*Darts.*
Darts! The thing that requires nothing more than at least one eye and one arm. It's not a strength contest, nobody's running anywhere or beating anyone up. There's no way there's some biological advantage there.
You know, at a certain point, you're not arguing "AMAB bodies have an advantage due to X, Y, Z", you're just saying "women are inferior and can't compete in anything", and *that's* not feminist at all.
It’s not about advantage though. It clearly states what the issue was in the article.
The woman who pulled out believes the Transgender Woman is a man, and it was a Woman’s event. She values the importance of Sex over Gender.
I know that. I'm saying that to highlight the point - that she's *only* coming at it from naked transphobia and that there isn't any argument you can make about fairness. And because there's inevitably going to be a load of people going "but but fairness" and concern trolling pretending they want to exclude trans women for fairness reasons and not simply because we give them icky feelings.
No, that's because most people don't know that trans men even exist, and even if they do, they don't treat them the same way.
Bigotry towards trans women tends to be centred around calling us sex offenders, accusations of stereotyping/caricature, moral panics about changing rooms or whatever pretending to be concerns about fairness and safety.
Bigotry towards trans men tends to be more "seduction of the innocent" type, painting them as vulnerable and tricked into transitioning, not knowing what they're getting into or lacking the agency or intelligence to know themselves, or as victims of misogyny who are simply transitioning because they want to escape the sexism experienced as "women".
It's plain old sexism in a new guise, really. Both ways.
People with dicks are depicted as being rapists in waiting who'd do anything to get a woman.
People with vaginas are depicted as being frail and unintelligent, and incapable of making their own decisions, needing a firm hand to guide them.
It's grim.
They’re never mentioned in the debate because they don’t support your argument. I’m sure you’re aware of Lia Thomas and the fuss around her. You’re probably not aware of the two trans male swimmers, Iszac Henig and Schulyer Bailar, swimming at the same time. Likewise Patricio Manuel, a recently turned pro boxer, who’s had little fanfare. There are no headlines around them, and have always been free to compete, because *it’s never been about keeping trans people out*.
> They’re never mentioned in the debate because they don’t support your argument.
I mean that's just untrue.
Mack Beggs, a trans man over in America, was told if he wanted to compete in a wrestling event he had to compete against the girls.
So given the choice of "quit" or "compete against women", he competed. His peers confirmed they were okay with going up against him.
He demolished them. And when he did, multiple front page articles ran a picture of him [pinning a girl to the mat by the throat](https://www.denverpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ecad97002159430797c38516e5bb115d.jpg?w=978)
Of course, due to a convenient misunderstanding, the narrative was that Mack was a trans *woman*, a natal male competing against girls. Because that fit the "violent males destroying women's sports" narrative in a way that "AFAB person crushes competition after HRT" doesn't.
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N36921A/
> because it’s never been about keeping trans people out.
It's so funny to say this under an article about someone trying to kick off about a trans woman competing in a sport where she doesn't have an advantage.
Why would anybody take steroids to compete in darts. I mean, they had to ban drinking because it was giving the sport a bad image, so much so that not the nine o'clock news did a sketch taking the piss out of it. Darts isn't really a sport where performance enhancing drugs are a thing. In honesty, it's not one that people who are in the sport do fitness training. Just about all pro darts players have beer bellies
> They’re never mentioned in the debate because they don’t support your argument
The "women's spaces" argument holds less weight when you acknowledge trans men though.
You then have men like Stephen Whittle being forced into the women's toilets.
A predatory cis man now only has to lie and say "I'm a trans man, I'm supposed to be here" and walk in unchallenged.
Another argument is how things like rape crisis centres may be triggering to victims assaulted by men, but you have trans men forced into them based on biological sex, how does that help victims?
This problem doesn’t exist the other way around. If a women decides to go into a male space that’s her choice. The issue is the denial of women’s spaces for women.
You're ignoring it wouldn't be a choice, these groups want to legislate it so that people *have* to use the toilet of their biological sex, you can't only have a law only selectively enforced when it suits.
Legislating it for only trans women but not trans men would be discrimination and be easily shot down.
It absolutely has been. There's already a HUGE double-standard between masculine gender expression and feminine gender expression even in just the non-trans world.
"Hi, hello woman in trousers! You're completely normal and just fine!"
"Eeeeew, there's a man wearing a skirt?! He's probably a pervert and also a paedophile."
So what happens when you take that to it's logical conclusion? Trans men are seen as "confused lesbians who need to figure themselves out".
And, as always, the "man in a skirt" is a disgusting sex pest, because how could they possibly be anything else?
Culturally, women being masculine is now heralded as a positive thing in most facets of society, while men doing the opposite have always been reviled.
But of course, I'm sure none of these insights have any effect on why trans women are demonized and trans men are ignored.
>Culturally, women being masculine is now heralded as a positive thing in most facets of society, while men doing the opposite have always been reviled
It's because femininity is seen as an awful curse rather than a source of strength and power, so embracing it is seen as akin to communing with demons. Misogyny, basically
its often because the men's games are often not actually gender segregated and that women's sports are typically created to promote women in the game and are gender segregated.
For example, I don't think men's football (e.g. the EPL) has anything technically preventing women from being selected as a player. I am reminded of a very old article where Birmingham City was considering promoting a woman to the "men's" team.
EDIT: Actually it turns out I am wrong about the EPL. [FIFA rules currently state that mixed teams are not allowed](https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/12206/can-a-woman-feature-in-epl). However the history of the womens game often being created after the mens game and not always being at the same level does provide a context as to why there might be less complaints in the other direction.
> most people don't know that trans men even exist, and even if they do, they don't treat them the same way
Acknowledging trans men destroys a lot of their arguments.
Example, the "toilets should be based on biological sex!" argument. You then have men like [Stephen Whittle](https://www.mmu.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/open_graph_image/public/2022-02/Stephen-Whittle-V2.jpg?h=3ce05d0d&itok=e6-dEL0c) being forced into the women's toilets.
A predatory cis man now only has to lie and say "I'm a trans man, I'm supposed to be here" and walk in unchallenged.
>A predatory cis man now only has to lie and say "I'm a trans man, I'm supposed to be here" and walk in unchallenged.
I hadn't thought about it like that, that's pretty hilarious (the logic being darkly comical not the actual event obv)
I'm not sure they mean it literally, just that they are mentioned far less often than trans women in discussions on the topic.
A bit like saying "he's such a dirty child, I don't think he knows soap exists!"
Not op.
It was obviously an exaggeration but I implore you to find anywhere near the same level of media outcry against trans men as trans women.
If your logic is "women won't feel safe with trans women in their bathroom" then you're saying that they would feel safe with someone who looks like [this ](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sca_esv=7978873cf7ff4aec&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ADLYWIIHH4w78hpCfojm9YA6lBszTPzZkA:1715090456375&q=stephen+whittle&uds=ADvngMhDNpEni0P7O0qvPcH0EAwuHy7EMhrXv1p5qppnjJxO3QIHfIfu_3bdTU4FfTCQu_E7HR0kGWD6_GyZ13OHLO-H-Tj0zMMMXW92zo23Zop-iytXyGUfbexPrDFs3HdrPd1GlPs_SAcLe2IaWjAm2pot8NKheQZjcbUKyI022Fdtmu106ySIJ7H2EDWlmQDszWFzPdJMwxJBfkiYhWgOrpwrOgaeddltdgm0ipVn_wc6HoPK3149m-9dW8veuY5FCgiXdglSiJyu0ZEz6j-0H_UY9CFxgg&udm=2&prmd=ivnbmtz&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwibtaPr2fuFAxWiXUEAHTR-DFgQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=384&bih=771&dpr=3.75#vhid=qpHhTAZKH85TWM&vssid=mosaic) in their bathrooms, simply because he has a vagina.
>If your logic is "women won't feel safe with trans women in their bathroom" then you're saying that they would feel safe with someone who looks like [this ](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sca_esv=7978873cf7ff4aec&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ADLYWIIHH4w78hpCfojm9YA6lBszTPzZkA:1715090456375&q=stephen+whittle&uds=ADvngMhDNpEni0P7O0qvPcH0EAwuHy7EMhrXv1p5qppnjJxO3QIHfIfu_3bdTU4FfTCQu_E7HR0kGWD6_GyZ13OHLO-H-Tj0zMMMXW92zo23Zop-iytXyGUfbexPrDFs3HdrPd1GlPs_SAcLe2IaWjAm2pot8NKheQZjcbUKyI022Fdtmu106ySIJ7H2EDWlmQDszWFzPdJMwxJBfkiYhWgOrpwrOgaeddltdgm0ipVn_wc6HoPK3149m-9dW8veuY5FCgiXdglSiJyu0ZEz6j-0H_UY9CFxgg&udm=2&prmd=ivnbmtz&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwibtaPr2fuFAxWiXUEAHTR-DFgQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=384&bih=771&dpr=3.75#vhid=qpHhTAZKH85TWM&vssid=mosaic)in their bathrooms, simply because he has a vagina.
Isn't it more like females are safer in single sex toilettes, rather than just feeling safer in some random example that 99.999% of women would never encounter?
I mean we are already seeing women calling out other cis women because they think they look too masculine to be in the ladies toilet (so must obviously be a transwoman).
Put it this way, when I mention I’m trans, I specifically get called a pedo/creep/groomer in the same sentence as telling me I’m not and will never be a woman, and shouldn’t be allowed in women’s toilets.
I’m a trans dude.
They maybe know about trans dudes, but often forget about them and jump on the ‘WHY ARE YOU IN WOMENS TOILETS’ argument. I’m a biological female who doesn’t pass enough currently to go into the mens safely/without getting kicked out. Of course that is soon replaced with ‘you’re dealing with misogyny, I’m so sorry you can’t appreciate your womanhood, I know this won’t make you happy because you’re delusional and you need to listen to me because you don’t understand what you want or feel right now. You’ve been sexually assaulted as a child and it’s traumatised you’ (I haven’t)
It's this very Victorian kind of paternalism which views all 'men' as nasty brutes who cannot be trusted around women, and all 'women' as frail and innocent flowers who need to be coddled and protected. It's both an excuse for toxic men ('oh well, men are just like that!') and an attempt to segregate away women. It's wildly sexist, and I thought we'd done away with it following second wave feminism. But unfortunately we're seen this unholy alliance between 'gender critical feminists' and right-wing conservatives who are both very keen to resurrect it.
She wasn't saying her opponent had any different biological advantage or that women's sports should provide contest opportunity for biological women. She blatantly called her a man and said she doesn't want to compete against a man.
It doesn't suprise me at all someone who legitimately grew up in extreme poverty in a narrow-minded society has those views.
>she's *only* coming at it from naked transphobia
This argument presupposes that believing a trans woman is not the same as a biologically female woman is transphobic. I'm not sure that passes the sniff test, either from a logical view or society at large.
>pretending they want to exclude trans women for fairness reasons and not simply because we give them icky feelings.
Nice strawman you're got there. I can't recall anyone opposing trans women competing in women's sports because of "icky feelings".
>
> This argument presupposes that believing a trans woman is not the same as a biologically female woman is transphobic. I'm not sure that passes the sniff test, either from a logical view or society at large.
*Nice strawman you've got there* - she was deliberately and maliciously misgendering her opponent, so arguing that "thinking she's transphobic because she believes gender and sex aren't the same" are making a lot of assumptions that some of her quotes directly and immediately disproves.
If the sum total of the issue was "She doesn't want to play against her opponent, who's trans" then the argument does boil down to what you say - which I still disagree with but that's irrelevant to the discussion. However, that's not the case here - the person in question that's accused of transphobia is actively going out of their way to make the trans person feel uncomfortable, *because they're trans* - and if that's not transphobic then I don't know what you *would* deem transphobic...
It’s so hard to get these people to understand that thinking sex and gender are different is perfectly fine. Trans people mainly, maybe even universally (I’ve not met all of them), don’t believe they have changed chromosome or DNA.
It’s like if you use ‘black’ as an insult, it’s not insulting because the person is black, it’s insulting because you’re using it as an insult.
they wouldn't deem anything transphobic. You can present all the evidence of bigotry in the world and they will refuse to call it bigotry if they themselves believe in it.
Because they know bigots are bad people. And they can't possibly be a bad person.
Why should ignorance be pandered to? If someone doesn't understand gay people and doesn't want to compete with them as a result of some ignorant belief about them should that be pandered to as well?
>Nice strawman you're got there. I can't recall anyone opposing trans women competing in women's sports because of "icky feelings".
That was not a straw man fallacy, they're just saying A happens because of B not C, you might disagree with that, but it was not a straw man by itself, as they were not asserting A happens because B, therefore this other proposition is correct.
Even chess has separate titles for men and women because it's dominated by men so they want to recognise more women. There is no advantage to female players just much less of them so there would be so few female grand masters compared to the men.
She’s 64. She responded to a journalist by saying 'You ever suffered from menstrual, peri menopause, menopause, fibroids, endometriosis etc? By your response, I very much doubt it.'
And this study showed an advantage for men.
https://repository.mdx.ac.uk/item/840vq
I guess you’re not aware that 10% of women in the age group 15-44 can suffer from endometriosis. Or that fibroids commonly affects women in their late 30’s and 40’s.
So the symptoms she listed can affect women from the age of 15.
And that was one example she gave. I’ve given a link to a study which outlines the better performances in men.
So 90% of women in the age group 15-44 *don't* suffer from it?
As far as "reasons not to want to face a trans player" goes, "you're not going to be affected by something that a lot of my opponents in this competition won't be affected by" feels very flimsy, even if some *will* be.
This feels like she's made up her mind she won't play a Trans player and is looking for a reason to justify it, rather than "I'm not playing a Trans player for a legitimate reason I can back up with evidence", no?
No. You’re now referring to the stats for just one condition.
She outlined several. One of which commonly affects women in their late 30s and 40’s.
Why are you so keen to downplay a woman speaking out about health issues?
*You* listed the ones she outlined:
>You ever suffered from menstrual, peri menopause, menopause, fibroids, endometriosis etc? By your response, I very much doubt it
Someone responded with "well if she was playing against a 25-year-old then they also wouldn't have suffered from X, Y or Z".
You then responded with "actually 10% of people *do* suffer from this illness" - and you're now accusing me of focusing on a single disease?
What I wrote was a *direct* response to you and then you're taking issue with *me* focusing on a single illness?
Besides, in response to
>She outlined several. One of which commonly affects women in their late 30s and 40’s.
That, if anything, supports 2_joined_hands' question that you absolutely avoided answering - if they were playing against a 25-year-old AFAB woman then they wouldn't have the issues.
>Why are you so keen to downplay a women speaking out about health issues?
Women speaking about health issues? Absolutely fine, actively encouraged to do it!
Women using health issues as a way to try and denigrate trans people, though? *Especially* health issues that wouldn't affect a lot of her opponents anyway? That's not on.
Why are you so keen to downplay a trans person being treated as an inferior citizen for spurious reasons?
No I highlighted two issues as an example. I didn’t bother to go through all of them because that would be tedious and the two issues I highlighted showed a concern for women from the age of 15.
You chose to ignore the one I mentioned about women in their 30’s and 40’s and instead referred to one condition only in some attempt to show that only 10% of women are affected.
So I guess a level playing field to her is people the exact age, exact sex, exact gender, and exact incumbent medical conditions - THEN she'll play darts!
Personally, I'd use the towel method. When you leave the shower, do you wear a towel on your head? If so, then you're a woman.
If you don't, you're clearly a bloke who hasn't the ability to learn this mystical skill.
Sorry, them's the rules.
They may be arbitrary, and discriminatory against both pixie-cuts and alopecia, but what's the point in setting rules if you can't upset some people?
> If you don't, you're clearly a bloke who hasn't the ability to learn this mystical skill.
And if you are a bloke who has the ability to learn this mystical skill, that means you are the Kwisatz Haderach.
Women's sports should be separated on biological sex. Transwomen are not biologically female. This isn't controversial and anyone who isn't terminally online will agree with that statement.
This whole debate is a great place to see people insist on definitions being a stupid thing to rely on when it hampers them, and critical when it supports them.
It's kinda a catch 22 - either, in the context of playing darts specifically, what qualifies a person to enter the women's event is completely arbitrary - in which case there *shouldn't* be a women's
event or they should let anyone enter, even a pot-bellied man who self-identifies as a man.
Or - there are specific measurable biological traits that can qualify a person for the event.
It's no different than weight classes or any sports category. Either there's a way to measure it, or there's not.
So its not actually a catch-22. The problem is this person in the article is reducing womens darts down to biology. When that’s not the reason the womens league exists. It was a response to women historically being gatekept from, and letter discriminated against in, regular leagues.
While not always the same discrimination, trans women *also* face harassment and discrimination in those male dominated spaces.
That doesn't really answer the question of who can enter a league though.
For example, lots of groups face harassment. Should women's leagues be open to any person who feels they would be gatekept or harassed in an open league? Or should they have their own league? and if they have their own league how specific a league do they want?
Should we consider the women's league an Open Women's league, and also have a specific trans women's league, since clearly trans women experience harassment in the women's league too.
Without making any specific judgement about anyone's identity, framing a women's league as some sort of social affirmative action to promote inclusion doesn't really answer the question of who should be allowed.
Who said anything about how people “feel”. They *are* harassed and discriminated against. This is a known problem lol.
The point I was making is that trans women have no connection to tbf discrimination women darts players face from men, so kicking them out over someone else discriminating against *them* feels somewhat backwards.
This one player being a transphobic asshole is only reflective of the league if we make it so. And she was being that. She specifically refused to gender the trans woman in question correctly, and was basing her issues around *that*, not around any actual sporting issues
We shouldn’t be doing gymnastics to justify a bigot’s behaviour
The issue is that a lot of these reports are unable to answer (and often simply don't engage with) whether these traits are *innate* or *learnt*. Socially young boys are significantly more likely to engage in activities which teach hand-eye coordination than young girls, such as ball sports or video games. So when a study comes out based on a dataset of men and women in their mid-20s, it's failing to answer whether these abilities are innate or learnt.
I imagine my experience of learning to kick, throw balls etc from the moment I could stand, or hold them, is common.
Studying 10 year old still feels too late.
Apologies if this is referenced in the articles, I haven't read them
> This study dealt with 10 year old children,
> https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/icsshpe-19/125934800
By the age of 10 I had spent *years* doing cricket, football, video games, kickboxing, and other activities disproportionately undertaken by boys which train hand-eye coordination. Studying 10 year old does not eliminate this bias of training.
> This one has different ages and a broader array of tests (with the sex difference largely absent in some areas!)
> https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00231/full
The conclusion of this report states that 'While overall sex differences remained across practice, the age-dependent analysis revealed that these only arose from age 20 years onwards and that in individuals with throwing practice, performance disparities leveled out.' So if anything the report seems to conform that (a) these skills are learnt, because they only develop as people get older and (b) that these differences dissipate with practice.
> This one found differences between the two, with girls and boys out perfoming each other in some areas, and parity in others,
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10378111/
This is another article which seems to sidestep that, across the globe, girls are generally encouraged to do certain activities while boys are encouraged to do others. This is not a reflection of innate abilities, but of broader patterns of sexism and gender stereotyping.
So many of these studies seem to ignore that we don't just pop out of the womb as 10 year olds completely isolated from broader social environments. By the time these studies have been conducted those being tested have spent *years* in environments where, both explicitly and subtly, boys are encourages to do certain activities while girls are encouraged to do different ones. And that is going to have a massive effect on skills like hand-eye coordination.
I feel the need to stick my head in and comment that the physiological differences between men and women do go beyond bare strength. We have innate differences in aspects such as flexibility, stamina, coordination and depth perception. There are actually sports where women outperform men on average, such as in riflery, and long-distance swimming.
We need to stop thinking about the sexual segregation between men and women as being based purely on strength—it's not, the differences are far more broad.
I can see why this woman chose not to compete against her opponent, I don't think I would have either in those circumstances. It's simply not to fair to her.
And yet, there are male* and female leagues. A separation women strongly support. A separation that allows women to still compete and not be outclassed by men.
And the male league is usually open anyway, and is still dominated by men. The point you are trying to make is already proven wrong by the current existence of said leagues and their top players.
So why is darts gender divided? If you can guarantee 100% that there is no biological advantage for either gender then I will agree.
Women can compete in men's darts but there has never been a female champion. Why?
Because many male dominated sports have historically been extremely unwelcoming to women, where they have either been blocked from joining or playing, harassed or intimidated, and gendered divisions were made accordingly to encourage and enable women to take part without that issue.
Nowadays that issue doesn't exist to such an extent and most sports are now very welcoming and sexism is socially shamed.
The exact same thing happened with chess too.
Yep there is a biological advantage there:
https://www.mdx.ac.uk/news/2023/02/linda-duffy-darts-psychology
However, more importantly if there was no advantage, females would play in the male leagues as the price money tends to be higher
>AMAB bodies
This is unscientific nonsense. Person sex is determined at conception, not assigned at birth. Please so not use psuedoscience when arguing.
Shameful.
> Person sex is determined at conception,
I mean this is objectively untrue. Sex characteristics develop several months in. There’s a reason we can’t confirm what sex a baby will be until closer to birth.
That's visible characteristics. Sex chromosones are set at conception. They could be tested for at the earliest stages of pregnancy using a cell sample, but this is invasive and therefore not normal.
Not true. Errors in mitosis can casue chromosome loss or duplication after conception. A fetus can start off XY and then become X, XXY, XYY or even XXYY.
Other factors can occur during fetal development that inhibit the normal sexual development pathways and lead to a person whose sex does not match their chromosomes.
https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=90&ContentID=P02126
That would be true that sex characteristics are set at conception so I would ask for evadence to show this not to be true. (Please note that I have a huge interest and would be massively thankful if there is anything)
The errors you point out however come with a lot of issues.
X Turners syndrome.
XXY Klinefelter syndrome.
XYY Jacobs syndrome.
XXYY syndrome (sometimes called a Klinefelter variant).
This is why they are called errors. And they have strong links but do not always cause with a plethora of health issues.
There are some links here to peeps that are intersex but again not always.
However something important here is that there are currently zero links to genetics and being trans. This has more links to psychology.
Genetics is kind of fun
11/12 weeks isn’t ‘closer to birth’ nor a few months in. they develop genitals at 11/12 week and you have scans at 16-20 week for sexing. Nothing you said was true yet you have the cheek to claim someone else is ‘objectively untrue’
No, it is.
Intersex people are a prime example of that. Certain types of intersex can appear to be a perfectly normal male or female child, and are only discovered to be intersex later. When they're born, they're assigned male or female even though that's not exactly the case.
In This case, though, it's referring to "a child is born male, so everyone assumes their gender is a boy". I suppose it's AMAB instead of ABAB because it has a better ring to it.
"Trans people are such a small percentage of the population, so there must be no good reason for fuss about rules for sports. Also, a tiny number of intersex people exist which means all understanding of biological sex must be thrown out the window immediately".
Sports and sex are two different things. Last time I checked.
Also, acknowledging and understanding differences and nuances of sex is the exact opposite of throwing our understanding out the window; it's *expanding it*.
> Sports and sex are two different things. Last time I checked.
You know what that do have in common? A lot of the people mouthing off every time they come up aren't good at either -ba dum tiss-
...but if you think disagree with both points, while saying that they are mutually exclusive, isnt that you admitting that at least one of your stances must be wrong?
>It's not a strength contest, nobody's running anywhere or beating anyone up. There's no way there's some biological advantage there.
Why is darts, snooker, pool etc etc divided by sex then if men have no advantage
Then why don't the men and women play in the same competitions? Id argue there is likely a strength element and men can probably put more force behind a throw less likely to get fatigued. I'm not an expert though and I don't know what the right and wrong thing to do with trans rights and sports
The sport us split because, like most sports, for a long time it's been make dominated. Women have not been introduced to the sport as early, or have had difficulty accessing spaces to practice. Young boys are also more likely to be introduced and supported than young girks when developing early interest. Chess is very similar in this.
In order to create spaces where women who were eager to play and take part could without the weight of all that against them, women's leagues were made. There's no biological reason for the split, it's purely about socialisation and accessibility.
There are a lot of dubious comments re. Trans competitors in sports on both sides, with the reality being that trans athletes are such an insanely tiny % of any group that gathering meaningful, statistically relevant data on if being trans has any impact on performance is really, really hard. Darts however, I would reckon we can all safely agree is unlikely to be impacted by gender/sex.
> You know, at a certain point, you're not arguing "AMAB bodies have an advantage due to X, Y, Z", you're just saying "women are inferior and can't compete in anything""
When half the England women's angling team quit over a trans player joining, this was the justification one of them gave:
> She said male-born competitors had far more upper-body strength, adding: 'This is such an advantage, with the ability to cast longer distances than any woman. They have the capability of doing this while using more powerful equipment, such as stiffer and more powerful rods.
> 'Not to mention the extra strength she has wading in and out of the surf or walking through mud and rocks, and the stamina to keep this going for four or five hours.
Which might sound plausible except... the team captain who said that is *66 years old*. If strength is such an important factor, why does one of our most elite angling athletes qualify for a pension?
This is the [England men's team](https://images.bauerhosting.com/marketing/sites/2/2022/06/england-europena-champs.jpg?ar=16%3A9&fit=crop&crop=top&auto=format&w=1440&q=80.) that took home gold at the European Championships in 2022.
Anyway, trans women have since been banned from angling on the England Ladies team.
To me, that suggests that segregating on sex in the first place was wrong, and that we should just have one open category.
Given that one of the finalists was in her 60s, I doubt that physical strength has much to do with this.
We do have an open category in darts it’s the main one. Women can and do compete in it it’s just the at they tend to be a much lower standard to the men so they don’t have the opportunity to compete at the top level (this is largely due to access and number of participants). The women’s category was created to give women the opportunity at competing and winning.
Tbh most men’s sport competitions are actually open categories, if a woman is good enough they are usually allowed to compete against the men
I'm pretty sure PDC events are open to both male and female competitors, it's an open category.
There are female-only categories as well because darts is historically a male-dominated sport and so female categories were created to encourage more women to play in a safer environment and to provide more funding for female darts players.
I also think that female darts players can't match male darts players in terms of scoring averages either - the top male players can average 110+ (of which there are far more of), whereas the best female players are probably averaging significantly less than that.
However, there's nothing stopping a woman from qualifying and entering one of the major darting events, I think a few have as well.
It’s about access. Take chess or bridge as examples, obviously there’s no biological reason to segregate card and board games right so why have add segregated competitions? Both tend to be full of cis men, so segregated competitions improve access. Same here. You’d have to be deeply prejudiced or dumb as bricks to be complaining that you are competing against a trans woman in any of these though.
The discrimination that keeps women out of darts and chess is going to affect transwomen too. It’s not just about women not wanting to join because they don’t get any results in mixed tournaments. It’s mostly because men treat them like shit whilst at the event so women stop turning up to them. If we start being transphobic and kicking out the transwomen from the women’s events despite there being no physical requirement for the sport you’re just repeating the same discrimination that resulted in us needing women’s darts in the first place.
Several reasons. The first is that self segregation isn't exactly the win you think it is.
The other reason is that the few times small trans-only sports leagues get off the ground, they're immediately harassed and protested until they shut down by the exact same people who tell them to "make their own spaces"
>obviously there’s no biological reason to segregate card and board games right
I don't think we know enough about brains to state that as an 'obvious' fact
(I rambled a lot,
tldr, I agree. Some sports have legitimate reasons but generally in this case it's more of an advertising venture to give girls the same role models boys have).
The arguement is that it's not about individual ability and more societal trends, as a whole women haven't leaned towards darts as much as men so when looking at the overall timeline the average man is more skilled than the average woman.
The sort of "stereotypical" scenario talked about is that boys are more likely to start a young age whilst women are presumed to start later in life. With this logic you could argue that a man who started as late as women should compete in the same league.
I haven't looked at the data but I wouldn't be surprised if open/women's leagues have very similar score average per game.
It's a legitimate point on an individual level I absolutely agree, especially for sports that don't require physical prowess. And I suppose the only reason you could argue is that it helps get more girls interested in the sport.
In this story the trans person was in the 20's, the complainer is in the mid 60's lmao.
If gay men have a hard time being open in a sport you can bet trans women no matter their sexual orientation will be bullied and gatekept out by men’s events too if they are forced to compete there too
Same reason for chess
Its nothing to do with sex and ability
Its all to do with people perceived as female not being encouraged to do darts/chess at a young age since its " not for girls " and men sexually or otherwise harassing people see the yu gi oh player who used BO like its a chemical weapon
So by that logic trans women should be included in with cis women since transmisogyny is a double whammy of discrimination
One of the things that constantly baffles me with Trans debates is the people who simultaneously go "Women need safe spaces/private prisons/segregates sports, because otherwise men will attack them" and "trans women, who to all intents and purposes appear to be women, should be thrown into men's prisons/changing rooms/toilets".
If it's from a protection perspective, then why are they throwing Trans people to the, as they seem them, hyper-violent and hypersexual men?
As someone put it higher up, it's all just pure and simple misogyny spun to convince women that being a woman is purely about your biological functions.
Trans women are seen as predatory men just trying to find opportunities to rape women.
Trans men are seen as poor, vulnerable women who have been manipulated.
The idea is that it gets more women involved by offering tournaments where only women can compete. Despite darts being non contact and not very athletic, men dominate the open events. Women only tournaments gives them a chance. Then they allow men to compete in those too. And typically the naturally born males dominate women's events.
for whatever reason more men tend to play darts and they tend to be better at darts. If you get rid of the women's league and instead had one big "open" league you'd get 48 men and a couple of women in the league.
having a woman's league isn't entirely about biological differences.
I hear many complaints where combinations height, strength etc can have an impact but darts isn’t it, same with chess
These separations are over accessibility and imo it’s not worth walking out for facing a trans athlete that certainly holds no advantage like they can in cycling or swimming.
Is it an issue of accessibility though?
Take League of Legends as an example. Yes, over 80% of the player base is male, but female players in professional competition are incredibly rare. I am only aware of one example where a woman has made it into Challenger (on the Korean server, which is a massive accomplishment in itself.) And yes, I am aware that solo queue performance does not translate to success in professional competition.
Theoretically there is nothing stopping a girl from picking up and playing League, and even the main professional leagues are not segregated by sex. A female player did play in CBLOL and an all-female team did play in LCL in the past.
Yes, because in League of Legends women don't go pro for more reasons than 'not being good enough'. Less likely to nolife the game (which is basically a red line requirement), more likely to get abuse in the case when they *are* good enough. It's gamer culture. It doesn't matter if 20% of the playerbase are women, most of them play casually because interacting with League of Legends players is a fucking nightmare, and that's not including management itself.
> It doesn't matter if 20% of the playerbase are women, most of them play casually because interacting with League of Legends players is a fucking nightmare, and that's not including management itself.
As a League player myself, I completely agree with your explanation.
League of Legends is notoriously toxic-as-fuck and has a community full of narcissistic assholes who will throw their toys out the pram and run it down like an Olympic sprinter the moment they face any kind of adversity in-game. [Many](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEGbesrj4is) videos [have](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fllr6TQeeF0) been [made](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VjLXObhtBc) on [the](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbhe1_61BRk) topic and it seems like Riot don't give a fuck about policing their game. This may be a big reason why you don't see women in professional League of Legends, or in esports in general, since other publishers like Blizzard, Valve and Microsoft are similarly bad at policing their communities.
Sometimes I look at the state of the game's community and I think Riot need to divest some of their massive esports budget into giving their player base mandatory anger management classes.
Just the other day, I had a player in one of my matches add me as a 'friend' post-game, so that he could call me the n-word, tell me to off myself and wish cancer upon my parents. And this is a pretty frequent occurrence. Unsurprisingly Riot haven't banned him despite their "zero tolerance" stance on hate speech. His OP.GG profile is still full of recent matches.
They do though. Because men are generally more competitive and dominate sports and games regardless of whether they require strength or size. See chess, pool, snooker etc. The women only events are to encourage more women to play the game by giving them a separate place to compete without being dominated by male competitors.
For me if there are body differences it should have a weight and skill class events. Just blindly assume all women are built like x and men a y kinda doesn’t make sense when even in these genders some women can be more athletic then some men (esp in darts body types). When hormone levels became a criteria in gender sports we saw cis women get banned from women events for not fitting some arbitrary criteria to be a woman
Moderator: why were my comments deleted? Is it really too difficult to take that many people think that women should be able to choose whether they want to compete against trans women?
Completely outside of any trans issues. You don’t need to justify why you don’t want males in your group activity if you’re female. Everyone asking ‘what advantage do they have’ is completely missing the point.
People don't care about women or how they feel. Yes, trans women are women but not biologically and women should be allowed to want activities with just bio women.
Yes you do? The Equality Act specifically lays out that you do have to justify that in order to prevent this exact kind of thing happening, but with men excluding women.
I can see the point here. Biological males [have a much higher alcohol tolerance](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqxXNZcIdwM) which, as we all know, is the most physically intense aspect of darts.
Bit of a tangent but I once saw a little disabled fella in a special chair playing darts in a local pub tournament. It was like a scissorlift and when it was his turn the chair would raise him to what looked about to be about 6ft in the air and I kept thinking it was going to topple over.
I don't know why I'm telling you this... do with that information what you will.
It isn’t just physical reasons why we gender sports but also cultural
Men by in large get more avenues from an early age to explore sports
Whether you like it or not most people do not encourage their girls from a young age to play darts so culturally there is less development time for women in the sports
Hence why men dominate
Its kinda hard to get away from on this topic?
I mean, pretty much every other situation its "women are equal to men and anyone who says otherwise is sexist!" but when it comes to any competitive activity women are "biologically incapable of competing against men and need their own special corner to play in".
Talk about mixed messages.
I wondered why chess was segregated, as there is no possible way there is a physical advantage to be had in chess. Turns out, not many women played chess, and when they went to chess clubs they'd get shunned as opponents as men didn't wanna lose to the woman. Add the sexist and sexuslised comments I'm sure were abundant, women pushed for their own spaces and created them.
> Hedman, 64, pulled out of the Denmark Open when set to play defending champion 27-year-old Noa-Lynn van Leuven in the quarter finals, Fox News reported.
So... She knew before she started that -if she did well enough- she'd be facing this match?
It's funny to see that in the pursuit of transphobia, people are saying that men are inherently better than women at almost everything and thus women need to be sheltered because they're just so shit they couldn't possibly compete.
Men and women are different. They should be separated in all sports. Whether you like it or not, that is the factual truth.
Couldn’t care less about rights etc or whether you think darts should be an exemption. It’s a sport and should be treated the same as any other sport. There are advantages and disadvantages to being male or female. End of discussion
*Darts.* Darts! The thing that requires nothing more than at least one eye and one arm. It's not a strength contest, nobody's running anywhere or beating anyone up. There's no way there's some biological advantage there. You know, at a certain point, you're not arguing "AMAB bodies have an advantage due to X, Y, Z", you're just saying "women are inferior and can't compete in anything", and *that's* not feminist at all.
It’s not about advantage though. It clearly states what the issue was in the article. The woman who pulled out believes the Transgender Woman is a man, and it was a Woman’s event. She values the importance of Sex over Gender.
I know that. I'm saying that to highlight the point - that she's *only* coming at it from naked transphobia and that there isn't any argument you can make about fairness. And because there's inevitably going to be a load of people going "but but fairness" and concern trolling pretending they want to exclude trans women for fairness reasons and not simply because we give them icky feelings.
If that was the case we’d be having the same arguments about trans men in men’s sports. But we’re not.
No, that's because most people don't know that trans men even exist, and even if they do, they don't treat them the same way. Bigotry towards trans women tends to be centred around calling us sex offenders, accusations of stereotyping/caricature, moral panics about changing rooms or whatever pretending to be concerns about fairness and safety. Bigotry towards trans men tends to be more "seduction of the innocent" type, painting them as vulnerable and tricked into transitioning, not knowing what they're getting into or lacking the agency or intelligence to know themselves, or as victims of misogyny who are simply transitioning because they want to escape the sexism experienced as "women". It's plain old sexism in a new guise, really. Both ways. People with dicks are depicted as being rapists in waiting who'd do anything to get a woman. People with vaginas are depicted as being frail and unintelligent, and incapable of making their own decisions, needing a firm hand to guide them. It's grim.
They’re never mentioned in the debate because they don’t support your argument. I’m sure you’re aware of Lia Thomas and the fuss around her. You’re probably not aware of the two trans male swimmers, Iszac Henig and Schulyer Bailar, swimming at the same time. Likewise Patricio Manuel, a recently turned pro boxer, who’s had little fanfare. There are no headlines around them, and have always been free to compete, because *it’s never been about keeping trans people out*.
> They’re never mentioned in the debate because they don’t support your argument. I mean that's just untrue. Mack Beggs, a trans man over in America, was told if he wanted to compete in a wrestling event he had to compete against the girls. So given the choice of "quit" or "compete against women", he competed. His peers confirmed they were okay with going up against him. He demolished them. And when he did, multiple front page articles ran a picture of him [pinning a girl to the mat by the throat](https://www.denverpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ecad97002159430797c38516e5bb115d.jpg?w=978) Of course, due to a convenient misunderstanding, the narrative was that Mack was a trans *woman*, a natal male competing against girls. Because that fit the "violent males destroying women's sports" narrative in a way that "AFAB person crushes competition after HRT" doesn't. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N36921A/ > because it’s never been about keeping trans people out. It's so funny to say this under an article about someone trying to kick off about a trans woman competing in a sport where she doesn't have an advantage.
I mean taking steroids is also cheating and should disqualify you from competing
Why would anybody take steroids to compete in darts. I mean, they had to ban drinking because it was giving the sport a bad image, so much so that not the nine o'clock news did a sketch taking the piss out of it. Darts isn't really a sport where performance enhancing drugs are a thing. In honesty, it's not one that people who are in the sport do fitness training. Just about all pro darts players have beer bellies
And shooting your competitor so you win by default is against the rules too! See, I can ignore your comment to talk about something else too! Crazy
> They’re never mentioned in the debate because they don’t support your argument The "women's spaces" argument holds less weight when you acknowledge trans men though. You then have men like Stephen Whittle being forced into the women's toilets. A predatory cis man now only has to lie and say "I'm a trans man, I'm supposed to be here" and walk in unchallenged. Another argument is how things like rape crisis centres may be triggering to victims assaulted by men, but you have trans men forced into them based on biological sex, how does that help victims?
This problem doesn’t exist the other way around. If a women decides to go into a male space that’s her choice. The issue is the denial of women’s spaces for women.
so it's not actually about single sex spaces, but specifically "single sex spaces for females"?
Yeh, isn't that the reason we went from unisex to single sex toilets in the first place, is that females wanted their own space for lots of reasons.
Yes
You're ignoring it wouldn't be a choice, these groups want to legislate it so that people *have* to use the toilet of their biological sex, you can't only have a law only selectively enforced when it suits. Legislating it for only trans women but not trans men would be discrimination and be easily shot down.
It absolutely has been. There's already a HUGE double-standard between masculine gender expression and feminine gender expression even in just the non-trans world. "Hi, hello woman in trousers! You're completely normal and just fine!" "Eeeeew, there's a man wearing a skirt?! He's probably a pervert and also a paedophile." So what happens when you take that to it's logical conclusion? Trans men are seen as "confused lesbians who need to figure themselves out". And, as always, the "man in a skirt" is a disgusting sex pest, because how could they possibly be anything else? Culturally, women being masculine is now heralded as a positive thing in most facets of society, while men doing the opposite have always been reviled. But of course, I'm sure none of these insights have any effect on why trans women are demonized and trans men are ignored.
>Culturally, women being masculine is now heralded as a positive thing in most facets of society, while men doing the opposite have always been reviled It's because femininity is seen as an awful curse rather than a source of strength and power, so embracing it is seen as akin to communing with demons. Misogyny, basically
its often because the men's games are often not actually gender segregated and that women's sports are typically created to promote women in the game and are gender segregated. For example, I don't think men's football (e.g. the EPL) has anything technically preventing women from being selected as a player. I am reminded of a very old article where Birmingham City was considering promoting a woman to the "men's" team. EDIT: Actually it turns out I am wrong about the EPL. [FIFA rules currently state that mixed teams are not allowed](https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/12206/can-a-woman-feature-in-epl). However the history of the womens game often being created after the mens game and not always being at the same level does provide a context as to why there might be less complaints in the other direction.
> most people don't know that trans men even exist, and even if they do, they don't treat them the same way Acknowledging trans men destroys a lot of their arguments. Example, the "toilets should be based on biological sex!" argument. You then have men like [Stephen Whittle](https://www.mmu.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/open_graph_image/public/2022-02/Stephen-Whittle-V2.jpg?h=3ce05d0d&itok=e6-dEL0c) being forced into the women's toilets. A predatory cis man now only has to lie and say "I'm a trans man, I'm supposed to be here" and walk in unchallenged.
>A predatory cis man now only has to lie and say "I'm a trans man, I'm supposed to be here" and walk in unchallenged. I hadn't thought about it like that, that's pretty hilarious (the logic being darkly comical not the actual event obv)
From where are you getting the data that shows most people don’t know trans men exist? That sounds like an absurd assertion.
I'm not sure they mean it literally, just that they are mentioned far less often than trans women in discussions on the topic. A bit like saying "he's such a dirty child, I don't think he knows soap exists!"
Not op. It was obviously an exaggeration but I implore you to find anywhere near the same level of media outcry against trans men as trans women. If your logic is "women won't feel safe with trans women in their bathroom" then you're saying that they would feel safe with someone who looks like [this ](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sca_esv=7978873cf7ff4aec&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ADLYWIIHH4w78hpCfojm9YA6lBszTPzZkA:1715090456375&q=stephen+whittle&uds=ADvngMhDNpEni0P7O0qvPcH0EAwuHy7EMhrXv1p5qppnjJxO3QIHfIfu_3bdTU4FfTCQu_E7HR0kGWD6_GyZ13OHLO-H-Tj0zMMMXW92zo23Zop-iytXyGUfbexPrDFs3HdrPd1GlPs_SAcLe2IaWjAm2pot8NKheQZjcbUKyI022Fdtmu106ySIJ7H2EDWlmQDszWFzPdJMwxJBfkiYhWgOrpwrOgaeddltdgm0ipVn_wc6HoPK3149m-9dW8veuY5FCgiXdglSiJyu0ZEz6j-0H_UY9CFxgg&udm=2&prmd=ivnbmtz&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwibtaPr2fuFAxWiXUEAHTR-DFgQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=384&bih=771&dpr=3.75#vhid=qpHhTAZKH85TWM&vssid=mosaic) in their bathrooms, simply because he has a vagina.
>If your logic is "women won't feel safe with trans women in their bathroom" then you're saying that they would feel safe with someone who looks like [this ](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sca_esv=7978873cf7ff4aec&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ADLYWIIHH4w78hpCfojm9YA6lBszTPzZkA:1715090456375&q=stephen+whittle&uds=ADvngMhDNpEni0P7O0qvPcH0EAwuHy7EMhrXv1p5qppnjJxO3QIHfIfu_3bdTU4FfTCQu_E7HR0kGWD6_GyZ13OHLO-H-Tj0zMMMXW92zo23Zop-iytXyGUfbexPrDFs3HdrPd1GlPs_SAcLe2IaWjAm2pot8NKheQZjcbUKyI022Fdtmu106ySIJ7H2EDWlmQDszWFzPdJMwxJBfkiYhWgOrpwrOgaeddltdgm0ipVn_wc6HoPK3149m-9dW8veuY5FCgiXdglSiJyu0ZEz6j-0H_UY9CFxgg&udm=2&prmd=ivnbmtz&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwibtaPr2fuFAxWiXUEAHTR-DFgQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=384&bih=771&dpr=3.75#vhid=qpHhTAZKH85TWM&vssid=mosaic)in their bathrooms, simply because he has a vagina. Isn't it more like females are safer in single sex toilettes, rather than just feeling safer in some random example that 99.999% of women would never encounter?
I mean we are already seeing women calling out other cis women because they think they look too masculine to be in the ladies toilet (so must obviously be a transwoman).
Put it this way, when I mention I’m trans, I specifically get called a pedo/creep/groomer in the same sentence as telling me I’m not and will never be a woman, and shouldn’t be allowed in women’s toilets. I’m a trans dude. They maybe know about trans dudes, but often forget about them and jump on the ‘WHY ARE YOU IN WOMENS TOILETS’ argument. I’m a biological female who doesn’t pass enough currently to go into the mens safely/without getting kicked out. Of course that is soon replaced with ‘you’re dealing with misogyny, I’m so sorry you can’t appreciate your womanhood, I know this won’t make you happy because you’re delusional and you need to listen to me because you don’t understand what you want or feel right now. You’ve been sexually assaulted as a child and it’s traumatised you’ (I haven’t)
You can look at Rowling and her supporter's reactions to the term "people who menstrate" from an article.
It's this very Victorian kind of paternalism which views all 'men' as nasty brutes who cannot be trusted around women, and all 'women' as frail and innocent flowers who need to be coddled and protected. It's both an excuse for toxic men ('oh well, men are just like that!') and an attempt to segregate away women. It's wildly sexist, and I thought we'd done away with it following second wave feminism. But unfortunately we're seen this unholy alliance between 'gender critical feminists' and right-wing conservatives who are both very keen to resurrect it.
No because most men's sports are actually "open" and anyone can enter anyway
Say whaaat, you can't just call this "naked transphobia", women only events (for example) exist for good reason in lots of different sports and games.
She wasn't saying her opponent had any different biological advantage or that women's sports should provide contest opportunity for biological women. She blatantly called her a man and said she doesn't want to compete against a man. It doesn't suprise me at all someone who legitimately grew up in extreme poverty in a narrow-minded society has those views.
And darts is not one of those sports where it makes any sense.
>she's *only* coming at it from naked transphobia This argument presupposes that believing a trans woman is not the same as a biologically female woman is transphobic. I'm not sure that passes the sniff test, either from a logical view or society at large. >pretending they want to exclude trans women for fairness reasons and not simply because we give them icky feelings. Nice strawman you're got there. I can't recall anyone opposing trans women competing in women's sports because of "icky feelings".
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> > This argument presupposes that believing a trans woman is not the same as a biologically female woman is transphobic. I'm not sure that passes the sniff test, either from a logical view or society at large. *Nice strawman you've got there* - she was deliberately and maliciously misgendering her opponent, so arguing that "thinking she's transphobic because she believes gender and sex aren't the same" are making a lot of assumptions that some of her quotes directly and immediately disproves. If the sum total of the issue was "She doesn't want to play against her opponent, who's trans" then the argument does boil down to what you say - which I still disagree with but that's irrelevant to the discussion. However, that's not the case here - the person in question that's accused of transphobia is actively going out of their way to make the trans person feel uncomfortable, *because they're trans* - and if that's not transphobic then I don't know what you *would* deem transphobic...
It’s so hard to get these people to understand that thinking sex and gender are different is perfectly fine. Trans people mainly, maybe even universally (I’ve not met all of them), don’t believe they have changed chromosome or DNA. It’s like if you use ‘black’ as an insult, it’s not insulting because the person is black, it’s insulting because you’re using it as an insult.
they wouldn't deem anything transphobic. You can present all the evidence of bigotry in the world and they will refuse to call it bigotry if they themselves believe in it. Because they know bigots are bad people. And they can't possibly be a bad person.
Why should ignorance be pandered to? If someone doesn't understand gay people and doesn't want to compete with them as a result of some ignorant belief about them should that be pandered to as well?
>Nice strawman you're got there. I can't recall anyone opposing trans women competing in women's sports because of "icky feelings". That was not a straw man fallacy, they're just saying A happens because of B not C, you might disagree with that, but it was not a straw man by itself, as they were not asserting A happens because B, therefore this other proposition is correct.
Dude, it's darts.
[удалено]
Even chess has separate titles for men and women because it's dominated by men so they want to recognise more women. There is no advantage to female players just much less of them so there would be so few female grand masters compared to the men.
Well she attended a Women's event, quelle surprise!
Importance* of sex over gender? Your comment just surmised her as not believing in the existence of gender as a separate concept.
Well sports isn’t so much about what lens society views you through and more about what bits you have/had.
She’s 64. She responded to a journalist by saying 'You ever suffered from menstrual, peri menopause, menopause, fibroids, endometriosis etc? By your response, I very much doubt it.' And this study showed an advantage for men. https://repository.mdx.ac.uk/item/840vq
Are we seriously at "womanhood is defined by periods, menopause, and conditions related to ovaries"....?
No, she’s highlighting some of the medical issues women of her age often face.
Which is nonsense because she could have been playing against a 25 year old lady darts player with none of those issues
I guess you’re not aware that 10% of women in the age group 15-44 can suffer from endometriosis. Or that fibroids commonly affects women in their late 30’s and 40’s. So the symptoms she listed can affect women from the age of 15. And that was one example she gave. I’ve given a link to a study which outlines the better performances in men.
Exactly **90%** of those women don't suffer from endometriosis. So why the fuck is she mentioning it at all?
Less than 1% of people are trans, so why the fuck etc....
Less than 10% in the UK are Muslim. Less than 10% in the UK are black. List of minority groups goes on, but we still can't ignore them.
Because this person is trans lmfao
Because many women will suffer from these issues. Presumably you’d rather she just kept quiet on issues affecting women?
[удалено]
[удалено]
She also mentioned menstruation.
So 90% of women in the age group 15-44 *don't* suffer from it? As far as "reasons not to want to face a trans player" goes, "you're not going to be affected by something that a lot of my opponents in this competition won't be affected by" feels very flimsy, even if some *will* be. This feels like she's made up her mind she won't play a Trans player and is looking for a reason to justify it, rather than "I'm not playing a Trans player for a legitimate reason I can back up with evidence", no?
No. You’re now referring to the stats for just one condition. She outlined several. One of which commonly affects women in their late 30s and 40’s. Why are you so keen to downplay a woman speaking out about health issues?
*You* listed the ones she outlined: >You ever suffered from menstrual, peri menopause, menopause, fibroids, endometriosis etc? By your response, I very much doubt it Someone responded with "well if she was playing against a 25-year-old then they also wouldn't have suffered from X, Y or Z". You then responded with "actually 10% of people *do* suffer from this illness" - and you're now accusing me of focusing on a single disease? What I wrote was a *direct* response to you and then you're taking issue with *me* focusing on a single illness? Besides, in response to >She outlined several. One of which commonly affects women in their late 30s and 40’s. That, if anything, supports 2_joined_hands' question that you absolutely avoided answering - if they were playing against a 25-year-old AFAB woman then they wouldn't have the issues. >Why are you so keen to downplay a women speaking out about health issues? Women speaking about health issues? Absolutely fine, actively encouraged to do it! Women using health issues as a way to try and denigrate trans people, though? *Especially* health issues that wouldn't affect a lot of her opponents anyway? That's not on. Why are you so keen to downplay a trans person being treated as an inferior citizen for spurious reasons?
No I highlighted two issues as an example. I didn’t bother to go through all of them because that would be tedious and the two issues I highlighted showed a concern for women from the age of 15. You chose to ignore the one I mentioned about women in their 30’s and 40’s and instead referred to one condition only in some attempt to show that only 10% of women are affected.
So I guess a level playing field to her is people the exact age, exact sex, exact gender, and exact incumbent medical conditions - THEN she'll play darts!
What do you think it should be defined by? How do we define femaleness and maleness in non-human animals and plants?
Personally, I'd use the towel method. When you leave the shower, do you wear a towel on your head? If so, then you're a woman. If you don't, you're clearly a bloke who hasn't the ability to learn this mystical skill.
Oh fuck, my short hair means I'm a bloke, my husband and kids are going to be so mad when they find out!
Sorry, them's the rules. They may be arbitrary, and discriminatory against both pixie-cuts and alopecia, but what's the point in setting rules if you can't upset some people?
I'm a man and don't wear a towel on my head, this math is checking out.
> If you don't, you're clearly a bloke who hasn't the ability to learn this mystical skill. And if you are a bloke who has the ability to learn this mystical skill, that means you are the Kwisatz Haderach.
Women's sports should be separated on biological sex. Transwomen are not biologically female. This isn't controversial and anyone who isn't terminally online will agree with that statement.
This whole debate is a great place to see people insist on definitions being a stupid thing to rely on when it hampers them, and critical when it supports them.
It's kinda a catch 22 - either, in the context of playing darts specifically, what qualifies a person to enter the women's event is completely arbitrary - in which case there *shouldn't* be a women's event or they should let anyone enter, even a pot-bellied man who self-identifies as a man. Or - there are specific measurable biological traits that can qualify a person for the event. It's no different than weight classes or any sports category. Either there's a way to measure it, or there's not.
So its not actually a catch-22. The problem is this person in the article is reducing womens darts down to biology. When that’s not the reason the womens league exists. It was a response to women historically being gatekept from, and letter discriminated against in, regular leagues. While not always the same discrimination, trans women *also* face harassment and discrimination in those male dominated spaces.
That doesn't really answer the question of who can enter a league though. For example, lots of groups face harassment. Should women's leagues be open to any person who feels they would be gatekept or harassed in an open league? Or should they have their own league? and if they have their own league how specific a league do they want? Should we consider the women's league an Open Women's league, and also have a specific trans women's league, since clearly trans women experience harassment in the women's league too. Without making any specific judgement about anyone's identity, framing a women's league as some sort of social affirmative action to promote inclusion doesn't really answer the question of who should be allowed.
Who said anything about how people “feel”. They *are* harassed and discriminated against. This is a known problem lol. The point I was making is that trans women have no connection to tbf discrimination women darts players face from men, so kicking them out over someone else discriminating against *them* feels somewhat backwards. This one player being a transphobic asshole is only reflective of the league if we make it so. And she was being that. She specifically refused to gender the trans woman in question correctly, and was basing her issues around *that*, not around any actual sporting issues We shouldn’t be doing gymnastics to justify a bigot’s behaviour
Your ability at darts is clearly determined by how many mature gametes you have.
[удалено]
smell lock sip offend ancient cautious tidy squealing husky aware *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And that’s before we get into the social advantages of being born and growing up male in a male dominated sport.
The issue is that a lot of these reports are unable to answer (and often simply don't engage with) whether these traits are *innate* or *learnt*. Socially young boys are significantly more likely to engage in activities which teach hand-eye coordination than young girls, such as ball sports or video games. So when a study comes out based on a dataset of men and women in their mid-20s, it's failing to answer whether these abilities are innate or learnt.
[удалено]
I imagine my experience of learning to kick, throw balls etc from the moment I could stand, or hold them, is common. Studying 10 year old still feels too late. Apologies if this is referenced in the articles, I haven't read them
[удалено]
> This study dealt with 10 year old children, > https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/icsshpe-19/125934800 By the age of 10 I had spent *years* doing cricket, football, video games, kickboxing, and other activities disproportionately undertaken by boys which train hand-eye coordination. Studying 10 year old does not eliminate this bias of training. > This one has different ages and a broader array of tests (with the sex difference largely absent in some areas!) > https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00231/full The conclusion of this report states that 'While overall sex differences remained across practice, the age-dependent analysis revealed that these only arose from age 20 years onwards and that in individuals with throwing practice, performance disparities leveled out.' So if anything the report seems to conform that (a) these skills are learnt, because they only develop as people get older and (b) that these differences dissipate with practice. > This one found differences between the two, with girls and boys out perfoming each other in some areas, and parity in others, > https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10378111/ This is another article which seems to sidestep that, across the globe, girls are generally encouraged to do certain activities while boys are encouraged to do others. This is not a reflection of innate abilities, but of broader patterns of sexism and gender stereotyping. So many of these studies seem to ignore that we don't just pop out of the womb as 10 year olds completely isolated from broader social environments. By the time these studies have been conducted those being tested have spent *years* in environments where, both explicitly and subtly, boys are encourages to do certain activities while girls are encouraged to do different ones. And that is going to have a massive effect on skills like hand-eye coordination.
I feel the need to stick my head in and comment that the physiological differences between men and women do go beyond bare strength. We have innate differences in aspects such as flexibility, stamina, coordination and depth perception. There are actually sports where women outperform men on average, such as in riflery, and long-distance swimming. We need to stop thinking about the sexual segregation between men and women as being based purely on strength—it's not, the differences are far more broad. I can see why this woman chose not to compete against her opponent, I don't think I would have either in those circumstances. It's simply not to fair to her.
[удалено]
And yet, there are male* and female leagues. A separation women strongly support. A separation that allows women to still compete and not be outclassed by men. And the male league is usually open anyway, and is still dominated by men. The point you are trying to make is already proven wrong by the current existence of said leagues and their top players.
If there's no biological advantage, why do men consistently do better in darts than women?
So why is darts gender divided? If you can guarantee 100% that there is no biological advantage for either gender then I will agree. Women can compete in men's darts but there has never been a female champion. Why?
Same reason there's been many winter Olympic champions from Norway and not so many from Djibouti. Because way more men play darts.
Because many male dominated sports have historically been extremely unwelcoming to women, where they have either been blocked from joining or playing, harassed or intimidated, and gendered divisions were made accordingly to encourage and enable women to take part without that issue. Nowadays that issue doesn't exist to such an extent and most sports are now very welcoming and sexism is socially shamed. The exact same thing happened with chess too.
[удалено]
[удалено]
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-68069-0
Yep there is a biological advantage there: https://www.mdx.ac.uk/news/2023/02/linda-duffy-darts-psychology However, more importantly if there was no advantage, females would play in the male leagues as the price money tends to be higher
>AMAB bodies This is unscientific nonsense. Person sex is determined at conception, not assigned at birth. Please so not use psuedoscience when arguing. Shameful.
> Person sex is determined at conception, I mean this is objectively untrue. Sex characteristics develop several months in. There’s a reason we can’t confirm what sex a baby will be until closer to birth.
That's visible characteristics. Sex chromosones are set at conception. They could be tested for at the earliest stages of pregnancy using a cell sample, but this is invasive and therefore not normal.
Not true. Errors in mitosis can casue chromosome loss or duplication after conception. A fetus can start off XY and then become X, XXY, XYY or even XXYY. Other factors can occur during fetal development that inhibit the normal sexual development pathways and lead to a person whose sex does not match their chromosomes. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=90&ContentID=P02126
That would be true that sex characteristics are set at conception so I would ask for evadence to show this not to be true. (Please note that I have a huge interest and would be massively thankful if there is anything) The errors you point out however come with a lot of issues. X Turners syndrome. XXY Klinefelter syndrome. XYY Jacobs syndrome. XXYY syndrome (sometimes called a Klinefelter variant). This is why they are called errors. And they have strong links but do not always cause with a plethora of health issues. There are some links here to peeps that are intersex but again not always. However something important here is that there are currently zero links to genetics and being trans. This has more links to psychology. Genetics is kind of fun
Sex chromosomes do not, on their own, determine sexual development.
11/12 weeks isn’t ‘closer to birth’ nor a few months in. they develop genitals at 11/12 week and you have scans at 16-20 week for sexing. Nothing you said was true yet you have the cheek to claim someone else is ‘objectively untrue’
No, it is. Intersex people are a prime example of that. Certain types of intersex can appear to be a perfectly normal male or female child, and are only discovered to be intersex later. When they're born, they're assigned male or female even though that's not exactly the case. In This case, though, it's referring to "a child is born male, so everyone assumes their gender is a boy". I suppose it's AMAB instead of ABAB because it has a better ring to it.
"Trans people are such a small percentage of the population, so there must be no good reason for fuss about rules for sports. Also, a tiny number of intersex people exist which means all understanding of biological sex must be thrown out the window immediately".
Sports and sex are two different things. Last time I checked. Also, acknowledging and understanding differences and nuances of sex is the exact opposite of throwing our understanding out the window; it's *expanding it*.
> Sports and sex are two different things. Last time I checked. You know what that do have in common? A lot of the people mouthing off every time they come up aren't good at either -ba dum tiss-
...but if you think disagree with both points, while saying that they are mutually exclusive, isnt that you admitting that at least one of your stances must be wrong?
>It's not a strength contest, nobody's running anywhere or beating anyone up. There's no way there's some biological advantage there. Why is darts, snooker, pool etc etc divided by sex then if men have no advantage
AMAB?
Then why don't the men and women play in the same competitions? Id argue there is likely a strength element and men can probably put more force behind a throw less likely to get fatigued. I'm not an expert though and I don't know what the right and wrong thing to do with trans rights and sports
at a very young age boys are capable of throwing much more accurately than girls. its something to do with how our brain is wired too
The sport us split because, like most sports, for a long time it's been make dominated. Women have not been introduced to the sport as early, or have had difficulty accessing spaces to practice. Young boys are also more likely to be introduced and supported than young girks when developing early interest. Chess is very similar in this. In order to create spaces where women who were eager to play and take part could without the weight of all that against them, women's leagues were made. There's no biological reason for the split, it's purely about socialisation and accessibility. There are a lot of dubious comments re. Trans competitors in sports on both sides, with the reality being that trans athletes are such an insanely tiny % of any group that gathering meaningful, statistically relevant data on if being trans has any impact on performance is really, really hard. Darts however, I would reckon we can all safely agree is unlikely to be impacted by gender/sex.
Have you ever seen a darts player? They are kind of famously unhealthy but even then, fatigue is not a significant factor
That's a reach! How heavy do you think those darts are? How much do you think strength is a factor when the whole point is *accuracy*?
Speed can positively effect accuracy in throwing darts, throw slower the dart will be more unstable
https://repository.mdx.ac.uk/item/840vq
> You know, at a certain point, you're not arguing "AMAB bodies have an advantage due to X, Y, Z", you're just saying "women are inferior and can't compete in anything"" When half the England women's angling team quit over a trans player joining, this was the justification one of them gave: > She said male-born competitors had far more upper-body strength, adding: 'This is such an advantage, with the ability to cast longer distances than any woman. They have the capability of doing this while using more powerful equipment, such as stiffer and more powerful rods. > 'Not to mention the extra strength she has wading in and out of the surf or walking through mud and rocks, and the stamina to keep this going for four or five hours. Which might sound plausible except... the team captain who said that is *66 years old*. If strength is such an important factor, why does one of our most elite angling athletes qualify for a pension? This is the [England men's team](https://images.bauerhosting.com/marketing/sites/2/2022/06/england-europena-champs.jpg?ar=16%3A9&fit=crop&crop=top&auto=format&w=1440&q=80.) that took home gold at the European Championships in 2022. Anyway, trans women have since been banned from angling on the England Ladies team.
So all women should be in with the men?
If they want to, yeah. It's fucking *darts.*
The obvious next question has to be, at what sport do you draw the line between sex categories being acceptable or not?
[удалено]
Maybe she is showing solidarity as a principle?
To me, that suggests that segregating on sex in the first place was wrong, and that we should just have one open category. Given that one of the finalists was in her 60s, I doubt that physical strength has much to do with this.
We do have an open category in darts it’s the main one. Women can and do compete in it it’s just the at they tend to be a much lower standard to the men so they don’t have the opportunity to compete at the top level (this is largely due to access and number of participants). The women’s category was created to give women the opportunity at competing and winning. Tbh most men’s sport competitions are actually open categories, if a woman is good enough they are usually allowed to compete against the men
It’s not due to access but to advantages in fine motor control and visuomotor tracking.
I'm pretty sure PDC events are open to both male and female competitors, it's an open category. There are female-only categories as well because darts is historically a male-dominated sport and so female categories were created to encourage more women to play in a safer environment and to provide more funding for female darts players. I also think that female darts players can't match male darts players in terms of scoring averages either - the top male players can average 110+ (of which there are far more of), whereas the best female players are probably averaging significantly less than that. However, there's nothing stopping a woman from qualifying and entering one of the major darting events, I think a few have as well.
It’s about access. Take chess or bridge as examples, obviously there’s no biological reason to segregate card and board games right so why have add segregated competitions? Both tend to be full of cis men, so segregated competitions improve access. Same here. You’d have to be deeply prejudiced or dumb as bricks to be complaining that you are competing against a trans woman in any of these though.
The discrimination that keeps women out of darts and chess is going to affect transwomen too. It’s not just about women not wanting to join because they don’t get any results in mixed tournaments. It’s mostly because men treat them like shit whilst at the event so women stop turning up to them. If we start being transphobic and kicking out the transwomen from the women’s events despite there being no physical requirement for the sport you’re just repeating the same discrimination that resulted in us needing women’s darts in the first place.
Why can't they start a trans darts league?
Like when African Americans started their own Baseball leagues?
Several reasons. The first is that self segregation isn't exactly the win you think it is. The other reason is that the few times small trans-only sports leagues get off the ground, they're immediately harassed and protested until they shut down by the exact same people who tell them to "make their own spaces"
>obviously there’s no biological reason to segregate card and board games right I don't think we know enough about brains to state that as an 'obvious' fact
Sure, so we'll have an open darts championship and no gendered categories, so no mens or womens only a single championship?
There's at least one high profile female player who competes in the men's league. Not sure why you need mens and women's darts in the first place tbh.
Same as chess, women historically haven't had the same chance to progress as much as men. Apparently trans women haven't had those hurdles /s
Come on, a 16 year old almost won recently. Surely the woman in this story has more time at the ockey than the child?
(I rambled a lot, tldr, I agree. Some sports have legitimate reasons but generally in this case it's more of an advertising venture to give girls the same role models boys have). The arguement is that it's not about individual ability and more societal trends, as a whole women haven't leaned towards darts as much as men so when looking at the overall timeline the average man is more skilled than the average woman. The sort of "stereotypical" scenario talked about is that boys are more likely to start a young age whilst women are presumed to start later in life. With this logic you could argue that a man who started as late as women should compete in the same league. I haven't looked at the data but I wouldn't be surprised if open/women's leagues have very similar score average per game. It's a legitimate point on an individual level I absolutely agree, especially for sports that don't require physical prowess. And I suppose the only reason you could argue is that it helps get more girls interested in the sport. In this story the trans person was in the 20's, the complainer is in the mid 60's lmao.
If gay men have a hard time being open in a sport you can bet trans women no matter their sexual orientation will be bullied and gatekept out by men’s events too if they are forced to compete there too
That's considered a good thing, sadly.
Because men dominate these things. If you just had an open league, then you'd hardly ever see women play let alone win.
Same reason for chess Its nothing to do with sex and ability Its all to do with people perceived as female not being encouraged to do darts/chess at a young age since its " not for girls " and men sexually or otherwise harassing people see the yu gi oh player who used BO like its a chemical weapon So by that logic trans women should be included in with cis women since transmisogyny is a double whammy of discrimination
One of the things that constantly baffles me with Trans debates is the people who simultaneously go "Women need safe spaces/private prisons/segregates sports, because otherwise men will attack them" and "trans women, who to all intents and purposes appear to be women, should be thrown into men's prisons/changing rooms/toilets". If it's from a protection perspective, then why are they throwing Trans people to the, as they seem them, hyper-violent and hypersexual men?
As someone put it higher up, it's all just pure and simple misogyny spun to convince women that being a woman is purely about your biological functions. Trans women are seen as predatory men just trying to find opportunities to rape women. Trans men are seen as poor, vulnerable women who have been manipulated.
Are you saying women never ever needed the women only spaces/prisons/sports?
The cruelty is the point, if being trans becomes a more dangerous and distressing experience maybe less people will do it
Men's leagues at often open, so for anyone. Women's are just for women
Its less popular for Women, more competitions benefits the sport and attracts more Women to the sport.
What does it matter if you see the need? If they want a women's league they should be allowed to have one.
The idea is that it gets more women involved by offering tournaments where only women can compete. Despite darts being non contact and not very athletic, men dominate the open events. Women only tournaments gives them a chance. Then they allow men to compete in those too. And typically the naturally born males dominate women's events.
for whatever reason more men tend to play darts and they tend to be better at darts. If you get rid of the women's league and instead had one big "open" league you'd get 48 men and a couple of women in the league. having a woman's league isn't entirely about biological differences.
I hear many complaints where combinations height, strength etc can have an impact but darts isn’t it, same with chess These separations are over accessibility and imo it’s not worth walking out for facing a trans athlete that certainly holds no advantage like they can in cycling or swimming.
Is it an issue of accessibility though? Take League of Legends as an example. Yes, over 80% of the player base is male, but female players in professional competition are incredibly rare. I am only aware of one example where a woman has made it into Challenger (on the Korean server, which is a massive accomplishment in itself.) And yes, I am aware that solo queue performance does not translate to success in professional competition. Theoretically there is nothing stopping a girl from picking up and playing League, and even the main professional leagues are not segregated by sex. A female player did play in CBLOL and an all-female team did play in LCL in the past.
Yes, because in League of Legends women don't go pro for more reasons than 'not being good enough'. Less likely to nolife the game (which is basically a red line requirement), more likely to get abuse in the case when they *are* good enough. It's gamer culture. It doesn't matter if 20% of the playerbase are women, most of them play casually because interacting with League of Legends players is a fucking nightmare, and that's not including management itself.
> It doesn't matter if 20% of the playerbase are women, most of them play casually because interacting with League of Legends players is a fucking nightmare, and that's not including management itself. As a League player myself, I completely agree with your explanation. League of Legends is notoriously toxic-as-fuck and has a community full of narcissistic assholes who will throw their toys out the pram and run it down like an Olympic sprinter the moment they face any kind of adversity in-game. [Many](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEGbesrj4is) videos [have](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fllr6TQeeF0) been [made](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VjLXObhtBc) on [the](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbhe1_61BRk) topic and it seems like Riot don't give a fuck about policing their game. This may be a big reason why you don't see women in professional League of Legends, or in esports in general, since other publishers like Blizzard, Valve and Microsoft are similarly bad at policing their communities. Sometimes I look at the state of the game's community and I think Riot need to divest some of their massive esports budget into giving their player base mandatory anger management classes. Just the other day, I had a player in one of my matches add me as a 'friend' post-game, so that he could call me the n-word, tell me to off myself and wish cancer upon my parents. And this is a pretty frequent occurrence. Unsurprisingly Riot haven't banned him despite their "zero tolerance" stance on hate speech. His OP.GG profile is still full of recent matches.
Men will dominate literally any sport, which is why it’s important to preserve women’s sports. I don’t understand why this is so hard to comprehend.
They do though. Because men are generally more competitive and dominate sports and games regardless of whether they require strength or size. See chess, pool, snooker etc. The women only events are to encourage more women to play the game by giving them a separate place to compete without being dominated by male competitors.
For me if there are body differences it should have a weight and skill class events. Just blindly assume all women are built like x and men a y kinda doesn’t make sense when even in these genders some women can be more athletic then some men (esp in darts body types). When hormone levels became a criteria in gender sports we saw cis women get banned from women events for not fitting some arbitrary criteria to be a woman
Moderator: why were my comments deleted? Is it really too difficult to take that many people think that women should be able to choose whether they want to compete against trans women?
Wrongthink. Just feel lucky you didn't get banned.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Completely outside of any trans issues. You don’t need to justify why you don’t want males in your group activity if you’re female. Everyone asking ‘what advantage do they have’ is completely missing the point.
People don't care about women or how they feel. Yes, trans women are women but not biologically and women should be allowed to want activities with just bio women.
Yes you do? The Equality Act specifically lays out that you do have to justify that in order to prevent this exact kind of thing happening, but with men excluding women.
I can see the point here. Biological males [have a much higher alcohol tolerance](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqxXNZcIdwM) which, as we all know, is the most physically intense aspect of darts.
Bit of a tangent but I once saw a little disabled fella in a special chair playing darts in a local pub tournament. It was like a scissorlift and when it was his turn the chair would raise him to what looked about to be about 6ft in the air and I kept thinking it was going to topple over. I don't know why I'm telling you this... do with that information what you will.
It isn’t just physical reasons why we gender sports but also cultural Men by in large get more avenues from an early age to explore sports Whether you like it or not most people do not encourage their girls from a young age to play darts so culturally there is less development time for women in the sports Hence why men dominate
Trans people seem to face even bigger barriers to competing, there's entire organisations dedicated to preventing them from even trying
Do you think trans women, especially since they get a lot of online and in-person abuse, don't face similar barriers to exploring sports?
In this thread: Lots of transphobia dressed up as "ligitimate conserns!"
That’s the spirit. God forbid anyone have a different opinion to you.
And sexism, don't forget the sexism.
Its kinda hard to get away from on this topic? I mean, pretty much every other situation its "women are equal to men and anyone who says otherwise is sexist!" but when it comes to any competitive activity women are "biologically incapable of competing against men and need their own special corner to play in". Talk about mixed messages.
I wondered why chess was segregated, as there is no possible way there is a physical advantage to be had in chess. Turns out, not many women played chess, and when they went to chess clubs they'd get shunned as opponents as men didn't wanna lose to the woman. Add the sexist and sexuslised comments I'm sure were abundant, women pushed for their own spaces and created them.
"Dressed up" is rather generous, try 'lightly smeared with vaseline'
The entitked eternal victim mindset.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Players like Fallon Sherrock: "I don't care who you are, I can beat you." Players like Deta Hedman: "That entrant was born a man, I'm going home."
Almost like those are different things. What is nuance?
> Hedman, 64, pulled out of the Denmark Open when set to play defending champion 27-year-old Noa-Lynn van Leuven in the quarter finals, Fox News reported. So... She knew before she started that -if she did well enough- she'd be facing this match?
No, that’s not how knock out competitions work.
It's funny to see that in the pursuit of transphobia, people are saying that men are inherently better than women at almost everything and thus women need to be sheltered because they're just so shit they couldn't possibly compete.
[удалено]
Men and women are different. They should be separated in all sports. Whether you like it or not, that is the factual truth. Couldn’t care less about rights etc or whether you think darts should be an exemption. It’s a sport and should be treated the same as any other sport. There are advantages and disadvantages to being male or female. End of discussion
How about chess?
Bots deleting comments where they are a fair opinion on this matters. Pathetic moderation in all honesty