Just to be clear - are you stating that you don't believe males (in general) have an advantage over females in the majority of athletics events?
Just to be clear - Nope.
Why do you think we separate male and female competitors?
Why do you think science is now arguing over whether competitors are male or female?
It was a pretty clear point - if you think there is a difference in ability/potential between male intersex with some male advantage and regular males then those differently abled people would be better catered for in the Paralympics with events dedicated to them
Oh, it's a "clear point", now... A minute ago it was muddying the waters and avoiding issues.
If, alternatively, you don't think there is a difference in ability/potential between intersex males and regular males then problem solved, they just go in the male category at the regular Olympics.
'Potential' has no place in this debate. Ability doesn't really belong either, as being technically able to do something doesn't mean they can do it in reality - Actual performance is the only concern and must be demonstrated and proven to be a result of genetic condition to determine advantage. Without that, it's just opinion toward one side or the other.
If advantage as a female is thusly proven, then it's an advantage not a disability as far as that athlete goes.
If they're proven 'too male' to compete as female, then they're just male and if they're not as good as other athletes then that's all they are. There is no disability.
So it still rests on what science has yet to provide, but either way they don't qualify as disabled. You're back to rowing in circles.
*points to all the Olympic world records.*
That part was 'clearly' rhetorical, but never mind....
How many of these records are due to the athlete having a confirmed DSD, which is confirmed to have afforded them an advantage not commensurate with the sex as which they competed, and in that particular event, though?
If you can so easily cite the differences between male and female based on a set of records, you must surely know why the differences occur and thus easily determine whether DSD is an advantage using the same reasoning?
The whole point of separating athletes into "men" and "women" is in an attempt to make sport "fairer" and more exciting to watch.
It is clear now that "gender" is failing to do that adequately. So lets look at other methods?
Maybe on a per sport basis:
This separation is what science is currently arguing, with assertions that DSDers only have advantages in certain events...
Problem is that the vast majority of "women" would end up in the 2nd/3rd division of competition being beaten by 40+ year old blokes, but at least it would be "fair"!
Athletes like Chand are the problem, in that they are "women" with confirmed XY chromosomes and internal testes, massive testosterone and all the 'male' stuff, yet still derive no advantage precisely because of their specific conditions. They're more 'male' than most DSDers, yet are not excluded from competition. Is that 'fair'?
Is there a way of dividing up a population into classes that promote competition without there being "unfair" edge cases?
1/. Determine if there actually is an advantage.
2/. Determine if that advantage is unfair.
In an arena where those who already have some sort of advantage over the average athlete rise to the top, the notion of 'fairness' is already subjective enough that you could debate the whole field... which is what everyone is doing.
Without a much more solid grounding in science, I don't think you can make it fair.
What is certainly unfair is publicly ripping the athletes apart before anything has even been established. This is very private, personal stuff and should not be disclosed no matter what the findings, without the athlete's specific consent. If you disagree, I'll happily challenge and speculate about your sex in public and we'll see how you feel about it then.
For example a "trans woman" has been though male puberty so has an advantage over women but if she's also suppressing her testosterone then she's at a disadvantage vs regular men ergo her medical condition is impacting her performance and we have a set of games for people whose disability/medical condition impacts their performance.
Paralympians are disabled either by natural conditions, or by events beyond their control and intent, which result in a disadvantage. They do not choose to be disabled.
Trans-athletes artificially alter themselves by choice - It's their choice and intent to be disadvantaged. Intentional disablement in order to compete is not allowed under Paralympic rulings.
As already stated, until there is scientific consensus over whether DSDers fall definitively into either sex, advantage against females cannot be established and they are not considered disabled against males.
Does it in every thread he chooses to grace.
Does what he can to assert himself above others and refuses to acknowledge any counter point to his rhetoric.
Says the love-child of ad hominem and numerous other logical fallacies...
You're like the wimpy kid who loudly eggs on a school bully.
A meaningless list of numbers that do not actually answer any of the questions. It just shows men win. It doesn't detail why, or shed any light on whether DSDs afford any advantage.
What is the actual advantage, what causes it, where is the science that proves it, where is the proof of it in individuals... and specifically where is all this in the DSD cases?
How are you not able to provide these answers?
nypost.com
