I don't really care? Does it matter? I want to know why they should be actively excluded.
If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say the reason an open category has been created is because female athletes were unhappy at seeing their records and places diminished. So this is a way to allow trans athletes to participate as well as maintain female spaces. I think the total exclusion could be what female athletes wanted i.e. a clear distinct separation. I can't imagine why a female athlete would want to compete with biological males anyway in a sporting sense.
I disagree with this statement. It's not accommodating if it's not wanted which the 0 entries would imply.
So your alternative is to let trans athletes erase female athlete sporting achievement and places? How is that accommodating to female athletes?
Didn't say that either. I don't think there is an easy solution currently in which both parties can be favoured currently and perhaps there never will be but my primary statement after this wanting to know why trans athletes decided not to enter and I haven't seen anywhere that discusses dialogue between the sporting body and trans athletes about this decision to have an open category either. All I have seen is the organisers in Berlin saying they've created it.
I know you didn't say it, but that's the situation that prompted this whole open situation. So at some point, you're going to have to make a judgement on what's fairer (or better). Is it the erasure of female athletes sporting achievements and places or a separate category for trans athletes? I know which is both fairer and better because it maintains female athlete participation and provides a clear defined space to include trans athletes, and it seems the sporting bodies do too.
It's fairer/better to you because that's what side you fall on. Again, in either situation, a group or individual will miss out.
It's fairer / better to the female athletes who seem to be continuously ignored by you. It doesn't matter what I think, but it should matter what they think.
I haven't ignored them, female athletes will still be able to participate in Berlin in the capacity they wish to. I'm specifically talking about this event.
completely agree. it's actually incredible something simple as this needs to be explained to some.
Ok, so I'm wrong. They didn't get any athletes attending this year, when do you think it will happen?
I understand the reason the open category was created and agree that the motivation of ensuring safety and preserving fairness of competition are good ones. The reasons for excluding trans women from female competition are many and detailed so I don't object to the existence of open categories, nor the preservation of female only competition.
It's so simple that we have 60 pages and nearly 2500 posts debating this in one Redcafe thread alone. I guess some of us are just that thick, right?
It's the total disregard for females that really annoys me. It's repackaged misogyny.
I think you're getting stuck on the semantics of it being called the "open" category. It was essentially supposed to be a trans/non-binary category.
They're looking at re-trying it at masters level (over 35s), so the idea hasn't been scrapped.
...and this is why it is a difficult discussion with no easy solution. You try to have a civil and reasoned debate about something and get accused of being misogynistic or transphobic.
They were allowed for decades, and that didn't happen.
Why have a female category at all? Why not have everyone lumped into 1?
Exclusively trans/non-binary I can understand although I could also empathise with inclusivity objections. Entirely open I can also envisage and would be my preferred choice. Everyone but these specific women just seems a fairly thoughtless middle ground. Maybe the middle choice is difficult for bureaucratic reasons or something.
But if a cis women wants to compete in the open they can't, hence it's not open is it.
It's not really been an issue in elite level sport until fairly recently.
It’s pretty hilarious that you think trying to support trans people’s rights equals misogyny. Especially given more women are supportive of trans people than men, and most people who are anti actually misogynistic policies like anti-abortion are also against trans rights.
You're a reasonable poster, so don't take it to heart (I mean there are others on your side of the discussion that are way worse). But it is incredibly frustrating having this conversation and we're continuously told to 'think of the trans athletes' where that care doesn't extend to female athletes who are seeing their sporting spaces and achievements diminish by the day. And then the ironic thing is, we are thinking of trans athletes, hence an open category, and now that's not good enough because none of them applied(!)....and this is why it is a difficult discussion with no easy solution. You try to have a civil and reasoned debate about something and get accused of being misogynistic or transphobic.
Please stop making things up.
Ah right on cue - weren't you hysterically bleating not long ago that everyone who opposes inclusion of trans athletes in female sports was transphobic?
From a purely physical standpoint
That feels like the least of anyone's concerns in this whole situation.
It's closed to someone that's a ftm transperson?
using phrases like 'hysterically bleating' doesn't really help your argument.
Yes but depends on the sport
Then it seems we're at a bit of an impasse.
No, sorry, should have been more specific. It's closed to those born female who still identify as such. Here's a link to the actual policy:
I'm more on your side than not when it comes to the issue, but this is uncalled for.
Thank you.
How many want to be identified that way? Especially if they transitioned as teens, they’d have no interest in being publicly identified as trans. Isn’t the point to just compete in their new identity? I think that’s point of a lot of the anti-trans laws: so people are outed.
Incorrect, the reason for what you perceive as anti-trans laws is to not infringe the rights of others.
