The Amy Schneider thread

Quote: Mission146

Wait...I think I understand now.

My response is fairness in sports has a lot more to do with sex and a lot less to do with gender. I'm not saying that gender is totally irrelevant, but if you had to break it down, I would say that sex (purely unqualified opinion) is the determinate to some extent like 90%.

Women's sports aren't entirely about equality; they are also about fairness. That women have the same athletic opportunities to participate in sports that men do is equality, but at the public school level, football is an exception and girls have to settle for getting to play with the boys if they can make the team. I'm not saying there should not be girls' football teams, if you can get enough girls in given schools interested and enough participating schools to have a viable conference...then go for it!

Anyway, when you see Chris Evert's or Martina Navratilova's positions on this...they are talking about fairness in competition and admitting that it's primarily sex-based in nature. In other words, in terms of sport, they are admitting that...at least at present...women are generally to be considered physically inferior to men. When saying, "Women," and, "Men," I am referring to sex, not gender.

In other aspects of life, such as non sports related jobs, a person can either do the job or they cannot do the job...at least, that's how it should be. You wouldn't assume that a person can or cannot based on sex or gender. An individual person, regardless of sex or gender, either can or cannot. Fairness in jobs is about whether or not you can do it and giving everyone an equal opportunity to have a particular job if they qualify for it physically or in other ways, depending on what the job is.

Fairness in sports is about competitive fairness. You might compete for promotions or advancements in other jobs, but the majority of promotions in other jobs are not going to be based on physical attributes. Put another way, it's typically those who have not been promoted doing the, "Grunt work," so physical abilities aren't generally relevant to promotions...especially not beyond a certain level.

Sporting competitions have mental elements to them, but are fundamentally physical. If someone of the sex female competes with the men, then she is naturally accepting a natural disadvantage and is trying to do it anyway. That's awesome. If someone of the sex male goes and competes with people of the sex female, then they are unfairly advantaging themselves.

It's really that simple.

Quote: Mission146

Wait...I think I understand now.

My response is fairness in sports has a lot more to do with sex and a lot less to do with gender. I'm not saying that gender is totally irrelevant, but if you had to break it down, I would say that sex (purely unqualified opinion) is the determinate to some extent like 90%.

Women's sports aren't entirely about equality; they are also about fairness. That women have the same athletic opportunities to participate in sports that men do is equality, but at the public school level, football is an exception and girls have to settle for getting to play with the boys if they can make the team. I'm not saying there should not be girls' football teams, if you can get enough girls in given schools interested and enough participating schools to have a viable conference...then go for it!

Anyway, when you see Chris Evert's or Martina Navratilova's positions on this...they are talking about fairness in competition and admitting that it's primarily sex-based in nature. In other words, in terms of sport, they are admitting that...at least at present...women are generally to be considered physically inferior to men. When saying, "Women," and, "Men," I am referring to sex, not gender.

In other aspects of life, such as non sports related jobs, a person can either do the job or they cannot do the job...at least, that's how it should be. You wouldn't assume that a person can or cannot based on sex or gender. An individual person, regardless of sex or gender, either can or cannot. Fairness in jobs is about whether or not you can do it and giving everyone an equal opportunity to have a particular job if they qualify for it physically or in other ways, depending on what the job is.

Fairness in sports is about competitive fairness. You might compete for promotions or advancements in other jobs, but the majority of promotions in other jobs are not going to be based on physical attributes. Put another way, it's typically those who have not been promoted doing the, "Grunt work," so physical abilities aren't generally relevant to promotions...especially not beyond a certain level.

Sporting competitions have mental elements to them, but are fundamentally physical. If someone of the sex female competes with the men, then she is naturally accepting a natural disadvantage and is trying to do it anyway. That's awesome. If someone of the sex male goes and competes with people of the sex female, then they are unfairly advantaging themselves.

It's really that simple.

Quote: JimRockford

My position exactly. I would have used fewer words.

Quote: rxwine

I think you're seeing it the same way. It would be great if we could treat a transgendered person in all ways like they wish, but I think in athletics we're practically forced to compromise and it's not to discriminate against them, it's to keep a balance in an area where we are unfair to another group of people which no one wants to do either obviously.

Quote: Mission146

I think it's remarkable that the majority of us can still find basic agreement on something in 2022. Refreshing, really.

Quote: JimRockford

And yet we are in stark disagreement with the NCAA and the International Olympic Committee.

Quote: JimRockford

And yet we are in stark disagreement with the NCAA and the International Olympic Committee.