Here is another question for those posters supporting males being included in female sports on the basis of 'inclusion'?
The background to this this statement from the Sports Councils Equality Group:
'Current research indicates that testosterone suppression does not negate this physical advantage over females and so cannot guarantee competitive fairness and/or safety.'
'The guidance provides content and a framework on which sports can make decisions and sets out some of the options a sport might consider, from prioritising transgender inclusion, or protecting the female category, and to additionally introducing universal admission.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10044995/Trans-athletes-retain-advantage-sport-say-UK-sports-councils.html
And the OIC new guidelines from November 2021
www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/16/trans-women-should-not-have-to-reduce-testosterone-say-new-ioc-guidelines
Joanna Harper, the visiting fellow for transgender athletic performance at Loughborough University, said that while she welcomed the IOC’s stress on inclusion, it was wrong to downplay the advantages of transgender women.
“It is important that the IOC has come out in favour of inclusion of trans and intersex athletes, but I think sections five and six of the framework are problematic,” said Harper, who is a trans woman and a competitive athlete herself. “Transgender women are on average, taller, bigger and stronger than cis women and these are advantages in many sports. It is also unreasonable to ask the sports federations to have robust and peer reviewed research before placing restrictions on trans athletes in elite sport. Such research will take years if not decades.”
If people are going to support 'social sciences' models for inclusion over 'physical sciences' which show that benefits of male puberty are not reduced enough to be competitive, how do you then account for the fact that female's face sexist discrimination from birth still.
Unless you live in utopia where your young daughter has not experienced this, then maybe you cannot answer. I have seen it for myself though where at school the 'boys' are welcomed to play football at lunch but the girls are turned away. By other students and by teachers monitoring the group.
And the boys football team gets the best coaches. They get sent to football camps and get better opportunities.
The girls? Well, they also then face their peers telling them that 'girls don't do/play [insert activity]'.
PLUS how do these sporting bodies then account for the effects of menstruation on females vs those who are male? And there is plenty of evidence mounting up to show that there is indeed negative effects on training, on bodies and on mental health around menstruation in sport.
So, even if a sporting body deliberately chooses to go the social science 'inclusion' route, how do they make for these allowances?