Intoscience

Okay, Rather than squabbling with you all (which I'm guilty of doing). Let me lay out my personal thoughts in (hopefully) a manner which is easy to understand and supports why I take the stance I do. I see 3 models to which we are arguing over. Model 1. Socially constructed gender characteristics, tendencies, personalities and roles: This model includes multiple genders, each identifiable by each individual person. The construct of this model has two "extreme" parameters at either end, which are for as far as I know been in place 9in one way or another) throughout modern human history. At one end we have the Alpha male - a tough, strong, powerful human who enjoys fighting, competition, engineering, getting down and dirty etc... At the other end we have the Dainty female - A human who is soft, weak, tender, likes fluffy stuff etc... you all get the drift. Between all this we have a spectrum presently around 8 billion people who can be easily mapped on this model, with over laps. This to me is the personality Identity model, where people are free to change/choose where they fit. Model 2. Physically constructed gender model, similar to model 1 based on characteristics, tendencies and roles, but physical attributes rather than personality. Again this will map quite easily with the 8 billion or so people and it will also map reasonably well with model 1. i.e the Alpha male, a big powerful, strong, fast, high muscle & bone density... the dainty female, small, weak, low density muscle and bone structure... again there is a wide spectrum and overlaps and people can easily identify with this physically. This to me is the physicality model, where people are somewhat restricted, but are still free to change/choose where they fit. Model 3. Evolutionary driven biologically constructed DNA characteristics, tendencies, roles: This model is the sticking point. This model starts with the basis of 2 distinct sexes - male & female. The distinction is built fundamentally into the biology of each person and though there maybe abnormalities or slight differences the fundamentals are set and unchangeable (at least post puberty). Unfortunately the set genetically characteristics no matter cannot be altered and thus those that standout as significant difference between male and female may play a part in advantageous/disadvantageous tendencies (elite sports levels). This model is not so easy to map onto the other models, especially so if a person wishes to identify way outside of their genetical makeup. My models are simplified versions of what I believe to be reality. they maybe flawed in detail. But in order for me to gain and understanding of the opposite stance i need to gain an understanding of what exactly does a biologically born male mean when they say they are a woman?

Did I mention your name in any of my posts? I said "people" maybe i should have said "certain people". From what I have read of your posts on this subject you have made some good arguments and though I may not agree with them I do respect your opinion. I'm getting tired of been told that what I (along with the vast majority of people and plenty of well educated and very intelligent people) consider to be reality is not real and we should change our perception even though the physical factual evidence supports it. All fine, but humans come in 2 groups (male & female) who may share the typical features I described, but also have distinctive physical differences. Are you denying this? I'm all for and have advocated throughout this thread 2 things, 1. fairness in competitive sport, 2. freedom to identify as one chooses. My issue comes about when the chosen identity of a person qualifies them for competitive sporting categories where they would have a very clear physical advantage which undermines the category, and may I add, undermines the rights of the persons who naturally qualify. My other concern is around the contradictions and hypocrisies that come about when a person demands that we define them as physical truth for something they are not. I ask again since no one as yet answered my question, and I'll re phrase it to make it more simple. If a person born in a male body feels/believes they were born in the wrong body and thus choose to be identified as a female. By what definitions are they using to make the distinction between male & female? Since I'm being told that gender is not binary and rather a spectrum, then why does a person want to identify as one part of a binary definition? Thus in relation to this thread by what definition do they feel qualifies them to enter into women's categories?

Exactly why I cited him, he is out of his expertise and out of his depth and being a well known and respected scientist I was quite shocked to see him "pontificate" in such a manner. If all he has is that women wear make up and dresses but men don't then I find it rather embarrassing coming from a scientist. I'm happy for science to prove by test that there is no advantage gained. This certainly sets the levels more fairly. I think we are arguing over 2 extremes. I'm arguing that the rules should not allow some bloke who suddenly decides to identify as a woman to compete against cis-females. If however a male that has transitioned & gone through significant therapy, procedures etc... and any physical advantage they had previously can be proved by scientific test to be eradicated then sure, crack on. All I'm seeking is all inclusive fairness. Hmm, typical lefty response. . It appears if you are not on the left then you are a righty? I see now why I get so many negative reps and this thread is so one sided. Nope I want a scale which measures fairly all. You want scales which, oh yes, fib a little to make you feel better. Better society for who? The crackpots? Good luck with that one, lol What a crock of crap, there are 2 sexes - male and female this maps out just fine. Outliers to this are like any other abnormality. A human is defined as a bipedal mammal, with 2 arms 2 legs, 8 fingers 2 thumbs. ten toes, 2 ears etc... Any person born with less or more is defined to have an abnormality (outside of the general normality) this doesn't make them any less of a person any less valued or anything else, but it does make them outliers and such they standout from the norm. A person suffering from dual personality is said to have a mental issue, a person suffering from depression the same. But for some reason a person with gender dysmorphia has no issue but the general public who recognise this are said to be wrong, transphobic or bigots. This has nothing to do with identification, it is about reality.

Ah... this is because as recently eloquently put by the popular astrophysicist Neil Degras Tyson - " I may wake up one day and feel 80% female, decide to put on make up and wear a dress, who are you to tell me I'm not a woman?" The issue is that some people born with male genitalia believe they were born in the wrong body and will do anything even go to the extreme suffering of having physical changes made to make them more female. I sympathise with such people and agree that their beliefs and feelings should be respected. Unfortunately this does change any facts though. i suffer with body dysmorphia, I believe i was born in the wrong body, my mind feels disconnected from my physical form. Unfortunately I am what i am and I have to find a way to deal with it. This doesn't mean people should be ignored, persecuted or discarded. on the contrary people who suffer should be supported, sympathised with, aid in solutions to fix/accommodate their issues. To me the transgender issue all seems rather arse backwards, rather than reaching out to each individual and supporting them, helping to ease their suffering. People would rather change everything else at the cost of others to appease or be virtuous or what ever other agenda they have. Do you wonder why you see an increase in right wing populism? I'll tell you, because left wing extremists are pushing extreme ridiculous wonkiness into society and thus those that would normally sit somewhere in the middle ( the vast majority) are sick and tired of listening to all this crap they are spouting. As a result those that feel strongly about it are pushing back and in doing so being branded right wing. When in fact all people want is a balance, tolerance from both sides, equilibrium...

We are arguing that biological sex is and that the differences between are distinctive, especially so when dealing with elite level sports. They are all included already, L - women's categories G - men's categories B - category determined by their biological sex male/female T - category determined by their biological sex male/female Q - category determined by their biological sex male/female A - category determined by their biological sex male/female The only person's complaining are the ones who want to redefine what it means to be a biological female. The persons who are opposing it are the ones who want to protect the rights of their own group The argument is all pretty straightforward, the solution to change the system for fair inclusion to accommodate the persons with gender biological sex dysmorphia appears more complex. We are seeking a fair solution others are seeking false virtue I don't think it makes much difference these days. Since anyone is free to identify with which gender they choose to and that the definition of the gender can be fluid then any person transitioning or not is free to choose which category they want to align with. Thus any male choosing to be female on any particular day can assume that group identity and in so, it seems, assume that group's rights. The sports and athletic committees are aware of this loophole and are trying to do something about it in a fair manner, which seems to be somewhat failing since the issue seems more complex than just binary biological sex definition. You know exactly what Mistermack was implying. There are categories based on physical advantages/disadvantages. weight, age, sex etc...

How they choose to identify is irrelevant to how they were born. Ironically generally any form of dysmorphia or phobia is considered a mental issue. However, gender dysmorphia seems to be the exception to the rule. Inconsistencies as per. The binary system is considered archaic, yet trans women are desperately seeking acceptance as women rather than men. So if there is no distinction between male & female then why are they identifying as women? If there is no male or female just a spectrum then why have any label at all why seek confirmation? Why are you getting irate? All I asked was what the definition of what a male & female are. I want to know if there is a distinction (which I believe there is since the vast majority of the population are male or female)? I also then want a sensible, workable system to include transgender in sports in a fair manner. A system that is both fair for all competitors and also enjoyable for audiences of such events. All I've heard so far is basically - sod the females, they should stop complaining and just let the blokes who are now considered women to play to.

How can you categorise without separation? You either have one open field, which gives equal opportunity, fine. But you will eventually end up with a handful of cis males dominating the vast majority of disciplines. In which case the remainder (vast majority of competitors will soon realise there is no point of competing since they have no chance. All of a sudden you end up with a minority of competitors where there is little inclusion. The difference is though that what I stated is accurate though maybe not detailed. So, answer the question in detail then, then apply that definition to competitive sports. All I'm asking is how do we categorise events in an all inclusive fair opportunistic manner? Ah so now you are ignoring the elite, but using the general hobbiest as your argument for the elite. We have established that at the lower level where may I add dreams, money, careers, jobs are mostly unaffected, it doesn't matter much that some lad who identifies as a girl comes along and blitzes the girl's events. So what, who cares, maybe the parents of all the girls competing that day, but hey, get over it it's just a bit of fun, stop being bigots. At the elite level tiny differences in performance make huge differences in success. people at this level build careers, live out their dreams, there is big revenue and lots of jobs rely on it. So its important to make sure to try and set a fair as possible playing field, both for the competitors and the fans.

Nope because, for some reason there is a small minority of biological men that want to change the mainstream definition of what a woman is to fit their personal ideological reasons. I.e they feel they were born in the wrong body and can't do a thing about it, so in order to make them feel better about themselves they choose to be identified as a woman, fine. But this is not good enough. They now want the definition of a woman to be changed so that it fits in with their own personal definitions, and worse still that definition can be fluid to suit each individual. It's and I feel a step too far. I suspect that the vast majority of cis-gender women would also agree. There is plenty of media attention around Lia Thomas, maybe he/she got what he really craved which was media attention. No point in posting links. no matter what I post or what links I post you will refute them anyway. I have stated the basic mainstream definition of what a woman is! It is you and many others who are avoiding refuting it. You are just supporting or spouting this crap about extending the definition so much so that it just becomes a diluted mess that is incomprehensible.

It's also quite telling that the offense has yet to define what a woman is. I'm still waiting for someone to refute that a "woman" is an adult biological female. Defined by her chromosomes, genitalia, bone structure & muscle density (post puberty), along with the inherent mechanisms (functional or not) to grow, carry and give birth to offspring. Cis gender women have objected and as a result been told to shut their mouths, stop complaining and stop being transphobic. The swimmer Lia Tomas is an example of such, where a lowly ranked "male" swimmer transgendered and then out competed high ranked "female" swimmers and even though the women competing protested Lia was still awarded the winner's medal in fear of rebuttal.

Greed is nothing new, people in power and wealth throughout history have continued to oppress the weaker less fortunate, while they continue to compound their personal wealth and power even further. The difference now is the internet exposes, but also provides people with the opportunity to exploit. In addition the internet provides a platform for idiocy and the proponents of such to promote their ridiculous ideas. At the same time it opens access to a wider audience (world wide) and thus people get to see how other people live, what they posses etc... where often people are exposed to a false sense of reality. Then we have the threat of AGI, whether that be independent A.I (self controlling and programming) or that which powerful wealthy people may use to manipulate the general population even further. It's interesting times but also quite alarming and certainly scary. Whether human society is doomed or not is too hard to say but there is going to be change that's for sure. for good or for bad, well that depends on your point of view.

Nope, I never stated anything other than by definition that is the generally accepted by the mainstream. use what ever language you prefer so long as it makes sense and that the correct use of the words are used, not made up definitions that suits. I know that in general (we are talking in general i.e the vast majority) a woman is distinctively biologically different from a man. Or if you prefer we will use the terms female & male since the term woman seems to be undefined. Those differences become more profound as each goes through puberty. Yes, studies have shown that in general (vast majority) males tend to be around 10%-30% stronger, faster and more physically powerful than females. Sure you have the extremes of the spectrum where a powerlifting female can be stronger than the average male. But that is not really a good comparison now is it? Though you can watch many videos of average males who do weights for their health and fitness but non competitive out lifting top ranked professional female powerlifters. My argument is and always has been that a transgender female who has athletic ability pitched against a cis female with similar weight and skill will in general over power the cis female. Take this to the extremes where you have an elite trans female competing against elite cis females the trans will dominate. As best I can tell, you're the only one here discussing "no restrictions." I'm saying the restrictions can be amended to allow for transgender inclusion in sports, not that zero restrictions should be used. Does this help us to better align on our views We are far more aligned then than I realised. It appears on this thread that some posters are assuming I want to ban transgender from sports. This is and never as been the case. I have stated many times that I would like to see sports and society in general adopting equality & fair inclusiveness for all people. +1 (my bold your statement above) I would just change it slightly to that and say "thresholds & guidelines which allow fair competitive inclusion for all" Why? I always thought the onus for evidence and definition was on the person making a claim? A person born biologically male who proclaims they are a female and have been mis-gendered and thus want to be identified as a woman. I'm happy to acknowledge and respect their preferred identity, absolutely fine. I would just like to know if they are identifying as a woman then what definition are they using so I can understand their position. Since my definition of a woman may not align with theirs. But I may be told I'm incorrect, and my definition is outdated, I'm biased, yet I'm also told that the definition can be personal to me and others should accept and respect this. I find it all rather illogical and somewhat damaging to the use of words and their meanings.

Go ahead then if you have an answer for this, i'm all ears. And? If I really wanted to be bald I'd cut my hair off. No argument there Interesting that you use this logic when suits but quickly dismiss it when it doesn't. It's also logical that if a any person identifying as they choose and are free with no restriction, then all restrictions are irrelevant. Regarded as? I want to be regarded as a dog, doesn't mean I am one. That was my point. A person is free to be identified as they choose to be, I have no issue with that. I,am to respect that and even use the appropriate (chosen) pronouns when engaging with a person. However, I'm not prepared to be forced into believing something which i know not to be true, and worse being persecuted for doing so. Can someone please define what a woman is? What a female is...? And non of this bullshit diverting tactic of "oh well, a woman is a gender label and its fluid, so that each person has their own definition of what a woman is and they are all correct even though they don't match up".

If a person wants to be identified as a woman then we need to know by what definition do they mean a "woman"? If that person is free to define a woman by personal choice then what does this mean in terms of identity? How are we to reconcile this ambiguity so that we are all clear on what a woman or man is? If sex is non binary and gender is non binary but labels and categories are then what are we to do? In sporting events (since this thread was about this, and being in the biology section as pointed out to me just now. There is clearly a difference in the majority between men and women. there is also one major difference that separates men and women. Women are evolved to have the mechanism to grow offspring, and give birth men are not. By this definition does a man wanting to become a woman mean they want those mechanisms? The men that go to the extremes of having surgery to change their genitalia are striving for something. They obviously have a clear definition of what a woman is, what the differences are...they have some definition that goes along with the general consensus of what the differences are between a man and a woman. They want to be labelled as a woman but we are told that the definition of what a woman is is fluid? Then you have those people who prefer to be identified as "other". Fine, identify as you so wish, but in life where there are categories in place to protect rights so how do we reconcile the additional identity profiles with the majority identity profiles such that all are included and all rights go unaffected? Interestingly I was reading somewhere recently that prior to around 2017 ish the definition of a transgender woman was a man who wants to identify as and feel like a woman. Then there was a shift where the definition took a slightly differing aspect, the definition became - a transgender woman is a real woman. To understand what this means logically we need to define what a "real woman" is. Now we are told a woman is what ever you define it as, its just a label. A. "I want to be a woman" B. "Fine, what is a woman?" A. "What ever I chose it to be" B. "OK, but my definition of a woman is a person of female sex" A. "That's not what a woman is, a woman is a gender label, and sex is non binary" B. "OK, explain to me your definition of a woman, a female, and a person who was evolved to have the mechanism to give birth?" A. "My definition of a woman is what ever I chose it to be" B. "OK, so you want to be identified as a woman, what does this mean to you, what do you mean by gender label?" I think there is much confusion and too much unnecessary complexity which has no positive impact on society and/or the people affected.

I know what woke means and you know exactly what I was pointing to wards but as usual just like many other posters on this thread you skirt around, ignore the point i allude to and throw it back at me to make me look like some bigot, or ignoramus. No one is arguing this, the argument is about how we should consolidate sex and gender when they are conflicting. And how we can accommodate this in society, in a fair and inclusive manner. Yes it is, I'm happy to respect their choice of identity, but why should i accept something that is non factual? If I want to identify as a dog then i would hope people would respect this and identify me as such. This doesn't change the fact that I'm a human not a dog. citation please. Show me some factual evidence that trans people are targeted above any other. People are beaten and killed al over the world for all sorts of reasons. Maybe in the US trans murder is rife? What are you talking about?? I was pointing out that some problems are far more pressing than others and if aren't dealt with sooner rather than later there won't be anyone around to complain anyhow. I'm talking about focus and appropriately actioning by priority. This doesn't mean other issue should be ignored it just means some are greater than others and more of a threat to the planet and society in general. No one is talking about exclusion in the way you are referring. As you well know!!! Yet another example of missing the point and twisting to make those who disagree with you look bad! Some very sly and devious posting going on now. Nope I'm saying that person has a mental health issue and they should be treated and cared for accordingly. That was my whole point. You have totally missed it. If I believe I was born in the wrong body and I want to be my authentic self then we all agree that we should respect my identity choice. But should this automatically qualify me for the rights of my identity choice if those rights affect other's? It's double standards and inconsistent. If I'm a man who believes and identifies as a woman I'm free to enter any women's category If I'm a man who believes and identifies as a child I'm not free to enter any child's category In fact I'll take it one step further and say that most psychological experts would regard my choice of identity as a child to be a mental health issue. I have a condition called body dysmorphia where I see myself differently than others and what I actually am. Many people suffer from this and similar. These conditions are regarded as mental health issues. Is anyone going to answer my questions? I'm constantly being preached to insinuating I'm ignorant and a bigot. I've asked to be educated using facts and definitions.

Yeah, I tend to agree. nevertheless, when this sort of thing happens you can't help but wonder and its easy to see why it can be spooky. On another note I mentioned a while back, possible on your original thread about getting a sense or feeling when certain people's deaths are imminent. So recapping I have had on a number of occasions as "sense" about someone a day or 2 before they die. It's always been random and it's also often been about people I have little or no contact with previously or for a long while. Anyhow I was sat working just the other day and I had the "sense" just randomly pop into my head about a person I have only met once years ago. It was a friend's father, the friend which I have lost contact with over the last couple years and I had only once met her father around 10 years previous. Low and behold I had a message yesterday informing me that he had died the day after I had the sensation. Another spooky episode indeed.

Then why have categories? Then why do males who feel they have been born in the wrong body want so desperately to become women? It's hypocritical and inconsistent. There is no such thing as binary sex just a spectrum Some people born male want to become female I oppose making sporting events unfair and boring Yet there is lots of media exposure & fuss on transgender rights, but we are to dismiss the rights of those affected by this. Typical. Funny how all of a sudden when suits a person's opinion, beliefs and feelings matter in science? Yet if I claimed that aliens are real, and that I was born a human but really I should have been an alien. You would then quickly dismiss this as nonsense, show us the evidence, you need therapy... Double standards. Yeah sure. All the nonsense that is being shoved down peoples throats, that is nothing more than a cry for attention and getting rather tedious and boring and promotes nothing positive in society, but actually encourages more contempt and resentment. The LGBQTAA+1, I mean WTF is this supposed to represent? and what are the people who are supporting this trying to achieve? I think it's insulting and patronising for the people who are gay, lesbian... and people are getting tired of it. Lets focus on things that really matter like saving our planet, saving near on extinct species, famine, poverty, disease... sustainability for the human race. Kindness & harmony in society, real equality & inclusion... Or shall we continue to pander to attention seeking people who have nothing else to worry about? Do you think the starving poverty stricken dying people in third world countries give a flying f about people who are complaining about wanting to be identified as "they"? And for those that are whining about being born male/female and should have been the opposite. Wow! how insulting to those people who are born disabled. I'm very embarrassed that I suffer from body dysmorphia, because I know that I'm very fortunate to be relatively healthy and that there are millions of people who would trade places with me! Ok, Lets cut to the chase Educate me please, Define the difference between male & female If there is no difference explain to me why the term male & female exist Define the difference between man & woman If there is no difference then explain to me what the term man & woman represent Assuming the above answers are satisfied, when a man wants to be identified as a woman what does this mean? What if my definition of a man or a woman doesn't match another person's definition of a man or a woman , how do we categorise such? If a person born male claims they are really female what do they mean by this? Would you say that if a person believes they are something that they are physically not, this would be regarded (scientifically) as a mental issue? I'm more than happy to change my views on this matter if we can find some consistencies and common ground.

No, but I have and still do feel/believe I was born in the wrong body. I suffer from body dysmorphia for one thing. So I can and do find some empathy for people who believe they were born in the wrong body. Well for me personally yes, opening up the playing field in a way that could be exploited. Granted, only a few individual cases have made the headlines. Depends on what sporting discipline and at what level. Honestly, it's not ever going to affect me personally, so from a selfish perspective I couldn't give a crap who competes with who. If you want to promote a left wingest, "in vogue" virtuous, woke driven extremist society, to make you feel better about yourself crack on.

First, apologies for creating a copy cat thread - Spooky Experiences - I'm more than happy for the threads to be merged if that's ok with the mods and OP of the original thread? Yes I think my experience is a coincidence, as unlikely as it may have seemed to me though. The 2 words/phrase that came up in the book are - dark web & antifa. At the time of reading I was completely unaware of either term and definitely never searched either of them ever in the past. In fact I haven't searched either since nor did I click on the ad links to either as displayed on YouTube. So I'm still non the wiser on either of them now. In answer to your questions - The Vat - I never spoke the words and I never searched either before or after since. In fact writing them in this response is the first time I have mentioned them since reading them in the book. What spooked me was that I had not typed or spoke either word, I had read part way through the book and took a quick coffee break at which point I flicked on YouTube (as I often do) and was shocked to see those items right there as the very first adverts. I can't ever recall seeing them advertised beforehand and I have not noticed them since. I'm not claiming anything I really do think its a spooky coincidence but I thought I'd share my experience with you all. I just found it very strange and somewhat unnerving at the time.

Why? If a person is born biologically of a certain sex but "believes/feels" they are of a gender that is different from that which is assigned to that sex then how else would you describe it? If you believe my understanding and empathy is lacking then educate me rather than assuming! This thread and indeed this forum is often full of inconsistencies. It's a science forum, but you are arguing that a person's beliefs trump the scientific evidence? I'm confused, please explain how a person's gender identity can be consolidated by their biological sex if the 2 are opposing? If a person is born genetically a certain sex (which they have no control over, and is where my empathy resides) what they choose, feel, believe or otherwise is irrelevant to scientific data. This doesn't mean we should ignore their beliefs or feelings or what ever way you want to frame it, absolutely we should respect and consider with as much empathy as possible. But we should not ignore the facts in doing so either. Well there is certainly many more important things to worry about in this world that's for sure. But with the current media exposure that this subject (and related) are generating then I guess the discussion is current. At least in Western society. 1. The argument is more about opening up the possibility of exploitation than isolated individual cases. 2. Actually, sport is a massive industry which generates trillions of revenue. Though not life threatening sport is and does provide people with a purpose, career, health and wellbeing and many more positive benefits.

Just a thread to openly discuss what you might consider strange. Whether that be personal experiences or stories you have heard about, inexplicable coincidences, spooky experiences etc... For instance, I have been reading a few novels (paper back fiction) just lately and within those novels some of the details used in the narratives are often based on real events or real places/agencies/people. I read 2 books related by author but unrelated by story line. Both are fictional stories, but feature real life details that I had not come across previously. The things I read in each book, one was a place and one was an agency. Both which I had never ever seen or heard or had any idea existed, so never mentioned previously. On separate occasions following reading each book I flicked on YouTube to find exactly to the letter what I had read, the exact thing being prominently advertised. Now, I have heard of and witnessed this happening when verbal or electronic discussions are made, where you get advertisements popping up on based key words that have been identified. But on this occasion it really appears that something read my mind! Now being skeptical on these matters I dismissed it as a very unlikely, but a possible coincidence. Even so it spooked me somewhat. Do you have any similar experiences to share?

You see, I read each as: u r joking - you are joking ur joking - you're joking

I'm in support of any mechanism which enables fair participation for all people, non to be excluded! At the same time the focus has to be on "fair" whether based on ability, physical size/prowess or any other advantage/disadvantage. Else you will get exclusion of outcome, minority groups dominating. I'm not sure what you are getting at? I have no problem with people being free to identify what gender or any other definition they want to use. But I don't see how this would work in competition? I don't understand how someone's personal feelings about their gender identity has to do with rules in sport? How is it strange, if anyone is free to decide what gender they want to identify as and thus then allowed to compete in what category that identity permits, then what is strange about that? It's just logic. I might decide to identify as a tortoise and thus from this day forward compete against other tortoises in the tortoise Olympics. Who's to stop me? Would you allow an abled body athlete compete in the Parra Olympics? Why not if a person identified as disabled? Why should all those people who "feel" they are disabled not be allowed to compete in the Parra Olympics?

The argument appears to be based on gender identification rather than biological sex (XX/XY chromosomes). In that your inclusion into categories should be aligned with your personal (arbitrary) gender identification. Which makes no sense to me, since how can we have distinctively fair categories which allow for inclusion without some form of discrimination based on clear definitions? Why not? what if the heavy weight boxer decides to identify as a twelve year old girl? If there is no limit to what a person can identify as and such they would be in their rights to enter the category which aligns with the identification of their own choosing, so how can we stop it happening? You are using an extreme made up scenario to counter my arguments exactly which I'm criticised of doing in return - Usain Bolt transgenders and comes out of retirement to compete in elite women's sprints, he/she would dominate every discipline from 60mtr to possibly 800mtrs go on to exceed every world record by a massive margin and would win 99% + of every race he/she chose to participate in. No one would be physically harmed so no argument there. But many elite cisgender women could be profoundly mentally affected and would be denied the opportunity to achieve their dream of becoming a champion. So where is the inclusion and equality in that scenario? Like I said - inconsistencies are the root cause of all these types of arguments.

Ok that's fine, but if your difference is arbitrary (as iNow suggested) then why bother with a definition at all? Because if we cannot agree on what the differences are whether personal to the individual or in general then how do we categorise and should we even bother? Therefore all the sporting categories may as well be abandoned. In which case you will just end up with a minority group of people totally dominating all sporting disciplines. If you are happy with that and feel this shouldn't be an issue then fine. I just don't agree. I'm asking if a person born with male genes decides they are now identifying as a women then how do they define what makes them a woman and if this is an individual choice based on their perception of what a man is and what a woman is then does that align with the general consensus of the difference between a man or a woman? Is there a general definition which separates the 2 sexes -XY & XX? There seems to be two arguments one of biological sex and one of personal gender identification. I just can't see how the 2 can be consolidated to form a general consensus that allows for fair ruling in sports. If the definitions are going to be arbitrary then how can you set fair rules?

So what is the definition between a man and a woman? Because the way I see it, if we can't all agree on what makes a man or a woman then how can we continue with this argument? JC is criticized for using outliers as examples (real events). Then you argue back with a ridiculous response. This forum is full of inconsistences. I might jump off a tall building in protest.