(04-07-2022 02:07 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 01:02 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Won’t the determinations by the governing bodies factor into the eventual consensus? What if the end result is the same two categories, somewhat redefined? There will still be winners and losers.

Of course. That's not what the court should do though. The court should merely ensure equal treatment and consistency, not that nobody wins or loses. An example might be having lived as the other gender for some period, having had specific body alterations or having hormone levels above or below a certain level. If you fit, you can compete. The issue of course is that now women can take steroids, as long as they remain below whatever level that is. There is no easy answer.

(04-07-2022 01:13 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 01:07 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 01:04 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 12:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Which political party is currently making this a bigger deal at the state or national level?

Seriously, when you make accusations like that, make sure to look in the mirror. I don’t see Democrats trying to pass bills that define sex or that create a free for all for athletics or anything similar. Right now it only appears to be Republican politicians looking to pass bills at the moment.

You don’t agree that legal definitions are needed?

Its best and easiest to maintain a culture war when there are no definitions.

Especially when you can accuse those working on laws to address the conflict as being “instigators”.

All of this

The left likes to talk about people being oppressed... like the trans person who can't use the 'other' bathroom... but the moment a solution is put forth, like whatever your birth certificate says, they claim 'the other side' is making a big deal about it.... ignoring that the ;solution' only comes about because of the charge of violating someone's constitutional rights. Serious charges that need to be addressed.

Much like traditional attributes of men and women (that don't always hold true) one party wants to express their feelings and the other wants to solve the problem. Of course the moment you solve the problem, there is a new opportunity to express feelings about that proposed solution.

Whether they like the answer or not, deciding that male and female are determined by chromosomes or equipment or any of a number of descriptors IS an answer. Things like 'does the equipment work' or 'has it been removed' doesn't have to be part of that equation.

The issue is that there isn’t really a problem to solve. Like the Governor of Utah pointed out - there were 4 instances of transgender high school athletes competing, and only one in women’s sports.

Yet the party of small government is advocating for laws the define where one must compete? How does that make sense? Why not let the governing sport bodies decide how they best manage the athletes who compete in their organization?

It’s a nice attempt to spin the instigators away from the legislators who have created a bogey man out of relatively infrequent issues that are best managed by the sport’s governing body.