← Back to context

Comment by BolexNOLA

5 hours ago

I understand the point of contention should be that but sadly when we dig into these discussions it often becomes clear that’s not what it is actually about. So frankly, I won’t sit here and stand for this user saying these women aren’t women.

They can talk about physical advantages/fairness in sports in good faith without erasing their identities and saying “it’s a fact that biology says they’re not women,” which is wrong. That’s just ignorance and/or transphobia, not a healthy discussion about advantages in competition.

“Men in women’s sports” is often convenient cover for many people to participate in erasure without copping to the fact that they’re just uncomfortable with trans people simply existing (or worse). Most of them, especially men with media reach/political clout constantly talking about it, are not passionate about women’s sports in the slightest and couldn’t care less if the playing field was level. So we can’t sit here and pretend that’s what this discussion is really about.

It’s very similar to when incels said “it’s about ethics in gaming journalism” during gamergate. Yeah, some people care about that legitimately, and there is a legitimate discussion to be had, but that wasn’t what the movement was actually about in any real sense. It just gave them a palatable reason to project to more reasonable people.

The existence of women's sport depends on excluding those advantages that are caused by male sex development. For almost all competitive sports, male physiological advantage is the rationale for a separate, restricted female category in which women can enjoy fair competition and in which female athletic excellence can be celebrated.

Pointing out that some individuals are female and some are male, and that the latter must be excluded from competition in the female category for it to meaningfully exist, shouldn't be something to take offence to. It's just a factual descriptor.