This is the logical consequence of the notion that "a woman is anyone who says they're a woman", which sadly is deeply misogynistic
.
Thankfully people are pushing back, and for the most part, women's sports will feature only women
Hmmm… I question if it is the logical consequence in the formal sense as worded. Where biologically advantages persons compete against those who lack the same advantage- we could say that it is a self evident truth that having advantage would give advantage. In the proposition as worded I would say it is more an “intuitive conclusion” or a deduction based on empirical knowledge. I would say that in your opinion it is misogynistic-
though not as fact. By definition misogyny is contempt for or prejudice against women. Therefore we could only apply the term misogyny to cases where the motivation or bias was from contempt or prejudice. Simply put- not all things that are or are believed harmful to women are misogynist- so the phrasing there would likely be better adjusted to “it is sadly harmful to women in my (your) opinion.”
One could also call it tone deaf or ignorant or some other similar word as to the history of gender or female autonomy etc, but again- those things aren’t inherently misogynist- similar to how if property is taken from the owner without legal authority or consent it is not always robbery, but robbery does involve the taking of property. Intent and specifics to the individual instance dictate wether it was with malice, knowledge, intent, etc.
so I will not debate you point In this reply- you are allowed an opinion and we are allowed to disagree- but I do have to point out these several flaws in the wording as they change the meaning and implications of the statement drastically.
It is a tricky thing for sure. How do we include and accommodate everyone, allow everyone an opportunity to compete regardless of the particulars of their birth- while maintaining an environment where everyone has a fair opportunity to win on the merits of skill and work?
A fundamental problem underneath it all is that by their nature things like sports are seldom of ever exuded by skill and work- genetics is a major component. There is nothing that Stephen Hawking could have done in his life to achieve the success of Micheal Jordan in basketball. The moment he was conceived essentially- that was never going to happen. We can overcome a certain amount of disadvantage with grit and such- but at some point the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that some people just can’t do some things. Even Patton Oswald probably never could have been the “next Jordan” despite being physically able compared to Hawking.
So it’s not as clear cut as it may seem- but biological sex to help determine classes and leagues in sports has worked reasonably well as a simple and easy method. In automotive racing- some cars get classed badly- they may not be bad cars, but it is decided they are too fast for a “lower” class but they often have some disadvantage that means that car just probably isn’t going to win any races in its class. Too fast for the cars it can compete against and not fast enough for the cars it has to compete with. But… with money you can pretty easily and painlessly just get another car. Human bodies aren’t cars, so it is a bit complicated when we ask what do we do?
I mean- it isn’t like there aren’t answers, but most of those answers mean changes to the very fabric of how we do these things and the business of sports. Most people don’t want change, they like what they are used to.
So we come to the fundamental truth that cuts through all the complexities. You either believe that we should do everything we can to include everyone, or you think some people aren’t “worth it.” That’s all there is to it. Thinking that trans athletes shouldn’t compete in “male/female” leagues or a league other than their biological sex doesn’t inherently make a person “bad” or “wrong,” it becomes “wrong” when people are cold and thoughtless about it- when they just shrug and say things like “deal with it..” those are the people who don’t care enough about another fellow human to even try to understand or be open to solutions that require any personal effort or sacrifice to give that person a chance.
There is a true and perverse dark humor in the fact that there is a lot of overlap between people who are against inclusion of trans athletes and people who scoff at the concept of “cultural appropriation.” There is something ironic in hearing the same person argue that identity and genetics aren’t something that can be owned or protected against annexation or acquisition by another person from outside that group regardless of history or ability equality in competition- and then listening to them say that identity and genetics are something a group of people owns and must be protected against annexation or acquisition by people from outside that group because history and equality in competition are paramount.
People are complex and few of anyone will check ALL the boxes of a given ideology or leaning- but when we see logical inconsistencies across issues of the same fundamental cores we start to see where peoples biases lie and where logic is used as a mask for said biases.
.
Thankfully people are pushing back, and for the most part, women's sports will feature only women
though not as fact. By definition misogyny is contempt for or prejudice against women. Therefore we could only apply the term misogyny to cases where the motivation or bias was from contempt or prejudice. Simply put- not all things that are or are believed harmful to women are misogynist- so the phrasing there would likely be better adjusted to “it is sadly harmful to women in my (your) opinion.”
so I will not debate you point In this reply- you are allowed an opinion and we are allowed to disagree- but I do have to point out these several flaws in the wording as they change the meaning and implications of the statement drastically.
A fundamental problem underneath it all is that by their nature things like sports are seldom of ever exuded by skill and work- genetics is a major component. There is nothing that Stephen Hawking could have done in his life to achieve the success of Micheal Jordan in basketball. The moment he was conceived essentially- that was never going to happen. We can overcome a certain amount of disadvantage with grit and such- but at some point the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that some people just can’t do some things. Even Patton Oswald probably never could have been the “next Jordan” despite being physically able compared to Hawking.
I mean- it isn’t like there aren’t answers, but most of those answers mean changes to the very fabric of how we do these things and the business of sports. Most people don’t want change, they like what they are used to.
People are complex and few of anyone will check ALL the boxes of a given ideology or leaning- but when we see logical inconsistencies across issues of the same fundamental cores we start to see where peoples biases lie and where logic is used as a mask for said biases.