain structures more similar to that of their identified gender.
And that's without getting into all the psychological aspects and gender being a social construct.
Are you suggesting that the HS science lessons you hardly paid attention to were the same as PhD research?
They have. But their rulings are often based on the money and viewership their competitions receive so their rules keep changing over time. More significantly, their members are governmental bodies who are accountable to their countries so the continued discussion is important.
Sports aren't fair by definition as some individuals will have biological advantages that make them successful. These organizations should be examining what is fair enough for their sports and ideally should have little to do with political movements.
It does though and too many people are looking at it through a lens of what makes them feel uncomfortable or what they have been bombarded with on social media instead of simply viewing it as making entertaining and meaningful competitions.
Intersex is so statistically so small that it is insignificant 0.018%
''Anne Fausto-Sterling s suggestion that the prevalence of intersex might be as high as 1.7% has attracted wide attention in both the scholarly press and the popular media. Many reviewers are not aware that this figure includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex, such as Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, and late-onset adrenal hyperplasia. If the term intersex is to retain any meaning, the term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female. Applying this more precise definition, the true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%, almost 100 times lower than Fausto-Sterling s estimate of 1.7%. ''
How common is intersex? a response to Anne Fausto-Sterling - PubMed
Anne Fausto-Sterling s suggestion that the prevalence of intersex might be as high as 1.7% has attracted wide attention in both the scholarly press and the popular media. Many reviewers are not aware that this figure includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex, such as...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Wow, its such a tiny minority you decided to pick on.
But I guess that's the point.
I dunno…I’m not a geneticist.
If…for the sake of argument…there is a scientific consensus amongst all of the researchers who have dedicated their careers to studying the topic of gender then I am inclined to believe it or to at least try to understand where they are coming from.
I am assuming that the definition of gender they are discussing includes not just one’s physical traits but also how they understand and experience the concept of gender. From that perspective, many researchers would argue that gender exists on a continuum rather than a binary proposition.
Anyhow…my original question was to ask why people get so upset about this in the first place…and please don’t tell me that it’s because you care so deeply about fairness in women’s sports
So what is it then? Because it just seems like more bigotry and fear mongering from the Right.
I dunno…I’m not a geneticist.
If…for the sake of argument…there is a scientific consensus amongst all of the researchers who have dedicated their careers to studying the topic of gender then I am inclined to believe it or to at least try to understand where they are coming from.
I am assuming that the definition of gender they are discussing includes not just one’s physical traits but also how they understand and experience the concept of gender. From that perspective, many researchers would argue that gender exists on a continuum rather than a binary proposition.
Anyhow…my original question was to ask why people get so upset about this in the first place…and please don’t tell me that it’s because you care so deeply about fairness in women’s sports
So what is it then? Because it just seems like more bigotry and fear mongering from the Right.
Instead of reiterating '' I dunno''...Why not try reading a book.
Why should anyone die on an issue that you really shouldn't even care about?
It doesn't touch your life.
As PET said, the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.
Its not like you care if pro athletes are cheating with steroids to begin with.
This is just an opportunity to justify gay bashing all over again.
Explain to me my view on pro athletes doing steroids..This should be interesting.
Its in all those threads you started on the issue.
Wait, you didn't start or post any threads about steroid uses by pro athletes?
You don't care about that at all?
Only this?
That's the point.
Search out my many posts on Barry Bonds and PED users.
Trust me you're in over your head here.
