this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
134 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45228 readers
4657 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 50 points 6 days ago (1 children)

OK, so hold up. This isn't testing if a woman is trans. This test also disqualifies cis women who have genetic conditions that give them masculine physical traits. This article gives examples of women's gold medalists who are cis but would now be disqualified.

We might have to replace the men's and women's categories with "open" and "two X chromosomes". Cis and trans people of all genders might be surprised to find whether or not they qualify for the "two X chromosomes" category. Particularly effeminate cis men might qualify for "two X chromosomes". This actually seems like a fair way to level the playing field, accomplishing what the current men's and women's divisions try to do.

I am a little worried about the idea of disqualifying athletes for having beneficial genes. This could have implications beyond women's sports, like being banned from basketball for being too tall.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Imagine putting in the work to qualify for the Olympics only to find out you're not a "real" woman by some arbitrary definitions. Michael Phelps has physical characteristics that gave him an edge in his particular sport, but people only tried to talk about his weed use as a disqualifying factor

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago

That's definitely going to ruin people's athletic careers, but at least this arbitrary definition has some merit in athletics. It's important to say that getting disqualified this way doesn't make someone a less "real" woman. Women can get disqualified from events this way. That's why I'd rename them to the "open" and "two X chromosomes" contests.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

That man has too many amino strings in his DNA that resembles fish DNA.

DSQ