LogFAQs > #929178164

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Transgender Cyclist Wins Female Cycling World Championship
Corrik7 10/24/19 11:22:27 AM #73:	Ashethan posted... The goal of the "Open" league seems to be to exclude trans athletes altogether. Since they won't be 'good enough' to qualify in the open league, and are 'too good' to compete in the cis-women league. It's like "Hey, we TECHNICALLY allow trans-somen to join. But none are able to qualify." Nobody is excluded in the open league. Why would they be excluded? This is literally the inclusive compromise route imo. You shouldn't be catering to the 1% at the expense of the 99%. If a transgender athlete is good enough to compete they will excel. We shouldn't be working out ways to unlevel the playing field for the 99% so that the 1% of SOLELY transgender mtf athletes can dominate females. This is only being argued in this direction because this is the only way it unfairly affects the division of sports, females. Nobody is arguing how it is unfair that transgender ftm athletes have zero chance of winning. The fact is that transgender athletes should probably just have their own league to themselves solely. But, then it is arguably discriminatory, and the leagues wouldn't be able to support themselves at all (while also coming at the expense of men's and women's sports themselves). Thus, it is a conundrum. You can either be unfair to 99% of women to allow the 1% a chance to compete in their nom biological divisions. Or you can give transgender athletes the chance to compete at the top level and maintain the fairness for the 99%. Why are we catering to the 1% over the 99%? This doesn't make sense as a society. --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Division 2 <cite>Corrik7 posted [p:929178164] in Transgende... [t:78103976]...</cite> <quote>Ashethan posted... </cite> <quote>The goal of the "Open" league seems to be to exclude trans athletes altogether. Since they won't be 'good enough' to qualify in the open league, and are 'too good' to compete in the cis-women league. It's like "Hey, we TECHNICALLY allow trans-somen to join. But none are able to qualify."</quote>Nobody is excluded in the open league. Why would they be excluded? This is literally the inclusive compromise route imo. You shouldn't be catering to the 1% at the expense of the 99%. If a transgender athlete is good enough to compete they will excel. We shouldn't be working out ways to unlevel the playing field for the 99% so that the 1% of SOLELY transgender mtf athletes can dominate females. This is only being argued in this direction because this is the only way it unfairly affects the division of sports, females. Nobody is arguing how it is unfair that transgender ftm athletes have zero chance of winning. The fact is that transgender athletes should probably just have their own league to themselves solely. But, then it is arguably discriminatory, and the leagues wouldn't be able to support themselves at all (while also coming at the expense of men's and women's sports themselves). Thus, it is a conundrum. You can either be unfair to 99% of women to allow the 1% a chance to compete in their nom biological divisions. Or you can give transgender athletes the chance to compete at the top level and maintain the fairness for the 99%. Why are we catering to the 1% over the 99%? This doesn't make sense as a society. --- Xbox Live User Name - Corrik Currently playing: Division 2</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1