this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
934 points (91.5% liked)

The Onion

4548 readers
973 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If we're considering testosterone to be a PED, perhaps we should ban everyone from sports...

On a more serious note: why not advocate for putting people into "testosterone-level groups", similar to how boxing, etc, do it with weight classes? Rather than just excluding trans women from competing.

I also feel I have to ask: how do you feel about your niece losing in competitions to cis women who have biological advantages, such as higher (natural) testosterone levels, longer limbs, bigger hands, smaller busts, etc?

[–] cybersandwich 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There is more to it than just "current testosterone levels" because (like you mention in your question at the end) biological birth sex as a male would likely afford the person with a larger frame, muscles/skeletal structure, bigger hands, longer legs, etc.

And to answer your question: no I wouldn't have a problem with cis women competing with each other. Obviously, natural differences exist and set people apart. But sport and competition is predicated on a foundation of fair play, personal excellence, and mutual respect among participants.

Any artificial advantage or thumb on the scale, for whatever reason, undermines the integrity of the competition, devalues the effort of athletes, and erodes the spirit of the game.

Naturally occurring differences like extra testosterone, height, or flexibility might be advantages but they aren't unfair because they are inherent to the individual's unique physiology and not externally imposed or artificially enhanced. That's the line we've drawn for sport and competition for centuries.

So no, that wouldn't bother me at all.