AIBU to think it was never that complicated to define a woman.

[Abisequer]

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has ruled that eligibility for the women’s category of Olympic events will now be limited to biological females, starting from the LA 2028 Games.

AIBU to think the category ‘women’ was never complicated and the obfuscation by certain governing bodies has compromised fairness in sport for women.

Examples of obfuscation include claims that genital checking would be needed or that biological men with lowered testosterone would be on an even playing field with biological women.

AIBU to think it was never complicated to define a woman and a cheek swab is all it takes.

Article

You know what, it's pointless even going ahead with all the actual races and tournaments in the first place, let alone the training and dedication.

Why can't somebody just identify as a gold medal winner in every category and in every sport and just be given all the gold medals in a wheelbarrow, then we can be done with it?

This topic has brought all the misogynists to the yard 🙄

The lure of being able to exclude, attack, name call, overrule and silence women, all while being lauded as progressive and liberal, was far too tempting for them.

The self entitlement of trans "women" is off the scale. Woe is them.

On Jeremy Vine, a bloke Amy, says its unfair, difference is nuanced. He went through male puberty, we see male, he is male, wa wa wa poor trans "women" its not fair. He is built like a brick shithouse, whinging because he cannot cheat by being in with biological females, he is male 100%. They have given him so much air time. Why is the male view eg trans "women " more valid than actual real women. Its completely wrong.

Yes. It can be extrapolated to that level of argument.

The whataboutery is really fuckwittery.

Meaning it is actually meaningless distraction using misinformation which has been addressed over and over and the cycle just continues.

And nobody believes it anyway. Because despite all the "but Phelps, but intersex, but not binary male/female, but where do we draw the line but but but"...

...they NEVER, but NEVER, want a fully, openly unisex category for everyone, which is literally the only option that makes sense if they believed what they were saying. They NEVER want this. They still want a female category to exist, purely so men can enter it.

Not that I think all the people here, who are beside themselves with excitement at the thought of policing gender, will read it - but for the watchers who do understand that biology is more complex than GCSE level - here's an article opposing the testing from Andrew Sinclair (who discovered the SRY gene).

Surprisingly (not!) he doesn't agree with the various mediocre 'academics' who've made a living from bigotry.

https://www.mcri.edu.au/news/insights-and-opinions/world-athletics-sry-gene-conversation

Im under 20 years old, you MIGHT have been thrashing it out for years when i was a child. Im new and im leaening but continue being pompous i guess ?

Do you actually understand the point of testing for SRY gene?

Because it is an indicator of whether further testing is needed for male puberty.

Perhaps you should be the person doing further reading

I think what you write about is a related issue, but different.

I don't think this is all about men, it's just the AGPs shouting loudest.

The trans person I am best acquainted with is female to male and their situation has as more to do with female originating stereotypes than with men.

Not that I think all the people here, who are beside themselves with excitement at the thought of policing gender

To be honest, the double pleasure of males finally being excluded from female sport AND the meltdowns of people pretending no one knows what sex anyone is has made it a brilliant day.

What a truly ridiculous post.

No one is policing 'gender'. They are upholding women's rights to sex specific sports. Why don't you think women should have that right?

There is nothing complex about the fact that there are only two sexes.

Two pathways for development, two gametes that can be produced. No third gamete. No 'in between' gamete. No one producing both gametes.

The testing, if you'd bothered to read it, is quite rigorous to accommodate any DSDs in the mix.

But ultimately, why take this position? Why try to muddy the waters for women by sneaking men into their sports through the back door?

It's not complicated. Having the IOC do a complete turn-around and acknowledge this to be the case is massive. I expect to see wailing and flailing from the usual places, but the statement appears to be sound and well safety-netted.

And where do you think those stereotypes come from? Patriarchy.

I don't care if I'm pompous, the point is I'm right. You know exactly who the women are, you know which of your parents is your mother and if you're 19 (or even old enough to be on the internet alone) you know which sex you are (if you have never had a period and believe you're female, you should have seen a doctor years ago).

There's no third sex. There's no third gamete.

Anyway, if this is all you've got now, that's a pretty clear indication of where it's all at. Just stop trying to confuse and bend reality and everything will be fairer and clearer. You absolutely know who the women are.

Oh yes I understand that you are in favour of policing women's bodies - you make that clear every time you post.
And suddenly you're acknowledging that it's not just a 'simple cheek swab'.

For people who are genuinely interested I would urge you to go do your own research rather than believe what a group of self appointed 'experts' (spoiler they're not) are pushing on this site.

Also it may be useful to ask yourselves what other aspects of women's sports e.g. sexual assault, rape, they ever post about, as to whether they really care about women.

So - you, some rando on the internet know more than Andrew Sinclair, who discovered the SRY gene. Good to know!

Phelps doesn’t hold a single world record any more. Many men have swum faster than him in recent years. Yet for some reason he’s held up as being some impossible-to-beat super human. He wasn’t. He was just the best of his era.

So now you're just trying to besmirch people because you can't refute their arguments?

Its all so ,,, predictable.

But please answer the question asked. Why don't you want womem to have single sex sports?

Is it just because you are a Male Rights Activust and you object so women having anything of their own? Because that's all I can think of.

This "policing women's bodies" shit is so, so dishonest. It's safeguarding women's rights and safety by recognising that, for all the infinite other ways women vary, the one thing we all share that men don't is biological sex. In a tiny number of people, that needs to be determined by further markers but it's always there and it's always determinable. Recognising what makes women women and not men for the sake of safegaurding their spaces, recognising the one common constant no matter what everything else is like, is so far from "policing their bodies" that it's off the scale.

Read the advice on the testing and you will see any complications regarding the SRY gene are completely accounted for.

Its all there. Educate yourself.

Andrew Sinclair keeps falsely claiming the SRY gene test will be the reason for exclusion. He’s either lying or stupid because this isn’t the case. A detected SRY gene will lead to further testing to determine the actual diagnosis, which may or may not lead to exclusion.

HTH

From this article

The SRY test isn’t cut-and-dried

World Athletics asserts the SRY gene is a reliable proxy for determining biological sex. But biological sex is much more complex, with chromosomal, gonadal (testis/ovary), hormonal and secondary sex characteristics all playing a role.

Using SRY to establish biological sex is wrong because all it tells you is whether or not the gene is present.

It does not tell you how SRY is functioning, whether a testis has formed, whether testosterone is produced and, if so, whether it can be used by the body.

And he is absolutely correct. Hence there is then further testing to be done to establish whether the body is utilising the testosterone or not.

The issue isn’t that this expert is wrong about that test. It seems he is and was wrong about what then happened.

No female person without that gene will be considered not eligible for the category of female sport. Only those people with the gene will need further testing to assess their eligibility.

Where is the confusion ?

Ah. Crossed with notbad !

I saw Tracy Holmes brought this up yesterday in the IOC press conference. I thought Jane Thornton answered it well considering the time constraints.