Why can’t we all agree that it’s absurd to allow biological men compete in women’s sports

There are differences of opinion regarding whether it is moral or beneficial for transgender people to undergo gender reassignment surgery. Regardless of where you land in that debate, everyone should be able to agree that it is unfair to allow “transgender women” (biological men who identify as women) to compete in women’s sports.

This is not about equality, but fairness. Biological males have clear physical advantages over biological females, guaranteeing that transgender women will beat all or most biological women in sports. That is why we have always separated sports by sex. Allowing transgender women to compete in women’s sports is not fair to biological women. They practice and train for years to be the best among women, only to be beaten by a biological male.

Biological women should not be defrauded of their chance to win at their sport simply because a man who thinks he is (or should be) a woman wants to compete alongside them. We should not ignore the desires of millions of biological women to satisfy the desires of a small number of transgender women (nor their safety, as we’ve seen biological women hurt badly by transgender women). This is about more than medals. Scholarships are on the line. This is about girls’ futures. If you believe in fairness, then join me in opposing transgender women competing in female sports. If this is allowed, it will effectively be the end of women’s sports.

Scalia Says:

March 20, 2021 at 11:39 am

I totally agree with your basic premise. It’s not difficult to see that this will greatly diminish or end female sporting. The absurdity of this approach is highlighted by the following:

According to the Chicago Tribune,

A Chicago man accused of sexually assaulting three young girls told prosecutors he considered himself a boy in a man’s body, according to Cook County court documents.

Joseph Roman, 38, is charged with predatory criminal sexual assault stemming from repeated attacks on three girls who were 6 to 8 years old at the time, according to prosecutors. Roman was a friend of the girls’ families at the time of the attacks between 2015 and January of this year.

During a hearing Wednesday, prosecutors said Roman admitted to some of the attacks and told Chicago police “he is a 9-year-old trapped in an adult’s body.” He was ordered held without bail.

This story highlights the logical conundrum liberals face when they attempt to assert rest/shower/locker room access for transgender persons. Joseph Roman claims to be a boy, even though he’s a biological adult. If society accepts his minor-status claim, authorities will have to justify charging a boy as an adult in order to impose stiffer penalties for his assaults. Moreover, though minors cannot legally consent to sex, they are not sent to juvenile hall for “consensual” sex. What should happen if this “boy” has “consensual” sex with a girl? Consistency dictates that we treat him no differently than biological boys.

Recall that there are few, if any, government-level standards requiring proof that one is genuinely transgender. In other words, all a person has to do is merely claim to be male or female. There are no time, dress, or medical requirements. A person may enter an opposite biological sex facility whether s/he looks like Marilyn Monroe or John Wayne. The Left insists that biology should not determine access, and they equally insist that everybody accede to that claim by using the pronouns corresponding to the same. Lacking biological or medical standards, the door is open for everybody.

Back to the Joseph Romans of the world. If a man must be accepted as a woman on his claim that he is a she, and if we cannot appeal to biology, time or lifestyle, on what basis can we reject Roman’s claim? If he claims to be a boy, why shouldn’t we accept it? Why would biology be decisive in his case and not a transgender person’s?

The obvious answer is that Roman’s claim should be rejected precisely because he is a biological adult. If psychologists certify that Roman is convinced he’s a child, then Roman clearly has a mental defect and needs to be kept away from children. Roman’s feelings are subordinate to public order and safety. Similarly, if a man is merely pretending to be a woman in order to get free looks in the locker room, he should be arrested. However, on what basis do we legally decide who’s pretending? A person with whom I was debating said that “ogling” should be a crime, but he would not define what that means. And if a man genuinely thinks he’s a woman, he has a mental defect that needs treatment. We don’t need to violate everybody’s privacy rights to assuage mentally defective persons, especially since they comprise an extreme minority. In other words, it’s a solution in search of a problem.

Separate rest/locker/shower rooms were created to preserve privacy—something liberals used to believe in. The privacy rights of the vast majority should not be trashed to satisfy a policy that exposes women to every pervert in the land.

LikeLike

Paul Vander Voort Says:

March 25, 2021 at 2:54 pm

TR …… well said. this is a made up problem, if these sjw want to fix it the only fair way is for “transgender women” to compete against other “transgender women.”

and for “transgender women” to use the women’s facilities as they want that would need the approval of every woman. if any woman objects —- the “transgendered woman” would need to use private facilities or there would have to be private facilities for the woman that objects to protect the rights of the woman.

Thinking to Believe