Re:US proposal for defining gender has no basis in science
by Steel_Phoenix on Monday November 26, 2018 @08:07PM
(#18538409)
It gets women in the Olympics. We can either keep gendered sports and tell people of ambiguous gender where they aren't allowed to compete, or we can have an Olympics that is 99% male(ish) by birth or hormone adjustment. I don't think women are going to like that. Sure, there are a few sports where there is some parity, but not many, at least among the elite.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:US proposal for defining gender has no basis in science
by dragonwriter on Monday November 26, 2018 @10:31PM
(#18539104)
> > What does fixed legal gender buy you there?
> It gets women in the Olympics.
No, it doesn't. Even to the extent segregation on a fixed biological definition of sex might do that, the IOC can (and does!) regulate standards for that gender segregation (and keeps tweaking details of the rules, which aren't based on fixed-at-birth sex), it isn't constrained to using legal gender as the basis. So fixing legal gender around some biological traits at birth doesn't get you anything in that regard. Which should be obvious, even aside form knowing the Olympic rules, just from the fact that many participating nations (including the current US) don't have immutably fixed-at-birth biologically-based legal gender, and are well represented by women in the Olympics.