I Have Permission

In various circles, the debate on biological men no longer being able to compete in women’s sport thanks to the World Athletics ruling on testing for the SRY gene has sparked ire from at least some men and, surprisingly, women, mostly those who would rather see inclusion over fairness, even if it means the eventual erosion of women’s sport. Many online posts criticizing the measure don’t actually address the issue itself. Instead, those who have contrary opinions take a page from Nikki Hilts’ How to Debate book and use made-up or skewed facts and loads of whataboutism as a basis for their argument. 

The other day on X (Twitter), a lady grabbed Nikki's example and ran with it when she wrote the following: “if you’re a person tweeting about this today under the guise of 'protecting women' and you’ve never said a word about eating disorders, abusive coaches, or predatory sponsor contracts (Nike), I just don’t believe that you care about women’s sports”

This was in response to the following tweet: “Story from here in Tokyo. Sex tests brought in after data showed 50-60 DSD athletes in global and regional finals between 2000 and 2023, World Athletics says. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/sep/19/sex-tests-brought-in-after-data-showed-50-60-dsd-athletes-in-finals-world-athletics-says “

I'm not sure about the responder’s stance on the topic —I can guess, but there’s a slim chance I could be wrong— but I’m in the unique position of having written about all of the topics she mentions, but also having addressed biological men in women's sport. That means, according to her logic, that I care about women’s sports (I do), but, again, according to her, a lot of others who speak up do not. I don't think she counted on any individuals having addressed both issues, though. 

But what if we apply that same logic the other way? Can I then call anyone out and claim she doesn't give a shit about female athletes because she dismissed one issue relating to women's competition?

Obviously, this kind of black-and-white thinking won't lead to civil debate or any kind of resolution. I doubt the poster meant it to. If you hold up a "Save The Seals" sign and someone starts yapping about the hippopotami and the dhole, the conversation is hijacked, and the focus moves away from saving any animals at all. Those who do the distraction are not usually the types who want any actual discourse. It's virtue signaling more than an attempt to contribute to the conversation.

My intention isn't to be an asshole here, however, if you truly care about women's sports, you should also care about a fair and safe playing field for them. That's very basic. Yes, abusive coaches, equal pay, childcare needs, and a long list of other issues are also important, but if women are competing at a disadvantage, they can not succeed as athletes. They will be unable to make a decent living competing against those who have a physical advantage. And, in the cases of Rugby and other contact sports, they are at a greater risk for injury when the danger is already high. 

Men and women sustain different types of injuries, and while men tend to get injured more severely playing rugby, which is why you wouldn't really want to invite that into women's sports, women are more susceptible to concussions and other types of injuries when they are hit or hit the ground. This is usually because women have less isometric neck strength than men.

Since this poster attempted to move the conversation away from the article, I’ll return to it by stating that the author points out that between  the years 2000 - 2023, 50-60 athletes competed in the female category in global and continental championships despite having gone through male puberty. 

This is a long-winded way of saying around 50-60 male athletes cheated by racing against women, and some of them were participating in multiple events. That’s also not including many lesser events with prize money around the world. I think it's important to acknowledge the ways women lose out when they are forced to compete against biological men if you do, in fact, care about women’s sports.

Moving away from sports and addressing everyday issues, I’ve mentioned before that I never want to offend anyone, but I find using incorrect pronouns difficult. The world is hard enough as it is, so I don't want to contribute to anyone feeling bad. I've certainly called some trans women "she" in real life so that I avoid hurting feelings. I'm less likely to do so now, but it all depends on the circumstances. In some instances, I'm not actually sure what's right. In others, it's obvious what's not right. 

In all cases, though, men and boys will never become women or girls no matter what surgeries they have, clothes they wear, or feelings they feel. Still, it's easier to have empathy for anyone struggling with gender dysphoria than it is for a criminal who is LARPing as a woman and committing men’s sexual crimes and worse.

I often wonder how it would be if I insisted people refer to me as "fatty" because I identify as a heavier person and feel like one most of the time. Ultimately, no matter how I feel about myself, I would never force anyone to play along with or contribute to my distorted reality of my body.

It’s always a relief when I meet someone like the gentleman I know from work who cross-dresses but still uses his given name and associated pronouns. I love that he embraces who he is and doesn't make everyone around him feel uncomfortable about how to address him. He's just who he is, and that's about as cool as it gets.

The use of "they" pronouns is even more confounding, and I really struggle with it. I met someone who claimed she "almost went by the pronoun they but decided against it,'" thus suggesting it's not necessarily about anything concrete, just something in vogue, a way to feel special. It seems even those who call themselves by a plural pronoun have trouble explaining non-binary. Non-binary is a fairly recent term that developed, similar to gender, as a social construct, yet those who claim they are often end up demanding special rights. It's fine to encourage broad expressions of identity, but not at the expense of reality or others.

I don't have any real solutions except to keep digging into the topic and listening to others. Mostly, I will continue speaking up about women's rights because, as a former athlete and as a woman, these issues matter to me. Being kind to one group doesn't have to include the erosion of someone else's rights.

On a separate note, my last short post on Malcolm Gladwell has drawn a lot of attention. I'm never sure why one post generates interest while another one falls flat, but thank you to anyone willing to read my blog posts. If you're looking for something more uplifting, I also review cheese on my blog, Say Cheese! I have some fun reviews in mind coming up for that one. And, though I'm terrible at asking for anything, especially money, my Venmo is @lizefb if you’re feeling generous and would like to help keep me writing. Or, consider a donation to my charity, Romo's Rescue Fund. We assist pet owners and other charities with veterinary costs and provisions. To date, we have put in over $10,000 and have helped save a lot of furry friends. We have also assisted with end-of-life care when the time comes. Just today, we covered the veterinary bill for someone in need, so we are grateful for any support at all