• Lemming6969@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    Do we need a protected class? If yes, there must be standards and those standards must be either endocrine or genetic or both. Yes they should be tested. Anyone failing the protected class can compete in the open class. It’s really that simple.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      What open class? There is no open class at the Olympics. So no it isn’t really that simple.

      • arin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Really? They prohibit women from competing alongside men?? No thats not the case, women only sports is to prevent males with higher biological advantage from taking over the women’s competition.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Is this an “Air Bud Rule” thing?

          Also, we have no idea if Khelif is biologically male. We have one corrupt Russian official saying “well maybe.”

          • Mirshe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            We actually do have a pretty good indicator that she’s biologically female - the fact that her home country, where she still lives, would’ve jailed her if they figured out she was a trans woman before they sent her to the Olympics. Algeria doesn’t allow gender transitioning in any way, and they can and do imprison people who live as a gender other than the one they were born as.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              You clearly can’t convince people. Because they just move on to “even if she is biologically female…”

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        Do you really think it’s fair for a full blown man to fight women in the ring just because he identifies as a woman? Women will get very seriously hurt or possibly killed fighting someone assigned male sex at birth. I have no problem letting them do anything that doesn’t hurt others, but this is a case where I think we need to be more sensible.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          If it’s about who might get hurt, maybe we should divide things up by something other than gender. I know plenty of women who could do a ton of damage with their fists and they aren’t even boxers.

          • realitista@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s one thing to work within the limits of your physique to become stronger, better, etc. It’s another thing to have a totally different physique that gives you a starting point higher than can be achieved naturally by anyone else.

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              So many sports are entirely about the physique you inherited though. Yes there is some technique to swimming and obviously you have to train hard. But these are just prerequisites, not differentiators. If we start saying that winning because of your physique is no victory, then really half of the events become meaningless. To a large extent, the Olympics does measure inherited traits and I think we ought to recognize that that is its point. If you think back all those centuries, it was very obviously the point to prove that your people are genetically superior to their people.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              So put those women in a higher class. There are plenty of women with “masculine” physiques… or are you going to claim Brittney Griner is also not a woman?

              • realitista@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                3 months ago

                I don’t think it’s fair to penalize a woman who works all her life to get to a certain level and just make her compete against someone who maybe hasn’t had to work at all because they are physically male. If anything, we need to make a class for people who are physically male but presenting female.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Are you talking about Khelif? How do you know she is “physically male?” What does that even mean? Is Brittney Griner “physically male?” Because she looks bigger and stronger than Khelif.

                  • realitista@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    As far as I can tell, that reliable information isn’t out there other than the fact that a Russian judge said she tested as XY and that she’s tested for high testosterone. I’d say XY is a pretty good starting place to call someone male or at least not traditionally female, if that test can be trusted.

                    But I think a lot of the controversy here comes from a lack of trustable info.

          • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            This is the correct answer. Divide competitors up by class, skill level, or anything else besides perceived sexual anatomy.

        • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Boxing has weight classes. As do most other martial arts.

          The problem is not a 50kg men fighting a 70kg women in terms of injuries and power imbalance. And in that set up the women most likely wins. The problem is the typical situation of a 80-100 kg men smacking down on a 50-60kg women. And that is the image the demagogues try to conjure.

          So if your full blown men is a 60kg feather to be able to compete against another 60kg women, the whole trope falls apart.

          • realitista@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            A man with the same body weight as a woman would still inherently have more upper body strength and higher ability to gain it as that’s just how men are built vs women. It’s still not a fair way of setting intersex classes.

            • Lime66@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I mean if they’re doing the exact same rigor and type of training, eating the exact same diet, have had the exact same level of boxing experience and fought the exact same opponents at the same skill level, then yes there would be an advantage to whoever is assigned male

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Do you really think it’s fair for a full blown man to fight women in the ring just because he identifies as a woman?

          Can you cite an example of this?

          • realitista@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            No I can’t because there’s no data to go off of. I’m honestly unclear as to whether it’s a valid issue or not. Even in this case where the data we have seems to indicate there’s an issue, the data doesn’t seem entirely trustable. Anyone claiming complete certainty in this environment with no evidence is clearly just blindly pushing an agenda in bad faith.

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              It seems odd that you’ve based multiple comments here on that example then, I think.

              • realitista@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Did you actually read said comments? I’ve said this multiple times. It’s basically the thesis of my statements.

                • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  They felt like concern trolling to me, but I admit I’m multitasking and posting this from next to my son’s hospital bed, so maybe my reading comprehension hasn’t been the best. I acknowledge that possibility.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Boxers and wrestlers have weight classes because weight confers a massive advantage and almost predetermines the outcome of the match. You might as well just award someone for weighing more, because skill can only overcome it to a point.

        I would prefer if competitive classes were determined by things like weight which are universal and obvious and non-invasive to measure. However I don’t know if that works for everything. Hormones do in fact confer major advantages, as chemical doping does. Should we not test for doping either?

        I do think it’s actually more invasive to try to measure if someone “lives as a woman” than it is to measure what’s in their blood. How do you even begin to define that, and aren’t you engaging in prescriptive sexism as soon as you start? I can tell that your suggestion comes from a place of wanting to support women and their autonomy but I don’t think you thought it through at all, at least not in the context of competitive sport. If you don’t care at all about fair sports competition, it’s all super easy. If you do want to enable fair sport competition, you have to actually deal with the complexities and not just fire off leftist slogans.