“Imagine a marathon with 100 runners. 60 are men and 40 are women. 4 of those women are trans. At the end of the race it is announced who was the fastest. Then it is announced who is the fastest woman. It is not a foregone conclusion that it would be a trans woman. There are almost ten times as many cis women, and also male advantage is less for long distance running. The fastest woman is announced and if she is trans then then the fastest non trans/non DSD woman is announced. All three would get prizes. They could also announce the fastest disabled person.”
“I would be happy with this compromise. It would not work with other sports, but there are other compromises. I would not expect the trans lobby to accept it and I would not expect GC people to either. You can't make everyone happy.”
And we keep telling you why your solution doesn’t work. You seem to be living under the impression that your solution hasn’t already been modelled and studied. And that it isn’t being trialled in different versions.
It is being trialed in two ways as we speak. One is parkrun. No monetary prizes but distance is recorded and it is self ID. Every single week just in the UK at least one of those runs has a male winner in the female category. There are male people setting female records in UK parkrun.
Aaahh ! But, you say, not EVERY race. Yes, but enough are. And in marathon where runners will attend as many as they can, because the top performers are invited, you could end up with a top male in the ‘special woman’ category winning regularly. It only takes a couple of them to then dominate the international circuit.
Not only that but currently in some marathons they HAVE a non-binary event. How many female people have won this ? NOT ONE! Always male athletes. A female athlete actually complained there was no female non-binary category! And compared to the winners of either male or female, those male anthletes are mediocre performers winning the same prize money as the top sex category performers.
As we keep saying to you.
Your ‘special woman’ category is actually indirect discrimination against women. Because congratulations, you have just given male people an extra prize pool opportunity under the false guise of ‘well women can enter too!’ And it rewards mediocre male athletes who make choices that limit their performance too.
How long before the male athletes who are far faster than female athletes but not winning any prizes also start abusing this ‘special women’s’ category? There is no special requirements at all. A male runner did this in Ireland to prove the point. A male weightlifter did this in weightlifting to prove the point. He also set a national record but refused it because he admitted he did it to prove a point. They didn’t have to do a thing, except register as a female for the category.
Your solution is unworkable and it is indirect negative sex discrimination towards women. You are on this thread attempting to shame people for having ‘extreme’ opinions when it is you who doesn’t seem to have any depth of knowledge about the sports situation.
You are doing what so many other posters who have decided due to their own prejudiced belief about feminists who are campaigning to protect women from the harms of conflicting rights where male people are demanding to be treated as female people, have done. You are mistakenly under the impression that there is a ‘middle ground’ that you hold that will magically provide the solution.
Your solution continues to harm women and girls. The real ‘middle ground’ ? It has either been suggested by feminists, sports scientists, developmental biologists, medical professionals and most of all, female athletes, and attempted and ignored by trans people (the transgender swimming category trial that not one competitor registered for) or is being implemented with the male category being called ‘open’ and retaining the female category.
Your ‘well the women might win’ is also completely missing the very significant point. A male winning that race is a mediocre male athlete compare like for like to other male athletes, and is being rewarded. Being rewarded for beating an exceptional female athlete because you feel that male athletes feelings are more important than rewarding exceptional female athletes.
For that exceptional female athlete to win that race against that less than exceptional male athlete means she had to be better by the power of x than that male. It is not the same as just pipping them at the finish line as she would if it was another female athlete. Do you get this?
Perhaps I need to be clearer. Your third category means that any female has to be a far superior athlete than the mediocre male athletes who are in that category.
That is yet another form of discrimination. It is setting the bar far higher for female athletes to win than for male athletes to win. The studies have shown that even with testosterone suppressed male athletes can potentially perform at a higher level than females possibly can. That they don’t perform at their highest level is due to their decisions on training and might even be their choice to maintain a particular body shape. Their decision. It is also their decision to limit their performance through testosterone suppression. A choice that female people don’t get to make and still win prizes.
So supine, what other group of athletes who deliberately choose actions and make decisions that limit their performance get to win prize money or reduce prize money (because sponsorship doesn’t come with an endless pot of gold) set aside for exceptional female athletes?
And here you are attempting to shame women because you believe you know better and that there is a ‘middle ground’ and that we are the fucking extremists. Well done you.