So … female athletes are gonna have to pay to prove their female. Surely this is sex discrimination given males don’t have to?

[SpringCalling]

British female athletes asked to pay for own £185 sex tests

https://www.thetimes.com/article/3b2be2b9-8010-4597-8a0a-4fec54154542?shareToken=a7910740cf729d14bc67ebeef8147190

Anyone found to have a Y chromosome picks up the tab. Sorted!

Gross... but predictable.

Can we bridge the gap with a GoFundMe for all current and upcoming female athletes.

I’d rather do a petition that it fall under UKAD as an anti-doping test funded by the government.

As it is only a test you need to take once in your lifetime, surely one of the sporting bodies can pay. A very small cost compared to the cost of equipment, coaching, flights to events etc.

I believe absolutely the sporting authorities should pay. But if not, I will happily sponsor the test for a female athlete.

No they don’t.

Even better. If Sharon Davis wants to gather the information of all people that will sponsor a test and match with an current athlete so they don't disrupt their training etc...I will be a sponsor.

You'd think. It doesn't sound complicated.

Yes women do outperform men in a few sports.

I don’t see the problem.

Female sports could be protected with these tests. All that needs to happen is that the country the female comes from foots the bill
for that female’s test.

It’s pretty obvious why males in male sports don’t need it. It’s because males are faster, stronger etc and so females aren’t going go make it into the Olympics (or whatever competition it is) in the male category. It isn’t relevant to male sports - so the thread title is really odd.

This is the bullshit of how the Olympics allowed themselves to be hoodwinked. There was some radiologist who was a transwoman and did some low quality research to demonstrate that at whatever age he was he had no difference to female athletes 20 years younger in long-distance running.

There is no sport in which the majority of females outperform the majority of males. The sports that females could be argued to "outperform" are the ones in which flexibility is the main component being assessed i.e. rythmic gymnastics and synchronised swimming. These sports are still separated by sex because women could potentially have an advantage in the current scoring system.

So I take it you are in favour of the continuation of mixed or open categories of sport where women compete directly against men?

You don’t think women should only have to compete against other women? And men against other men?

You are wrong by the way. Women outperform men in endurance based sports.
free diving- men’s static apnea record 7 minutes, women 9 minutes

Ultraruns- https://bornonthetrail.substack.com/p/are-women-better-ultra-runners-than-men

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240731-the-sports-where-women-outperform-men

women and men should not be competing against each other in any event
the vast majority of the open or mixed sex sport categories are events that have been deliberately engineered to favour the physiology of men

for example, if an open sea swimming race event is long distance as in 20 miles or over, the majority of women will have faster times than the majority of men.
but how long are open sea swimming races usually? 10k which is only 6 miles!! (And that’s the Olympics length)

It’s not that we are always weaker and men are stronger or faster, it is that the majority of events are designed by men and for men to match their strengths

only by all sports being kept separated can we design women’s events to match our strengths instead of forcing elite women athletes into open/mixed sex categories where the events are literally rigged to favour men.

so yes all athletes should be tested so that men and women are kept separate in sports. It’s the only way to get more female world record holders and more girls to take up sports- to achieve gender parity in sports.

Absoultely if thats what they signed up for but if they are signing up for a female based competition inclusion of males is wrong.

And sure in an extrememly small number of obsucure ultra endurance sports there is some evidence that women who have smaller mass when they have eliminated their fat, and a higher slow to fast twitch fibre ratio that it is possible for them to beat men. But the fact that the number of these events are so few in number that they are the exception that the rule that males have a significant advantage of females in athletic ability.

The average female is the same strength more or less that the average 12 year old boy. This is not something that TW ever bring up when they say they "feel like a woman" but is one of the dominating factor in why women behave the way they do in society.

Can you give examples of how women out perform men in the sports you listed?

Ok, I see you have posted links to ultra running.

The reason Courtney Dewaulter won that particular race is because none of the men she raced against were elite. Dewaulter is one the greatest female ultra runners of all time and holds numerous course records. But none of her course records are close to the men’s course records.

Similarly when Jasmine Paris won the Spine Race is was taken as a sign that women outperform men in ultras because she won by such a margin in a time of 83 hours. But her record has been obliterated by a man who ran it 11 hours faster than Paris. The Spine Race is also notorious for being so weather dependent. Look at the results. Pavel Paloncy is one the best male ultra runners. His time the year before Paris’s was 110 hours. But he has done it in 81 hours.

Women are not better at ultra running. There are some exceptional elite women who perform well and get get results against other men, but that is not the same as being of equivalent performance.

Only the TIMs are complaining it is intrusive.

An Average 5 year old with poor vision and a new toy to distract them can tell who is a man and who is a woman.

Fine the cheats 15k when caught.

Who pays for drug testing?

Because it’s the women that have to both undertake the work and pay for a procedure that is required because men are the perpetrators.

can you honestly not see how this is inappropriate

I don't think I'd see a cost equivalent to a couple of pairs of trainers as too much to pay for assurances that everyone I compete against will actually be a woman.

Whilst I would prefer this cost to be funded in the same way other anti cheating measures like drug testing are, on balance I would rather these tests happen than not and getting bogged down in who pays for it only gives ammunition to the TRA line that the gender critical movement harms female women (which is very much the argument being made on Reddit right now).

If you look into it, you'll find that it's almost none. There are a tiny handful of sports in which women can do well, but don't on average do better than men.

This is an interesting alternative idea. You could state that only women are eligible to take part in women's sports competitions, and that female competitors agree to take a swab test if requested to do so [by some appropriate body], and if the swab goes against them they will be banned / fined. That would money and hassle for women competitors. However, there are a few downsides to this approach. Including that captured organisations might well fail to do anything if a man entered a female competition. And there'd be lots of publicity over anyone who looked masculine and was asked to take the test and then passed it. Plus arguments over DSD / not realising (whatever the truth of the matter).

Well, quite. It seems unnecessary in any case, if anyone sees that a man trying to pass himself off, the surely any complaint would lead to a test. Most of them out themselves by bragging, in any case.

Lots of people are having their DNA checked via ancestry websites, surely they aren't paying that much?