For people assigned male at birth, variations in anatomy that enhance their athletic abilities are often deemed impressive, such as wide “wingspans” or a long stride. People with large amounts of those explosive, fast-twitch muscle fibers may pack a powerful punch or hoist a massive clean and jerk. But for people assigned female at birth, some of those same variations are suddenly unfair advantages. This is especially true when those variations cross over into what people perceive as traits that are “manly.” No one complains of the flexibility and strength of female gymnasts—it is merely amazing. A powerful triple axel on the ice is perfectly feminine when done in a skirt. But a powerful punch? A cheetah-fast sprint? Variation is suddenly of deep concern.
Representation is important, but also go play with the men if you don’t meet the traditional standards of femininity?
Men don’t really face the same issues as women do.
Ignoring the potential dogwhistle, you have just summarised the issue as outlined in the article. Men are not facing the same issues of discrimination as women in sport.
Michael Phelps can sweep the floor with the competition and everyone admires his ‘wingspan’, but when Imane Khelif began to trounce her opposition due to her impressive physical traits, she is accused of being a trans woman, and bigots become experts in phrenology to try and out a cis woman. Why is one okay and the other not? Should Phelps have to compete in another category for the long-armed? Or be excluded from competing because it’s unfair to the average man?
Ultimately this is just a problem of anyone listening to trash on the Internet.
Imane earned her spot and her podium. The Olympics and other organizations have stuff set up to ensure fair competition. No one should care for a second what alphawolf69 thinks on the topic.
I’m not diluting the current issue. It’s very important. But society should shift to stop considering bigots on Twitter as important discourse.