They play according to their sex, which is material reality and inescapable, rather than a bare feeling. Sure, transitioning doesn't create advantages - but puberty does.
None of this is anti-trans, and none of it is right-wing. There is nothing right-wing about pointing out that sex is real, immutable, and important, and that just social structures would account for that.
Neither is anybody "attacking" anyone's identity (whatever the hell that means). Everyone should be able to live their life as they see fit, constrained only by considerations of others being able to do so under fair conditions too.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 9:30,
Reply)
FWIW...
I do agree that the matter has been coopted and weaponised by the right, and that's regrettable and a distortion of what's really in play.
But the fact that a position can be coopted by the right does not mean that it's a right-wing position, any more than Nick Griffin's crocodile tears about halal slaughter mean that animal welfare concerns are right-wing.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 9:49,
Reply)
That's a bloody good point well made.
(
brb man-child cuck corporate supplicant fuck, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 16:48,
Reply)
What does playing according to "sex" mean?
Do you think male heavyweight boxers should be competing against male bantamweights, for example?
(, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 9:52, Reply)
No. Of course not.
But you can have weight classifications within sex classifications.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 9:53,
Reply)
My point is that boxing already recognises that a single category of "male" is not sufficient to categorise competitors. Perhaps "playing according to sex" is also too simplistic for other sports, and they need to consider ways of categorising competitors in a more granular fashion.
(, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 10:37, Reply)
Simply because sex isn’t sufficient
As the *only* category, does not mean that it isn’t the most important initial category. And in fact, as everyone who hasn’t lost their minds knows, it is.
I’m not meaning this to sound hyperbolic, it’s simply the truth of what you’re suggesting; if boxers were separated by weight class and not sex, what you’d have is this; lots of dead female boxers.
(, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 10:42, Reply)
It's perfectly sufficient in most contexts.
In some, it's not. That's why we divide boxers by weight.
But the natural range of abilities within sex classes is dwarfed by the differences between them; and that's why competition within sex classes is (by and large) fair, and between them is (by and large) not.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 29 Jun 2021, 10:45,
Reply)