An interesting piece published yesterday by Unherd. My published comments are here.
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
Our YouTube channel is here, our Facebook channel here, our Twitter channel here.
If everyone who reads this gives us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. You can support our work by making a donation here.
Hugely enjoyable this, as the obvious is skirted round and mental contortions abound to avoid the actual explanation for “women’s ” this or that sport/ games/ competition. Which always boils down to the sexes are different physically and mentally. And women would win nothing. Has anyone seen any protests/ objections/ or mention even of women transitioned to men ? Surely they need to get prizes too? Where are the voices to make Mens competions fairer to trans men ? Because of course no one even begins to think there is any prospect of trans men winning anything at all.
In an interesting misapplication of empirical “and without separate female competitions, women might win very little. So, from purely empirical reasoning, women’s competitions make sense.” So there is no reason to have women’s competions because otherwise women might not win prizes! But why should women win prizes if they aren’t the best of the best? You could just give women prizes for turning up then every one would get a prize ! The truth is that women’s competions exist to give women prizes, good old fashioned chivalrous generosity, nothing to do with “equality”. At some point no doubt someone will wade in with the usual clincher, somehow women,s chess is a safe space from VAWG. Male Chess players being rapists or wife beaters enforcing misogyny and patriarchy with the “Male gaze” jokes and outrages like opening doors etc.