Posted on 02/02/2020 6:19:47 AM PST by Kaslin
If you peruse social media for three minutes, you can find discussions on virtually every topic imaginable. From pop culture to politics, science to sports, food to fashion, there is no shortage of people willing to express their opinions.
But there are limits.
This week I took a camera crew to a nearby liberal arts college. My goal was simple; I wanted to find out what college students thought about sports. Or, more specifically, I hoped to learn what they thought about transgender women (i.e., biological men) participating in womens sports.
This was not a theoretical exercise. The debate about men competing in womens sports is raging and it isnt going away anytime soon.
On one end of the spectrum, some argue that there will never be full acceptance as long as sports remain gendered. They demand full inclusion of transgender athletes based on their self-proclaimed gender identity. Under this view, an MMA fighter such as Fallon Fox can be celebrated as the bravest athlete in history for the willingness as a biological male to enter the ring and quite literally break the skull of the female competitor he was fighting.
Those who hold the opposing view cite biology as the necessarily determining factor when it comes to participation in mens or womens sports. They argue that the inherent physiological differences in men and women (muscle complexion, bone thickness, muscle mass, etc.) give males an intolerable advantage over females when it comes to athletic endeavors. Count fighter Tamikka Brents in this camp. Brents was on the receiving end of Fallon Foxs bravery, and received a concussion and 7 broken orbital bones for her trouble. Notably, Brents wasnt told before the fight that Fox was a biological male. She later said she had never felt so overpowered ever in my life, and concluded when it comes to a combat sport I think [men competing in womens sports] just isnt fair.
At first glance, Americans seem to be evenly split on this issue. According to a Rasmussen Reports poll, 51% of those surveyed opposed admitting athletes into sports based on gender identity, which would suggest 49% favor such a practice. Take a closer look, however, and youll see that just 29% favored using gender identity as the determining factor; another 20% labeled themselves undecided.
Why so many on the fence?
Perhaps theyve seen what happens when individuals share an insufficiently-woke opinion on issues related to transgenderism. Author J.K. Rowling of Harry Potter fame was blasted for her transphobia when she came to the defense of a woman who lost her job for stating that people cannot change their biological sex. Tennis great Martina Navratilova a member of the LGBT community was also labeled as transphobic after she argued that allowing biological men to compete against women was insane and cheating.
Suffice it to say, vigorous discourse is not particularly welcomed on this topic. Indeed, transgender cyclist Rachel McKinnon has gone so far as to claim that only a sore losing bigot would object to a biological male participating in female athletics because real champions want stronger competition.
My experience at Colorado College this week only served to confirm that sometimes the truth is simply too controversial. As you can see in the video, I asked students a variety of questions about biological men competing in womens sports. For instance, I inquired as to whether males had any biological advantages in athletics as compared to women. Some acknowledged the scientific reality, but others hemmed and hawed. Others even took a page from the NCAA transgender handbook and questioned whether such a competitive advantage existed.
I told students that Karsten Braasch, a male tennis player ranked 203rd on the mens tour, was able to easily defeat Serena and Venus Williams in back-to-back exhibition matches in 1998, despite a training regimen that one journalist reportedly described as revolving around cigarettes and beer. I asked how this could happen, given the extraordinary talent and skill possessed by the Williams sisters. Some acknowledged the simple fact that men have some biologically-conferred advantages in speed and strength. Others claimed to be unsure of why Braash triumphed.
We talked about Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood, two high school track and field athletes from Connecticut who, although biologically male, are competing against girls. Though one of these athletes failed to even advance in boys indoor track events during the Winter 2018 season, the two now hold 15 womens state championship titles (which were previously held by 10 different girls). I asked whether this was fair to the girls who were being effectively kicked off the award podium. Some admitted that this was unfair and seemingly in violation of Title IX, but at least one student maintained that Terry and Andraya were girls and denied any negative impact on womens athletics.
As a society, have we come to a place where truth cannot be tolerated in the face of the prevailing orthodoxy of tolerance? Must the most basic biological differences between men and women be denied or whispered in secret? When the camera was turned off, one student told me that he believed biological men should not be competing in womens sports. He also told me that he wasnt comfortable making that statement on camera.
Men and women are different. Allowing men to compete in womens sports hurts women. Stating these facts may be politically taboo, but that doesnt mean they arent true.
It is more a matter of cowardice than the truth being “controversial.”
Not necessarily. They may be perfectly healthy young men who made the rational decision that they are not top-line athletes, but since they automatically hold an advantage against girls, they claim to "identify" as female so they can "compete" without real competition. Against girls, they have no real competition.
If we are to believe the left that there is a patriarchy dedicated to keeping women subservient, then it looks like the patriarchy has come up with a fiendishly clever way to suppress women. Any man who wants to suppress women can just claim that he “identifies” as one, and *boom* the doors are open for him to suppress and displace women all he wants.
In Shakespeare’s time, women were not allowed to do anything and absolutely could not perform. All of the female parts in his plays were played by men. Have we really gone so far backwards in women’s rights?
I also did not know that Tamikka Brents was unaware that her opponent was biologically male.
That’s just wrong. She should have been informed and had the option to not “compete.”
She (and any other female who fought with Fallon Fox) is the “brave” one. It’s totally upside-down for a biological male to be labeled “brave” for fighting biological females. Would a heavyweight champion boxer be called “brave” for fighting a much lighter weight category?
I have some mixed feelings about this.
Women are much more supportive of this LGBTQRSTUV insanity than men, so in a way there is a touch of schadenfreude and that they deserve what they’re getting.
On the other hand, not fighting this idiocy will eventually negatively impact all of us, not just women.
“Better to spend those 3 mins here on FR.
Social media is a cesspool. Stop complaining.”
FYI - FR is social media!
Women athletes must start a movement to fight this insanity.
The college could make bunches of bucks if they put on some Christians vs. Lions fights, or even bullfights. Bullfights are very popular.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.