I think this should be handled by the communities of the different sports in stead. I imagine some sports, like power-lifting, would end up separating on biological sex - with some others wouldn’t
I don’t think that single example really proves that. There’s reasons why we have separate events for men and women, and some of those have to do with biology - if biology didn’t matter, we could just remove the separation altogether.
…but then again, I really don’t think it should be up to me either, that’s kind of my point. The communities and institutions of the different sports should figure this out, not the IOC, and certainly not me.
If transphobia wasn’t rampant, that would be ideal. But transphobia is rampant, and it just means each and every sport defaults to exclusion. That’s how it worked before this IOC ruling. That’s how it worked at the last Olympics, in which zero trans women were able to compete.
Idealised scenarios that assume fairness and good will don’t work. They just lead to exclusion, and worse, they make it impossible to gather more data.
And the reason for that is that everyone thinks like you. Which is to say, everyone thinks “Biology matters”, but for some reason, is never working to challenge that assumption by acknowledging that trans folks biology changes with the introduction of hormone replacement. It’s also a space with a lot of bad faith and actively misleading research, because of the aforementioned transphobia.
Excluding trans people from sport is an openly acknowledged “first step” of a where they’re using to normalise exclusion of trans folk in wider society. These are the folk generating much of this research, research that normally would be laughed out of the room, but when it’s about trans people and aligns with the “common sense” belief that trans folks have an advantage in sports, somehow the research gets taken seriously.
That’s the environment we live in. And that’s the environment that tried your approach, as a stepping stone to the outright exclusion we have now.
I don’t see how entrusting the process to the IOC will ensure that there’s less transphobia behind the decision. It’s not exactly known for being very progressive :p
And either way, I don’t think fighting to push something through against the popular will, without a clear plan for consensus-building afterwards, is a good way of building lasting change - I’d say it is a good way of creating a backlash, and of selling the Conservative image of the trans movement as anti-democratic and elitist.
Appeasing the bigots and fearmongers has never once in the history of people lead to success and protection of minority rights. All it is is a slowly closing ratchet.
The only method that has ever worked is pushing back. It doesn’t have to mean violence, but it means making people uncomfortable, and challenging their harmful beliefs, not letting them sit comfortably with them
I think this should be handled by the communities of the different sports in stead. I imagine some sports, like power-lifting, would end up separating on biological sex - with some others wouldn’t
The only trans woman to ever compete in the Olympics was a power lifter. She came last.
Your intuition about trans athletes is wrong.
I don’t think that single example really proves that. There’s reasons why we have separate events for men and women, and some of those have to do with biology - if biology didn’t matter, we could just remove the separation altogether.
…but then again, I really don’t think it should be up to me either, that’s kind of my point. The communities and institutions of the different sports should figure this out, not the IOC, and certainly not me.
If transphobia wasn’t rampant, that would be ideal. But transphobia is rampant, and it just means each and every sport defaults to exclusion. That’s how it worked before this IOC ruling. That’s how it worked at the last Olympics, in which zero trans women were able to compete.
Idealised scenarios that assume fairness and good will don’t work. They just lead to exclusion, and worse, they make it impossible to gather more data.
And the reason for that is that everyone thinks like you. Which is to say, everyone thinks “Biology matters”, but for some reason, is never working to challenge that assumption by acknowledging that trans folks biology changes with the introduction of hormone replacement. It’s also a space with a lot of bad faith and actively misleading research, because of the aforementioned transphobia.
Excluding trans people from sport is an openly acknowledged “first step” of a where they’re using to normalise exclusion of trans folk in wider society. These are the folk generating much of this research, research that normally would be laughed out of the room, but when it’s about trans people and aligns with the “common sense” belief that trans folks have an advantage in sports, somehow the research gets taken seriously.
That’s the environment we live in. And that’s the environment that tried your approach, as a stepping stone to the outright exclusion we have now.
I don’t see how entrusting the process to the IOC will ensure that there’s less transphobia behind the decision. It’s not exactly known for being very progressive :p
And either way, I don’t think fighting to push something through against the popular will, without a clear plan for consensus-building afterwards, is a good way of building lasting change - I’d say it is a good way of creating a backlash, and of selling the Conservative image of the trans movement as anti-democratic and elitist.
Appeasing the bigots and fearmongers has never once in the history of people lead to success and protection of minority rights. All it is is a slowly closing ratchet.
The only method that has ever worked is pushing back. It doesn’t have to mean violence, but it means making people uncomfortable, and challenging their harmful beliefs, not letting them sit comfortably with them
I don’t necessarily disagree with any of that, but I also don’t think it invalidates any of what I just wrote.