Why not just remove gender restrictions on sport
Discussion
We have seen lots in recent years about equal pay, tennis, the us football team and others have all made progress here. Then we have the issue of people who have changed their gender. This does appear to be men becoming women and then wanting to compete rather than the other way round, but it's likely to become more widespread.
Today is the boat race, first the women, then the men. Why don't we just get rid of this and have sport open to all genders. Simply then we have the best competitors competing regardless of what their gender is
Premier League could do it next season as all league teams have a female team. Just combine them?
Same with tennis. Open up the draw to the same number as the female and male tournaments, but just have one big competition.
Would kill the argument on the pay and would mean everyone can compete at the highest level if they are good enough.
Today is the boat race, first the women, then the men. Why don't we just get rid of this and have sport open to all genders. Simply then we have the best competitors competing regardless of what their gender is
Premier League could do it next season as all league teams have a female team. Just combine them?
Same with tennis. Open up the draw to the same number as the female and male tournaments, but just have one big competition.
Would kill the argument on the pay and would mean everyone can compete at the highest level if they are good enough.
There would be no females in the top hundred of any sport.
I think they should keep gender separation in sport but also make sure that the screen time is representitive of the audience, men watch live sports whilst woman watch soaps and reality TV so putting woman's football on at primetime on the TV when no one is interested is a bit nonsensical.
I think they should keep gender separation in sport but also make sure that the screen time is representitive of the audience, men watch live sports whilst woman watch soaps and reality TV so putting woman's football on at primetime on the TV when no one is interested is a bit nonsensical.
a_dreamer said:
We have seen lots in recent years about equal pay, tennis, the us football team and others have all made progress here. Then we have the issue of people who have changed their gender. This does appear to be men becoming women and then wanting to compete rather than the other way round, but it's likely to become more widespread.
Today is the boat race, first the women, then the men. Why don't we just get rid of this and have sport open to all genders. Simply then we have the best competitors competing regardless of what their gender is
Premier League could do it next season as all league teams have a female team. Just combine them?
Same with tennis. Open up the draw to the same number as the female and male tournaments, but just have one big competition.
Would kill the argument on the pay and would mean everyone can compete at the highest level if they are good enough.
It's a bit like scrapping different classes of Motor racing and amalgamating Karting in with F1 - it would become boring if an F! car self-identified as a Formula Ford.Today is the boat race, first the women, then the men. Why don't we just get rid of this and have sport open to all genders. Simply then we have the best competitors competing regardless of what their gender is
Premier League could do it next season as all league teams have a female team. Just combine them?
Same with tennis. Open up the draw to the same number as the female and male tournaments, but just have one big competition.
Would kill the argument on the pay and would mean everyone can compete at the highest level if they are good enough.
untakenname said:
There would be no females in the top hundred of any sport.
I think they should keep gender separation in sport but also make sure that the screen time is representitive of the audience, men watch live sports whilst woman watch soaps and reality TV so putting woman's football on at primetime on the TV when no one is interested is a bit nonsensical.
Yep teams of men or men now women. All the women born as women would be nowhere. Shame on the sport / all sport for dragging it down like this.I think they should keep gender separation in sport but also make sure that the screen time is representitive of the audience, men watch live sports whilst woman watch soaps and reality TV so putting woman's football on at primetime on the TV when no one is interested is a bit nonsensical.
Only really an elite level thing as I get thrashed by plenty of women runners every Saturday morning.
TX.
I think we'll end up with at least four categories:
1. Born male
2. Born female
3. Trans post op
4. Mixed
If you're trans but pre-op you'd compete in 1, 2 or 4 but if in 4, say as in the mixed relays for track and field or swimming, you'd have to entered under 1 or 2.
It's making my head hurt just thinking about it. Let's face it, transgender athletes are no threat to male competitors. With females, the number of trans from men competing isn't yet significant but that doesn't mean it won't become a huge issue in the future.
1. Born male
2. Born female
3. Trans post op
4. Mixed
If you're trans but pre-op you'd compete in 1, 2 or 4 but if in 4, say as in the mixed relays for track and field or swimming, you'd have to entered under 1 or 2.
It's making my head hurt just thinking about it. Let's face it, transgender athletes are no threat to male competitors. With females, the number of trans from men competing isn't yet significant but that doesn't mean it won't become a huge issue in the future.
OMITN said:
OP can I just check which prejudice you’re going for here?
Is it anti-biological female, anti-Trans or just a sort of indiscriminate “Women! Know your limits!” rant?
(Anyway, I’d have thought the obvious answer to your question here is male puberty.)
It's not that sinister. I just find it very interesting how there is so much talk in the media but it often ignores key factors that drive the difference in pay etcIs it anti-biological female, anti-Trans or just a sort of indiscriminate “Women! Know your limits!” rant?
(Anyway, I’d have thought the obvious answer to your question here is male puberty.)
I agree on your obvious point but that does not account for all sports does it?
Countdown said:
It's a bit like scrapping different classes of Motor racing and amalgamating Karting in with F1 - it would become boring if an F! car self-identified as a Formula Ford.
That's fine, but the F1 drivers get more money than the karters, they get more TV time, more sponsorship etc etcF1 is probably less entertaining than a kart race in terms of overtakes and pure racing, but it's the pinnacle. Hence the attraction.
I'm all for women's sport being on TV by the way. The more sport on TV the better. It's the idea of equal prominence that I don't get (although we are not at that point). I like that BBC tend to show more women's games as that sport needs the prominence to help it catch up the men's game, which might start to shrink the gap in pay etc.
Unreal said:
I think we'll end up with at least four categories:
1. Born male
2. Born female
3. Trans post op
4. Mixed
If you're trans but pre-op you'd compete in 1, 2 or 4 but if in 4, say as in the mixed relays for track and field or swimming, you'd have to entered under 1 or 2.
It's making my head hurt just thinking about it. Let's face it, transgender athletes are no threat to male competitors. With females, the number of trans from men competing isn't yet significant but that doesn't mean it won't become a huge issue in the future.
Exactly right. It feels like an issue that might be coming. But also do you remember Caster Semenya? The poor lady was destroyed by media and competitors comments with stories round the world ranging from her being a cheat to questioning where she hid her b1. Born male
2. Born female
3. Trans post op
4. Mixed
If you're trans but pre-op you'd compete in 1, 2 or 4 but if in 4, say as in the mixed relays for track and field or swimming, you'd have to entered under 1 or 2.
It's making my head hurt just thinking about it. Let's face it, transgender athletes are no threat to male competitors. With females, the number of trans from men competing isn't yet significant but that doesn't mean it won't become a huge issue in the future.
ks. Tests suggested she was female but that didn't stop all the abuse she got and the impact on her career. Maybe you'd eventually kill gender restrictions and make it on some hormone level instead (like horsepower restrictions in some racing)
Edited by a_dreamer on Sunday 3rd April 16:26
It's a complex subject and I don't envy the authorities or the athletes.
The argument that we accept that physical attributes confer advantages (swimmers' big feet, double joints, etc) is compelling, so it gets tricky when we won't accept something like very high but natural testosterone levels in a woman.
However, we have weight classes in boxing, so the biggest and strongest can only compete within a certain range, which is why I think multiple categories are the only acceptable way out of this.
I don't know much about Semanya but I thought she also had an atypical genetic gender makeup as well as high testosterone levels, meaning the 'female' definition isn't straightforward. Happy to be corrected.
The argument that we accept that physical attributes confer advantages (swimmers' big feet, double joints, etc) is compelling, so it gets tricky when we won't accept something like very high but natural testosterone levels in a woman.
However, we have weight classes in boxing, so the biggest and strongest can only compete within a certain range, which is why I think multiple categories are the only acceptable way out of this.
I don't know much about Semanya but I thought she also had an atypical genetic gender makeup as well as high testosterone levels, meaning the 'female' definition isn't straightforward. Happy to be corrected.
monthou said:
I can only assume (some) people are treating this seriously.
Good grief.
Exactly. I think the OP is just trying to make a point rather than suggest something that would work well in practice. Who would the best women compete against in most sports? Would they enjoy it? Would anyone want to watch more than once? Would it be shown on TV? Would the women be able to earn any money doing it? Sounds like a disaster me. The only people who would be pleased would be the "Well that's what the feminazis asked for!" crowd. Good grief.
There are very few sports were gender does not actively play a part in that sportspersons ability to achieve certain things. Most equestrian type activities, I also think things like darts and snooker, and motorsport.
Every other sport really, being a female is a disadvantage in terms of athletic ability, power, strength etc.
There is some scope in the fact that in things like powerlifting, boxing etc you compete at a weight, so what is to say that a lightweight boxer at whatever stone should be equal, but I am sure anyone would agree that would be a potentially unequal fight?
I don't know why, but it seems that way. But in terms of things like rowing, football, crickets, tennis, there is simply a disadvantage to equal level pros competing against each other/ And there always will be
Every other sport really, being a female is a disadvantage in terms of athletic ability, power, strength etc.
There is some scope in the fact that in things like powerlifting, boxing etc you compete at a weight, so what is to say that a lightweight boxer at whatever stone should be equal, but I am sure anyone would agree that would be a potentially unequal fight?
I don't know why, but it seems that way. But in terms of things like rowing, football, crickets, tennis, there is simply a disadvantage to equal level pros competing against each other/ And there always will be
popeyewhite said:
Unreal said:
It's a complex subject
It's really not. Either you want sport to be fair, or you're happy to let some have a clear and uncontested competitive advantage after transitioning. However, the gender issue under discussion isn't limited to transitioning athletes. We can see in the Semanya case that she is female yet still possesses an advantage over other females that is unconnected to transitioning. Unlike an athlete with long legs, that helps in an event like the high jump, she is prevented from competing because she has a high testosterone level. Where is the fairness in that?
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff