Comment by joshstrange
8 hours ago
This exactly. People who I have seen make jokes at the WNBA's expense suddenly caring about the sanctity of the sport... I often wonder if they see the cognitive dissonance, probably not.
8 hours ago
This exactly. People who I have seen make jokes at the WNBA's expense suddenly caring about the sanctity of the sport... I often wonder if they see the cognitive dissonance, probably not.
College sports should expand into having an Alumni league. Like the WNBA and other W-sports have a suspicious system where the leagues expenses grow very much in line with revenue while player salaries don't.
Colleges already have the facilities to host games so it seems like an easy steal as there's actually a lot of money in (certain) woman's sports (i.e. USMNT and USWNT in soccer have similar revenue but different salaries) but the salaries are low so its an easier target then say the NFL.
[flagged]
>Most of the actual work to stop males from competing in women's sports,
Males who transition to female are not males. They are female/women. It is already not permissible for men to compete in women-only sports.
This became a national issue when many politicians and pundits saw a new vector to attack the trans community. We have heard it on campaign trails constantly for years now as if it’s some existential threat to the country. Your (incorrectly) characterizing it as some grassroots movement by concerned women across the nation who “simply don’t want men competing in women’s sports” is exactly what they hoped would happen over time because it gives them plausible cover.
Yes sports are a spectator event but I guarantee you not one of these people has watched women’s sports outside of exciting Olympic bids. They can’t name a single women’s soccer team in the US or a single star WNBA player. The sport is not the concern at all and we shouldn’t pretend it is.
> Males who transition to female are not males. They are female/women. It is already not permissible for men to compete in women-only sports.
This is precisely the point of contention. The people who want women's sports leagues to be able to legally or socially-acceptably bar transwomen want this precisely because they do not consider trans women to have the meaningful female characteristics that justify having a female-specific sports league to begin with.
I'm personally ambivalent on this point, and it's because I don't actually care about women's sports one way or the other (I barely care about men's sports). But if you do care about women's sports, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that you might have good reasons to want to restrict trans women from participating for the same reasons you want to restrict cis men from participating.
1 reply →
They are male, and retain male physiological advantage even if they undergo interventions like testosterone suppression. It's not the only route by which a male athlete with such advantage might compete in women's sport, nor is it an issue limited to the USA. This is a broader issue affecting the fairness of women's sport in competitions across the world.
For instance, all three medallists in the women's 800m at the 2016 Rio Olympics were male. They had been issued with female birth certificates by their home countries due to having underdeveloped external male genitalia - and therefore according to the rules at the time could enter as female - but they still benefited from testosterone-driven development.
World Athletics, and other sports governing bodies for other sports, have tightened their eligibility criteria in response to cases like this, and in light of evidence that male advantage is still retained even with pharmaceutical or surgical treatments. This has been an ongoing problem for much longer than US pundits have been bringing it up in relation to trans, and it's adversely affected many female athletes, from amateur leagues to international competition.
12 replies →