"Dictating to trans people about _how they get to live_ is the process of saying they can't co-exist in this world. It is the insinuation that they are _separate but equal_."
This isn't about "how they get to live". For instance, if a male wants to dress in clothing designed for female wearers and adopt a name more commonly used by women and girls then the vast majority of people will live and let live, and happily co-exist. It's not a problem.
However it becomes a problem when encroaching on the rights of others. The female category in sports is a great example because exclusion of males is the entire rationale, as this provides women and girls with a competitive space that is fairer and safer than if it is mixed-sex. Allowing males into the category - which effectively destroys it - has a negative impact on female athletes. So of course there is going to be opposition to this.
"This moral outrage has now led to invasive 'tests' women have to go through before they participate in multiple sports at an international level. This outrage has caused a proliferation of false claims lodged against women who just, simply do well in sports and don't fall within the very subjectively defined 'gender identity'."
Screening for sex can be done with a cheek swab. This is vastly less invasive than the anti-doping tests athletes must take, which involves having blood taken and urinating in a cup while someone watches.
"For example, what Imane Khelif went through is a damned outrage. Has this author taken responsibility of what their rhetoric might mean to so called 'real women' that he's claiming to be so supportive of?"
There's a significant amount of evidence that indicates Imane Khelif is actually male, with the athletic advantage that brings.
"Language is a living and breathing thing. The meanings of words change over time."
Right, but going back to the above point, if we can't use words like "man", "boy" or "male" to describe the category of people who are definitionally excluded from the female category of sports without being shut down and complained at, then how can anyone make the case for women's sports to those who disagree? Or indeed any aspect of anything relating to women.
Perhaps that's the point - attempting to make it "bigoted" and "transphobic" to argue in favor of women's and girls' sex-based rights, rather than presenting any rational argument for taking them away.
Anyway I think this shows quite clearly that your analogy doesn't fit when one digs into the detail. None of the above is anything like the struggle for racial equality.
As I understand it, these are the major pieces of evidence:
- Karotype testing of Khelif (and the other disqualified boxer, Lin) showing XY chromosomes, reported by sports journalist Alan Abrahamson who's seen the lab reports and covering letter that was received by the IOC from the IBA: https://www.3wiresports.com/articles/2024/8/5/fa9lt6ypbwx5su...
- A member of Khelif's training team, Georges Cazorla, revealing in interview that Khelif has problems with chromosomes and hormones, and has been under testosterone suppression to bring levels into the female range: https://www.lepoint.fr/monde/2024-olympics-imane-khelif-was-...
- Extracts from a medical report leaked to French journalist Djaffer Ait Aoudia, which state that Khelif has a disorder of sex development, 5-alpha reductase deficiency, which exists only in males: https://lecorrespondant.net/imane-khelif-ni-ovaires-ni-uteru...
There are other oddities as well, like Khelif choosing not to pursue a case at the Court of Arbitration for Sport after being deemed ineligible to compete in IBA events. And the head of the Spanish national team, Rafael Lozano, saying that when the Algerian team visited to train, they ended up matching Khelif with a male boxer to spar, as the upper body strength and punching power was too much for the female boxers.
Worth noting also that all this is consistent with Khelif competing at the Olympics in the women's boxing category, as they only ask for identity documentation and do not verify sex, unlike weight classes which are strictly controlled.
This isn't about "how they get to live". For instance, if a male wants to dress in clothing designed for female wearers and adopt a name more commonly used by women and girls then the vast majority of people will live and let live, and happily co-exist. It's not a problem.
However it becomes a problem when encroaching on the rights of others. The female category in sports is a great example because exclusion of males is the entire rationale, as this provides women and girls with a competitive space that is fairer and safer than if it is mixed-sex. Allowing males into the category - which effectively destroys it - has a negative impact on female athletes. So of course there is going to be opposition to this.
"This moral outrage has now led to invasive 'tests' women have to go through before they participate in multiple sports at an international level. This outrage has caused a proliferation of false claims lodged against women who just, simply do well in sports and don't fall within the very subjectively defined 'gender identity'."
Screening for sex can be done with a cheek swab. This is vastly less invasive than the anti-doping tests athletes must take, which involves having blood taken and urinating in a cup while someone watches.
"For example, what Imane Khelif went through is a damned outrage. Has this author taken responsibility of what their rhetoric might mean to so called 'real women' that he's claiming to be so supportive of?"
There's a significant amount of evidence that indicates Imane Khelif is actually male, with the athletic advantage that brings.
"Language is a living and breathing thing. The meanings of words change over time."
Right, but going back to the above point, if we can't use words like "man", "boy" or "male" to describe the category of people who are definitionally excluded from the female category of sports without being shut down and complained at, then how can anyone make the case for women's sports to those who disagree? Or indeed any aspect of anything relating to women.
Perhaps that's the point - attempting to make it "bigoted" and "transphobic" to argue in favor of women's and girls' sex-based rights, rather than presenting any rational argument for taking them away.
Anyway I think this shows quite clearly that your analogy doesn't fit when one digs into the detail. None of the above is anything like the struggle for racial equality.