So are you in favor of making all sports teams coed? If you truly believe “biological sex” is a meaningless term, then what rationale could there possibly be for having separate men’s and women’s teams.
+1 for not having trans women compete against bio women. The female sports I am most familiar with are track and volleyball. In VB for instance the men play with nets about 6" higher than women - make sense since they tend to be taller with a greater wingspan. In mixed adult leagues you are not allowed to have three men at the net at any time, presumably because of the inequality in size and strength. I am not indifferent to the plight of trans athletes but I do think not participating in competitive sports is a sacrifice they have to make.
You have committed a logical fallacy, specifically, the either/or fallacy. You are claiming that either a person accepts the outdated notions of “biological sex”, OR they are for coed sports. One does not follow from the other, AND there are alternatives to these two arguments which you ignore.
I have no idea how to run sports while considering actual biology. I am just a biologist who is pointing out that people want to make decisions based on wrong biological assumptions.
What I am saying is that gendered sports today is based on assumptions which are not born out by biology. Rewrite the rules of sports, rather than trying to rewrite biology.
It’s not a logical fallacy to claim women specific teams would have to go away if you believe the terms men and women are biologically meaningless. You could come up with a completely new system based on some algorithm taking into account testosterone and height. You’re being evasive on what alternative you would prefer.
I’m not being evasive. I simply do not care enough to waste my energy and time in trying to figure out ways in which to make spectator sports look better. I do not watch spectator sports, I do not follow teams, and I have no idea about most of the rules for most of the games. So I am also unqualified in this matter.
I give my opinion when I have an opinion, and I have no opinion on the matter of how they should change the rules so they protect human rights, and does not ignore biology and, much worse, help spread misinformation about biology.
As for issue/agenda groups providing legal counsel to the Connecticut girls…
I like the old adage: “Even a broken clock is right two times a day.” OK, so said groups’ hands may not be above suspicion, but legal advocates are biased, obviously. Also, I am dismayed that some posts in this thread essentially characterize these girls as bigots. As I understand the facts of the story I do not see that position from the girls at all.
However, if they did not agree with the ADF on its more well known views, they could have carefully selected some other legal counsel who was not well known for those kinds of views.
If you were making a lawsuit that attracted groups that you do not agree with, would you want to use them for legal counsel, perhaps causing you to be seen as a trojan horse for those groups?
I think it’s an unnecessary tangent. ADF is a Christian based law network. We can disagree with their cases and counter them legally. But they are entitled to their views and are Americans as well. The girls may be Christian or they offered to help for free. The lawyers are all qualified and bar registered. They are just as qualified to represent them as anyone. Also a network this large will undoubtably have varied cases.
I’m a fan of the aclu personally. But do I think they get every case right. No way. Some are head scratchers. But they are large and varied. Certainly can be a great resource for many.
It’s always about the case for me. These children are not part of some grand right wing conspiracy. Not based on what I’ve read. They feel that the system disadvantaged them and they are seeking remedy. They my win or lose. It’s their right to try.
I believe we should let it play out and not pigeon hole motives. They may be out of alignment with ones views but we are free country known for beneficial disagreements. It makes us stronger and unique that way. Ultimately we are all on the same team and respect the outcomes. If not people are free to continue to fight back through the system. But ad hominem attacks against the plaintiffs choice of lawyers is misplaced imho.
The case itself is complicated. I believe trans students need to be accepted and lovingly woven as individuals as part of our communities. I also see if someone has an advantage in sports may be unfair.
MODERATOR’S NOTE: this thread has devolved into a debate so I am closing it.