ANALYSIS: Really, we care about justice … but the dramatic gender identity motion threatens the concept
How two reportedly feminine boxers badly slammed their way into the gold medal round was a hot topic on social media during the Paris Summer Olympics.
Algeria’s Imane Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-ting reportedly had previously failed gender/sex tests ( they had X chromosomes ), according to International Boxing Association. As a result, they both were disqualified from last year’s World Championships.
The International Olympic Committee evidently saw things different, and allowed Khelif and Yu-ting to thrive. Up until the turn of the last century, the IOC had been conducting gene testing, and over 80 % of female athletes wanted them to stay the way they were. My sister was also given them twice.
In this head-scratching video tape, Mark Adams of the IOC appears to think that eliminating gender testing is some sort of good motivation.
There has certainly been a lot of criticism against the two boxers from the trans and LGBTQ+ organizations, largely highlighting anomalies or disorders that athletes should n’t be held accountable for. If such indeed turns out to be the case, it still does n’t alter the concerns/complaints of the larger ( mainly female ) athletic community and general public regarding fairness.
In a recent , Forbes article, Oregon State University’s Susan Shaw ( pictured ) hits all the politically correct heartstrings in defense of Khelif and Yu-ting, saying the former has “always identified as female”, that the IOC does n’t “recognize” the International Boxing Association, and that we exist in a time of “heightened transphobia”.
” So why is it so difficult for us, especially in the US, to have such an essential and necessary conversation”? Shaw asks. For her, the average spectator ( and athlete ) is too stupid to understand the “nuances” of sex and gender.
Shaw, the instructor of courses such as” Feminism and the Bible”,” Global Feminist Theologies”, and” Feminist Theologies in the US”, cites a stat that less than 30 percent of Americans are “scientifically literate” which conflicts with the notion that” sports are built on assumptions of two kinds of bodies—male and female”.
Shaw asserts that” the technology for many systems is not that simple.”
Further: OSU’s Shaw: White Christians deny climate change while east coast burn
She says,” We ca n’t have nuanced conversations if we just line up on our side, especially when there are issues where there may be more than one side to a topic.” If we are n’t willing to acknowledge that we might be mistaken, we ca n’t have conversations either.
In a typical women’s, gender, and sexuality studies manner, Shaw (quickly ) acknowledges that in sports men have inherent advantages over most people, but he then concludes the segment in this manner:
I believe that the concern that boys are frequently taunted in gender-segregated activity is at the heart of it all:” You lost to a girl”! We prevent both genders from competing by making sure that does n’t happen by preventing men from losing to women in athletic competition because that goes against the grain of sports culture.
How about this: If there’s one item Americans benefit in their activities, it’s justice. And they love underdog. When the two cross it’s beautiful. Get the Snow Miracle. or Kurt Warner joining the St. Louis Rams as a player in 1999.
Regarding the former, Americans resented the fact that the USSR team technically was comprised of “amateurs” because they did n’t get paid to play on “professional” teams. They did, of course, receive compensation because they had all played hockey up for a while and were paid. Unlike the British club, which had been assembled from different college teams,
If the general public had n’t already been subjected to progressive states ‘ mandates that high school ( and some college ) athletes are required to be allowed to play on the teams they want, Shaw’s point would have been received more favorably. That is, if a natural boy only “identifies” as a lady, he’s allowed to run on the girls ‘ track group, use the girls ‘ locker room, etc. Any people opposed to for are labeled “bigots”,” transphobes”, etc. etc.
Further, in response to direct questions of fairness, the public gets retorts like those of women’s soccer star Megan Rapinoe — that , Hey mom and dad,” I’m sorry, your kid’s high school volleyball team just is n’t that important. It’s never more important than any one girl’s life”.
Getting it? In order for the trans-kid’s thoughts not getting hurt, your regular gender-binary girl’s feelings— and dreams — do n’t problem.
What happens when one offers a intelligent, natural response to the growing need for gender non-specific athletes to be included in a distinct category for sex non-specific athletes? That guy actually is canceled.
Yes, there’s been a lot of misinformation , and painful thoughts on social media regarding for issues… but liberals have pressed the subject and belittled those who question them.
Here’s something to ponder: How would Americans react to a trans-man ( biological woman ) who had managed to make it to the Olympics and was in contention for a medal? I’d bet many ( most? ) may cheer on the athlete who is a failure.
Less: OSU Women, Gender, and Gender Studies system celebrates with pull show
IMAGES: leungchopan/Shutterstock .com, Oregon State U.
Follow The College Fix on Twitter and Like us on Twitter.
