[BostonCard]

I meant it as a figure of speech; sorry for singling you out. I do appreciate the way you have approached this thread, which I think has generally allowed a more civil engagement than what one would expect for the controversy of this subject.  To the extent that I undermined that, I am sorry.

I still wonder why a theoretical possibility that your daughter hasn't encountered would prompt you to "come down on the side that competitions should be held on a biological basis" while an actual disadvantage that your daughter deals with everyday merits a shrug (and, if I am reading between the lines, I detect a little pride in the fact that she is out-competing older girls).  Is this a bit fear of the unknown?  Like, if there were a couple of transgender girls on your daughter's team or the teams she plays against, and she were still doing well, would your opposition be the same?  Or are the sex advantages in her chosen sports so profound, and the rewards for success in those sports so great, that you are concerned about the proverbial floodgates opening.  Is it a safety issue (as was the case for the World Rugby League)?

There may be ways that the unfairness of sex at birth is qualitatively different than the unfairness that is the result of age or money.  If that's the case, I'm wondering what those differences are.

By the way, I am surprised GR hasn't weighed in here.  In another forum, he discussed a different approach to the issue of sex and transgender, which is to do away with dividing sports by sex per se, and have two divisions: an open division that has no restrictions, and a restricted division where there might be age, gender, hormone, etc. restrictions to keep the competition a bit more balanced.  Hopefully I conveyed his plan accurately.  It is an interesting concept.

BC

[BostonCard]

I meant it as a figure of speech; sorry for singling you out. I do appreciate the way you have approached this thread, which I think has generally allowed a more civil engagement than what one would expect for the controversy of this subject.  To the extent that I undermined that, I am sorry.

I still wonder why a theoretical possibility that your daughter hasn't encountered would prompt you to "come down on the side that competitions should be held on a biological basis" while an actual disadvantage that your daughter deals with everyday merits a shrug (and, if I am reading between the lines, I detect a little pride in the fact that she is out-competing older girls).  Is this a bit fear of the unknown?  Like, if there were a couple of transgender girls on your daughter's team or the teams she plays against, and she were still doing well, would your opposition be the same?  Or are the sex advantages in her chosen sports so profound, and the rewards for success in those sports so great, that you are concerned about the proverbial floodgates opening.  Is it a safety issue (as was the case for the World Rugby League)?

There may be ways that the unfairness of sex at birth is qualitatively different than the unfairness that is the result of age or money.  If that's the case, I'm wondering what those differences are.

By the way, I am surprised GR hasn't weighed in here.  In another forum, he discussed a different approach to the issue of sex and transgender, which is to do away with dividing sports by sex per se, and have two divisions: an open division that has no restrictions, and a restricted division where there might be age, gender, hormone, etc. restrictions to keep the competition a bit more balanced.  Hopefully I conveyed his plan accurately.  It is an interesting concept.

BC