Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

agnos.is Forums

  1. Home
  2. World News
  3. OK, so hold up.

OK, so hold up.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved World News
3 Posts 3 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • hitstun@fedia.ioH This user is from outside of this forum
    hitstun@fedia.ioH This user is from outside of this forum
    [email protected]
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    OK, so hold up. This isn't testing if a woman is trans. This test also disqualifies cis women who have genetic conditions that give them masculine physical traits. This article gives examples of women's gold medalists who are cis but would now be disqualified.

    We might have to replace the men's and women's categories with "open" and "two X chromosomes". Cis and trans people of all genders might be surprised to find whether or not they qualify for the "two X chromosomes" category. Particularly effeminate cis men might qualify for "two X chromosomes". This actually seems like a fair way to level the playing field, accomplishing what the current men's and women's divisions try to do.

    I am a little worried about the idea of disqualifying athletes for having beneficial genes. This could have implications beyond women's sports, like being banned from basketball for being too tall.

    F 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • hitstun@fedia.ioH [email protected]

      OK, so hold up. This isn't testing if a woman is trans. This test also disqualifies cis women who have genetic conditions that give them masculine physical traits. This article gives examples of women's gold medalists who are cis but would now be disqualified.

      We might have to replace the men's and women's categories with "open" and "two X chromosomes". Cis and trans people of all genders might be surprised to find whether or not they qualify for the "two X chromosomes" category. Particularly effeminate cis men might qualify for "two X chromosomes". This actually seems like a fair way to level the playing field, accomplishing what the current men's and women's divisions try to do.

      I am a little worried about the idea of disqualifying athletes for having beneficial genes. This could have implications beyond women's sports, like being banned from basketball for being too tall.

      F This user is from outside of this forum
      F This user is from outside of this forum
      [email protected]
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Imagine putting in the work to qualify for the Olympics only to find out you're not a "real" woman by some arbitrary definitions. Michael Phelps has physical characteristics that gave him an edge in his particular sport, but people only tried to talk about his weed use as a disqualifying factor

      K 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • System shared this topic on
      • F [email protected]

        Imagine putting in the work to qualify for the Olympics only to find out you're not a "real" woman by some arbitrary definitions. Michael Phelps has physical characteristics that gave him an edge in his particular sport, but people only tried to talk about his weed use as a disqualifying factor

        K This user is from outside of this forum
        K This user is from outside of this forum
        [email protected]
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        That man has too many amino strings in his DNA that resembles fish DNA.

        DSQ

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • System shared this topic on
        Reply
        • Reply as topic
        Log in to reply
        • Oldest to Newest
        • Newest to Oldest
        • Most Votes


        • Login

        • Login or register to search.
        • First post
          Last post
        0
        • Categories
        • Recent
        • Tags
        • Popular
        • World
        • Users
        • Groups