And FIDE "disagrees with me on the question of male physiological advantage" in… chess. https://doc.fide.com/docs/DOC/2FC2023/CM2_2023_45.pdf There's clearly more to this "ban trans people from sports" phenomenon than dispassionate assessment of the evidence.
dang has asked you to stop commenting like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45108551. If you're explaining your position, I'd consider that fine (though dang might not), but throwing out claims that are easy to state and hard to rebut (without stooping to the "fight rhetoric with rhetoric" level) does not encourage thoughtful discussion.
The reason for a separate women's category in FIDE's chess competitions is different to athletic sports - it was introduced to encourage female participation in what was an overwhelmingly male-dominated field.
That statement makes the point that FIDE are well aware this is a problem, and is one they're trying to solve:
"FIDE not only strives to increase women’s representation in professional sports and official positions but also to change the perception of chess as purely a men’s world. Our community has to be a place where women feel safe and respected. Therefore, any action that carries disrespect, sexism or physical, verbal or emotional assault is unacceptable."
Now, some people might argue that if a male competitor claims to have a woman identity, whatever that is, then that player should be permitted to compete alongside women. Given their aim of increasing female participation in chess, FIDE have been somewhat more skeptical of this argument, as you can see in the policy you linked.
> but throwing out claims that are easy to state and hard to rebut (without stooping to the "fight rhetoric with rhetoric" level) does not encourage thoughtful discussion.
I made a comment about the perspective of World Athletics on this, and linked to their statement as evidence. Why would you feel the need to rebut this? Instead of considering it thoughtfully.
Once again, the minor concern and discussion of trans participation in sports is a wedge issue used largely by conservatives to rile up people and keep them from voting for liberal parties (in the US). This is undeniable IMO. Perhaps it is a liberal failure to discuss the sports issue more, since doing so would disarm the disingenuousness of the "I only care about sports" excuse of conservatives.
It is being used as a wedge issue by conservatives in the US, but I feel that liberal politicians made a rod for their own backs on this one. An unforced error that their opponents were happy to take advantage of.
wizzwizz4|5 months ago
dang has asked you to stop commenting like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45108551. If you're explaining your position, I'd consider that fine (though dang might not), but throwing out claims that are easy to state and hard to rebut (without stooping to the "fight rhetoric with rhetoric" level) does not encourage thoughtful discussion.
drankl|5 months ago
As an example, here's what women in chess have to deal with: https://www.fide.com/fides-statement-on-sexist-remarks/
That statement makes the point that FIDE are well aware this is a problem, and is one they're trying to solve:
"FIDE not only strives to increase women’s representation in professional sports and official positions but also to change the perception of chess as purely a men’s world. Our community has to be a place where women feel safe and respected. Therefore, any action that carries disrespect, sexism or physical, verbal or emotional assault is unacceptable."
Now, some people might argue that if a male competitor claims to have a woman identity, whatever that is, then that player should be permitted to compete alongside women. Given their aim of increasing female participation in chess, FIDE have been somewhat more skeptical of this argument, as you can see in the policy you linked.
> but throwing out claims that are easy to state and hard to rebut (without stooping to the "fight rhetoric with rhetoric" level) does not encourage thoughtful discussion.
I made a comment about the perspective of World Athletics on this, and linked to their statement as evidence. Why would you feel the need to rebut this? Instead of considering it thoughtfully.
unethical_ban|5 months ago
drankl|5 months ago
This article has an interesting viewpoint, from the perspective of a feminist liberal who had been trying to warn Democrats about this for years: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/dignity/vol10/iss2/8/