The Transgender Athletic Homogenization, Conflation and Confusion
Gregg Zegarelli Esq.
Managing Shareholder at Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC
Some people who are genetically binary at birth do not agree with Mother Nature's genetic (gender) designation. Therefore, some of these people desire or need socially to designate their gender otherwise.
It might be said that these people do not see it as a need or desire, as such, but simply a truth of self-fulfillment and self-revelation. [1] As to internal fulfillment and revelation, all are entitled to their own. [*1]
We would be a mean, base, and hypocritical people—professing diversity, freedom, and free-thinking equality—to deny such persons the personal pursuit of happy self-realization. [2] Who are we to judge such any such person's internal self-realization? [3]
That said, we are charged to recognize the relatively recent opportunities that some medical doctors—who also tend to be excellent money-makers—have provided such people to challenge Mother Nature, whether it is corrective or augmentative, or something else. [4] This includes modern so-called "expert" "doctors of psychiatry" and "psychologists." [5] Some doctors and surgeons carve a path that tempt and enable these human self-objections and contradictions to Mother Nature, all for the bias of a fee, of course. [6, *3]
The support for challenging Mother Nature over the little cosmetic things tends to ground the very premise that emboldens more medical substantive challenges. [7, 8, 9]
That which feeds upon insecurity will tend to create the trap for it, and the lure.
Now, this impromptu post is the result of hearing pundits last night argue over transgenders competing in sports as a political issue in the upcoming election.
One of the pundits argued that it follows that, because a transgender person has a right to be a transgender, it would naturally follow that a transgender person should have an equal right to play in the sport of the transgender person's resultant group. That is, a genetic XY-man to compete in the XX-women athletic grouping. This issue was addressed, in part, in They Entered the Building, but Only One Went In. [*2]
This proffered television authority news-pundit statement is a blunt suggestion of intellect. Moreover, it adduces foolishness, folly, misunderstanding, and chaos. The rhetoric confuses, conflates and homogenizes. Alas, everything is not all the same.
Indeed, the statement fails to assess the context as it really is, by rhetorically taking a generally true statement as the premise into a conclusion that is not necessarily true. It incorrectly and falsely induces. [12]
That is, to agree that someone has a right or is otherwise accepted in core society as a transgender is not to conclude that the same person has a right to enter a sporting group. They are different contexts of association.
Whether we acknowledge a need or desire by a transgender person to be or to become a transgender, we can reasonably presuppose that a transgender, in being or becoming a transgender, will have a tending need and desire to self-fulfill socially "as-if" the contrivance of the scientific contradiction did not occur or does not exist as such; that is, to make it invisible and irrelevant as such.
But this is delusion. The incontrovertible fact is that a "trans" person has indeed crossed, or "transgendered," from Mother Nature's scientific designation, which fact persists no less than as a scientific truth—not a philosophical truth, a scientific truth. And the result of a tail does not thereby wag the dog. Moreover, let us not assert some fine exception, as both wisdom and social order are a framework of general rules; if every exception were given equal footing, the exceptions would swallow the rule into a form of social chaos.
Such as it is with discrimination, attributes are tested to context. [12] There are two parts to the assessment: 1) the person; and 2) the inclusional grouping. All transgenders share the attribute of contradicting their genetics, but all transgenders are not the same. All sporting groups into which the transgender seeks to be included share the attribute of being a sporting group, but all sporting groups are not the same.
Let us take three sports to expose the point: 1) poker playing; 2) curling; and 3) arm wrestling. First, we need to expose the purpose of the game; that is, the reason for the game's existence:
The purpose of a game is to test excellence; that is, to test what thing is best (excels) among matched competitors. A game is a form of a competitive relative testing. Each sport is testing something, and that something is one or more human attributes, and each attribute has relevance as such.
If we should introduce mind drugs, or steroids, or weakening drugs, into one contestant, such that it artificially causes success or a failure in the essential purpose of the game, then those "cheats" defeat the game and the game's test, and, therefore, the game's result is invalid to express what Mother Nature has provided to humanity, being the tested attribute or group of attributes. Cheating destroys the game, it destroys the test, and destroys the competitive fun. The game becomes an irrelevant facade of itself.
Let us take the poker game. A poker game tests applied skill against luck, and does not materially rely upon physicality DNA. If a brilliant skilled transgender person, XX-woman, and XY-man sit together as players at a poker table, the attribute being tested is not defeated by the XX-woman or XY-man DNA, or the social nominative categorization, in any material cognizable manner. [*2] Therefore, there is no rational basis to exclude gameplay by the transgender person.
But, now let us take arm wrestling. Arm wresting tests physical power, trying to resolve for the most powerful in the matched group. Yes, there is a per se gender-neutral technical skill, as such, but it is subsumed by the test of raw power. As the test of the game is to test the physicality potential of the human contestants, physical potentiality DNA is relevant to the test. By all tendencies, XY-males have a greater potential for physical power by general rule categorical group-type XY-male DNA. The science of DNA doesn't care if someone is insulted, as DNA is a product of Mother Nature, who is immune from all that noise. She persists as scientific truth.
On a particular specific individual basis, could there arise a XX-woman who is stronger than a particular XY-man or the "average man"? Certainly. [13] I have already admitted that there were more than a few (apparently) XX-women in an exercise class I took that were running rings around me. [*2]
But the issue is not one of particulars, but one of rational scientific potentiality. The test of the game is to squeak out that last iota of potentiality into actuality. As a matter of general rules, if not the absolute rule, the best XY-men will defeat the best XX-woman in arm wresting. This is the rational scientific tendency. But...but, even so, let us assume that there is a unique XX-woman who is better than any XY-man in arm wrestling. It could happen. Therefore, it might be fair for XY-men to allow XX-women to participate in the XY-men's category. We notice that, here, the scientific tendencies are not defeated by the exception. It will then perhaps create some new locker-room issues, but that is a different matter. If the weaker by natural disadvantage can defeat the stronger by natural advantage, there is no inherent injustice.
Yet, the inverse is not true. To allow the tending weaker in the genetic test to try to defeat the tending stronger might be fair. If the best natural XX-woman can defeat the best natural XY-man in arm wrestling, the XY-man might be insulted, but he (and all XY-men) will stand in awe and respect of that champion natural XX-woman. People can debate whether 59 year-old Bobby Riggs was a fair match for 29 year-old Billie Jean King, but she famously made her point. [13]
However, the more complicated issue is whether XY-man should be permitted to enter into XX-women arm wrestling. Here, the tendencies of DNA do not need to draw out the exceptional XY-man, since the XY-man's natural DNA provides an unfair competitive advantage. It might make a great game to watch the best XX-woman try to defeat the best XY-men, but the inverse is not true, by tendencies. Indeed, watching an underdog competitor become victorious is exhilarating and inspiring, watching a bully is repulsive and deflating.
As a matter of competitive justice, saying, "I will defeat you with one hand tied behind my back," is distinct from "I will defeat you with an extra hand," by implication of applicable disadvantageous tendencies. The former exposes greater relative competitive excellence consistent with the game's test, but the latter exposes less relative competitive excellence inconsistent with the game's test.
And, we need to keep in mind that it neither all one way or the other. If The Gronk could enter the Olympics in women's gymnastics against Simone Biles—contradicting all the natural tendencies of competition—it might be fair. If the best natural XY-man can defeat the best natural XX-woman in that realm, the XX-woman might be insulted, but she (and all XX-woman) will stand in awe and respect of that champion man. The substantive question is not one of absolutes, but relativity; to wit, being who has the factual tendencies to advantage and disadvantage by assessing context. Like discrimination law, it protects the weaker in fact, which is here a function of the DNA scientific truth relative to the test of the sport's game.
For sports like the middle category, being curling (or bicycling), the question gets more difficult and honed, it being less clear to what DNA is being tested on a material physicality potentiality basis.
Therefore, such as it is for discrimination, a critical assessment is required regarding exactly what is being tested in the game and how the DNA chromosomes of XX-women and XY-men DNA are materially relevant to the question being tested in the game, and whether the game's objective is furthered or contradicted by application of the tendency.
Where nature gives an advantage, the test is not fair, but where nature gives a disadvantage, the test is fair, but it depends upon what exactly is the attribute being tested for excellence.
In conclusion, I will suggest the take-away is this:
The rhetoric that, because a transgender person may be entitled to be a transgender in a diverse, free and free-thinking civil society, it therefore follows that the transgender person is entitled to participate in the transgender person's resultant athletic category, is both logically false and socially foolish. [*5]
It has nothing to do with any failure of love or respect, but rather the common sense of determining the essential purpose of what is being tested in the game and the material relevance of the attribute that exists by natural science or by unnatural contrivance, as the case may be.
The proffered television authority news-pundit statement is a blunt suggestion of intellect. It adduces foolishness, folly, misunderstanding, and chaos. The rhetoric confuses, conflates and homogenizes. Alas, everything is not all the same.
[3] ONE?: The LinkedIn Reference Set [#GRZ_183] 3.1 ONE: 609 [L6:38] ("The Measure")
[8] The History of the Decline and Fall of the American Hegemony—Chapter 7 Excerpt—Wall Street [#GRZ_181]
[9] The History of the Decline and Fall of the American Hegemony—Chapter 6 Excerpt—Responsibility Framework Failure [#GRZ_180]
"Omnia omnibus non eadem." ("Everything is not all the same."); "Id quod suspicione pascitur, tendet ad laqueum et lure." ("That which feeds upon insecurity will tend to create the trap for it, and the lure.") ~ grz
*?Gregg Zegarelli, Esq., earned both his Bachelor of Arts Degree and his Juris Doctorate from Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. His dual major areas of study were History from the College of Liberal Arts and Accounting from the Business School (qualified to sit for the CPA examination), with dual minors in Philosophy and Political Science. He has enjoyed Adjunct Professorships in the Duquesne University Graduate Leadership Master Degree Program (The Leader as Entrepreneur; Developing Leadership Character Through Adversity) and the University of Pittsburgh Law School (The Anatomy of a Deal). He is admitted to various courts throughout the United States of America.
Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.,?is Managing Shareholder of?Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC.?Gregg is nationally rated as "superb" and has more than 35 years of experience working with entrepreneurs and companies of all sizes, including startups,?INC. 500, and publicly traded companies.?He is author of?One: The Unified Gospel of Jesus,?and?The Business of Aesop? article series, and co-author with his father,?Arnold Zegarelli, of?The Essential Aesop: For Business, Managers, Writers and Professional Speakers.?Gregg is a frequent lecturer, speaker and faculty for a variety of educational and other institutions.?
? 2024 Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.?Gregg can be contacted through?LinkedIn.
The statements or opinions made in this article are solely the author's own and not representative of any institution regarding which the author is affiliated.
#GreggZegarelli #Wisdom #Transgender #Athletics #Wisdom #TheGronk #SimoneBiles #Olympics #DNA #PresidentialElection #XXXY #XX #XY #Gronkowski #Zegarelli #GRZ_211
Nonprofit is a tax status, not a business model. Accounting Professional with Single Audit, Federal Grant, Non-Profit Industry Expertise
2 周Before Title IX in 1972, a few of us who were interested in Track had to be on the boys team, because no girls team(s) existed. Occasionally we would compete against another team that may have also had a female or two on their team. Then they league would allow an unofficial race between us. Once Title IX went into effect, three of us went before the School Committee to request funding for a girls team and coach. This went into effect during my Junior and Senior HS years. There were plenty of interested students, we had no problem fielding a team. Now virtually every high school has a girls track and field team, along with many other sports. I know from this experience that females are not as fast or strong as males in this sport. I also know from studying biology in college for three years, before a switch to business and accounting (long story, stuff happens as they say) that an XY chromosome will, with rare exception, initiate male puberty, ensuring the male will develop more strength than the female of the species. Therefore, I bifurcate my support of transgenderism with my opinion that any individual that has been through male puberty should not be allowed to participate in a female sport.