[lee martell]

Eventually, women themselves are most likely going to be the one’s to put the kabash on this concept. I’m talking about ‘female-from-birth women’. They will be the ones too often on the losing end of such contests. At some point, they’re going to get tired of ‘losing with grace’. What about all their hard work? Right now, the court costs and bad PR from fighting this are usually too high for most competitive institutions to take on.

[Maigrey]

So you know, there is a huge ongoing social war with those who are supportive of "Female from birth" feminists and "support anyone who claims to be a woman, whether they have XX or XY chromosomes." The progressives who support those people who aren't XX women call the others TERFS - trans-exclusionary radical feminists. The dividing line is whether those poor unfortunate souls who think they are but their bodies aren't are enabled rather than offered extensive help.

The younger generations are in the middle of this fight and under the radar of most.

And the progressive feminists who embrace and endorse those who are not-women are corrupting Title IX because they support those who think they are but genetically aren't.

It truly is pandora's box when it comes to women's athletics. I already know there are biological differences, including lung capacity, testosterone levels, and density of muscle fibers - so those athletic pursuits that depend on such will have a huge advantage.

Personally I think that it should be the Top tier and then second-grade tier. Of course women's athletics would disappear quickly under the spaghetti mess of Title IX with these endorsements - but I don't think most guys care whether women play sports unless it's beach volleyball.

[Salamander]

That could be greatly hastened if the Olympics let these guys compete in womens’ sports.