Masking Morality With Science: Men Pretending To Be Women In Sports

There is little point in talking about women pretending to be men in sports, because everybody knows that when these women go up against men, they lose. (There may be odd exceptions I am ignorant of, like some fruity prancing about with streamers, an actual sport for females that I don’t know if men indulge in or not.)

All know that men are bigger, stronger, and faster than women. Not more flexible, not daintier. This is not breaking news. It is not news at all. It wasn’t even news to Adam after he noticed he was missing a rib. Headlines announcing a man beat a woman in a race, or in lifting large weights, would be as exciting as those announcing the sun has managed to rise in the east yet again.

Unless the men winners are pretending to be women. Then such headlines becomes fascinating.

All such headlines are like, “All Pretend Man Pretending To Be Woman Won The Race Against Women Fair & Square.”

Buried in the stories, every now and then, are one or two ladies complaining it wasn’t fair. Which it wasn’t. But which few or no organizers of these events want to openly admit. Nevertheless, these headlines are accumulating and the lies people are forced to tell growing ever more absurd and irksome. Imagine the mind of the judge as he has to strap a medal on a hulking figure in a wig calling himself Mary Sue.

But how to escape the trap we set for ourselves? We can’t, or rather we have lost the ability to say men don’t have the “right” to pretend to be women. And few have the guts to say, out loud, that dude is a dude. They don’t want the grief and persecution from the Shrieking Classes. Worst, though, is the pretend persecution from people who know it is all wrong, those who join in the persecutions because they know that “silence is violence.” These hypocrites commit the worst sins.

The simplest thing is for organizers, like the Olympics, to announce “No men in women’s events” and be done with it. Then everybody can go back to normal. But that requires fortitude and men with chests. All such men have been purged.

What’s needed is a higher authority to point to, some Entity which all respect, and which can be blamed on the banning of men. “It wasn’t me who won’t allow men pretending to be women to compete against women,” sayeth the judge, “But this all-powerful Entity.”

This Entity cannot be God because of his embarrassing positions on certain modern beloved proclivities. It cannot be any man, nor organization, for all the obvious political reasons.

It is anyway clear to all what the Entity must be: The Science.

The Science is seen by nearly all as supreme arbiter. Are we not everywhere admonished to “Follow The Science!”? Rulers, bureaucrats, Experts, and, most importantly, celebrities, all justify acts by pointing to The Science. The Science knows right from wrong.

That’s all very well, but which The Science do we Follow in the matter of men pretending to be women in women’s sports? The Science that says crazy men ought not to mix with the ladies? That psychology works, but it’s too naked in its judgments. Far too religious. It sounds too much like one wants to impose one’s beliefs, which is precisely what one does want to do, without admitting it.

We could try more hardcore psychology, like banishing those who suffer from autogynephilia. That state is easily larded with technical jargon and hearty medical and psychiatric terminology, and so fits neatly with The Science. Alas, these describe sexual practices, and none dare ban any person based on his “orientation”. Except, for now anyway, those “oriented” to the kiddies.

How about genes, you ask? Any with a Y chromosome is out. That works, and is properly The Science. A perfect solution. Except that it is too perfect. It is uncompromising; indeed, as inflexible as saying “No Men Allowed” (which is also works and is cheaper). Organizers know saying “Y—Not!” is equivalent to “No Men Allowed”, which causes them to shake and shiver in fear of being punished for their belief.

Thus the “middle” position of testing testosterone levels. Testosterone is a chemical in the blood, shared by those of both sexes, with more on average in men. It was unknown ninety years ago. Chromosomes were unknown, too. Sex was always known. But because it is ancient knowledge, it is not seen as The Science. Testosterone and chromosomes, being new, have a solid The Science feel to them. Both require machines that go Bing! in order to discover. Test tubes are always The Science.

If the rule is “No participant with a testosterone greater than T can play”, then we have The Science doing our required work. Or most of it. It’s superior to chromosomes because a few men will slip in under T, and organizers can pretend the few men pretending to be women with low T are “really” women.

Another problem is that this single chemical is only part of any man’s story. Men still come equipped with many in-built advantages, even if they are, because of eating a mess of drugs, low in this particular chemical (at the time of testing). And these advantages can also become too difficult to pretend not to see.

So much so the Olympics might ban outright men pretending to be women in women’s events, as reported here. The chance is increased because now a woman is in charge, and so Victim calculus is invoked. It seems even she doesn’t want to be dogmatic about it, and is looking for loopholes for those with “differences of sexual development” or DSDs.

These are people born with certain genetic abnormalities and so forth. An older term is “intersex”, but “differences of sexual development” is much more The Scientific (anything with more words is more The Scientific). The thing to understand about these people is that even most of them are more-or-less normal, as the link below details.

Statistics are greatly exaggerated here, of the kind advocacy groups enjoy lying about (such as “5 out 4 college women are raped”). You’ll see the number 1.7% of all people are DSD, which is false. It’s closer to 0.018%, as the link shows. I did a calculation and came up with a “rough number of true intersex athletes about 24.” For the USA, that is.

How many of these would make the Olympic teams would surely be less; thus in any given sport the best number to predict is none.

Still, there might be the odd one. What to do? It is a moral question that admits of an easier The Science solution, given one can say things like “Klinefelter syndrome” to impress the masses. Here the “Y Not!” has more force, and perhaps they’ll hit upon the idea, because it can be buried in DSD lingo.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use PayPal. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: \$WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank. BUY ME A COFFEE.