A complex process
Once more unto the breach dear friends – we will square the circle, we will we will we will.
Raises hand
Excuse me excuse me this is competitive sports you’re talking about. It can’t be “inclusive” at all times because of the competitive bit. The whole point of competition is to exclude everyone but the winner. Inclusion isn’t the goal.
Also, of course, what they mean by “a balance between fairness and inclusion” is inclusion of men who pretend to be women at the expense of women. You can’t “balance” that. You might as well try to balance a piano on your finger.
As of 17 July 2023, all transgender women who have transitioned after puberty are banned from competing in the women’s category at UCI-sanctioned events.
For non-UCI-sanctioned events, USA Cycling has devised a two-tiered system aimed at striking a balance between fairness and inclusivity in the sport.
That is, a balance between fairness to women and inclusivity of men in the women’s category in the sport. Put like that it doesn’t sound quite so fair and balancey, does it.
“The revision of our Transgender Participation Policy was a complex process guided by several factors. Foremost was the direction of our Board of Directors, who asked us to prioritize the balance between fairness and inclusion,” states USA Cycling CEO Brendan Quirk.
The Board of Directors asked them to prioritize the balance between fairness to women and inclusion of men, in other words it asked them to do the impossible.
“…transitioned after puberty…” What about “transitioned” before puberty, how will that be verified? This is why laws requiring an age of consent is a good idea. There is something horribly wrong with people who push trans ideology on prepubescent children.
Has anyway suggested: “Hey, yes, of course trans women and cis women are both kinds of women, just as trans men and cis men are both kinds of men, but there are obvious differences in body and strength between them (remember, women come in all sorts of bodies and shapes), so how about we make a cis women’s team, a trans women’s team, a cis men’s team, and a trans men’s team? And you’re always pointing out that the numbers of trans people are so tiny — so that’s great, that will give you higher chances of winning when you compete on the trans women’s team!”
Of course, that wouldn’t convince the TIMs, since their whole goal is to violate women’s boundaries, but it might convince the general populace.
@GW #2
Of course, having trans women’s categories and trans men’s categories does not resolve the issue of which locker rooms the “trans” athletes will use.
Instead of women and trans women are two kinds of women (and men and trans men are two kinds of men), it really should be that men and trans women are two kinds of men (and women and trans men are two kinds of women).
maddog1129 @3: Yes, obviously men and trans women should be considered* two kinds of men, but then we would get called bigots and our argument would be discounted entirely. Baby steps.
*In actuality they’re only one kind of man, since there’s no coherent definition of “trans”.
No baby steps that say trans women are any kind of women. Nope nope nope.
GW #4 wrote:
The problem with your compromise position is encapsulated in your parenthetical phrase: women do indeed come in all sorts of bodies and shapes — yet this has never effected their eligibility for sports. A 4’ woman can still try out for the basketball team; a 7’ woman doesn’t have to follow rules ensuring that her advantage in height doesn’t allow her to dominate a game. There is no precedent for evaluating women of different races, classes, creeds, etc. for differences in body and strength so we may divide them and make it “fair. If an African tribe is genetically gifted for sprinting short distances, then good for them.
Weight classes in wrestling aren’t separating different “types” of women, they separate by weight alone. If simple physical qualifications always eliminate a type of woman, however, then it’s easy to argue that that type is being targeted for elimination. I don’t think that any compromise can be rationally justified after an agreement that TWAW.
I see, yes, good point. And of course maddog1129’s point about locker rooms.
Regarding locker rooms, the solution seems clear. Just create another for the trans women, and another for the trans men. And then others for the enbies, and the genderqueer, and the genderfluid, and the unicorns, and the transhumanists….
At that point we’re down to single stalls, since “there are as many gender identities as there are people.”
“we will square the circle”
You have found the solution.
The wheels on the bicycles are all square so that no competitor in the cycling contest ever gets ahead of the others.
@GW,
I’m afraid one stall per person won’t be enough. So many of us contain multitudes.