|
Sexually female adults should not be forced to compete against people who are sexually male adults, regardless of gender self-id. It's not fair. When it comes to athletic competition where male physiology confers an advantage, natal women should be a protected class. Perhaps the categories should be "female" and "open"?
We don't ask pre-puberty boys to compete against post-puberty boys because that's not fair either. Once puberty kicks in males just get soooo many physical advantages - bigger hearts, greater lung volume, more red blood cells per litre of blood, stronger connective tissues, stronger bones, greater muscle mass - in just about every sport that involves physical exertion it's just not fair to put an athlete who hasn't experienced male puberty up against someone who has. And that's not taking into account the advantages a male has just from sheer physical geometry in some sports - for example, longer arms means a man can fend off a a female tackler or punch a female combatant in the face before she can even touch him. A physically male cyclist has a narrower pelvis (not shaped for making a baby) and so can direct more power directly downwards on the pedals. A male athletes thighs are above his shins in almost straight lines like || while a female's legs look like ><. That narrow nonbabymaking pelvis combined with broader male shoulders also means that a male swinging something (e.g., a club or racquet) has a greater range of motion, and thus power, than a female athlete. His swing isn't obstructed by a broad pelvis like hers is.
As mentioned earlier, the one sport in which women consistently match or outperform men is ultralongdistance swimming.
|