Ms. Rose does NOT get Ditched for her acknowledgement of the inequality in athletics that some individuals face. That is a serious issue that continues to need attention from ruling bodies. Rather, Ms. Rose gets Ditched for her failure to understand what her particular line of reasoning will ultimately mean for athletics in general, not just for transsexuals. Ms. Rose states that the policy for the IOC was changed based on the "recognition that a person's gender is more complicated than any single factor, combined with the inability to identify medically sound testing criteria". This reasoning allows for the inclusion of transsexual athletes in Olympic competition, which is neither being promoted or argued against in this post. What is being pointed out, though, is the fact that this reasoning also eradicates the ability to have ANY male/female separations in athletics at all. Using this logic, could an individual not argue that they are mentally and physically two different genders? Which gender determines their athletic eligibility? If gender is to be deemed something too complicated to be defined by any medical metric, there is no authority to establish restrictions or groupings based on gender. Ms. Rose needs to take enough time to think through the implication of this reasoning, not only to her particular interest group, but also to the broader collection of athletes. Once she does this, she needs to either continue to support that reasoning or go back and revise it for the benefit of creating a more sound logic, free from any "irrational, emotional argument"
No comments:
Post a Comment