Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

Long overdue but science and fairness finally prevail in the IOC.

 

[icowden]

Longwinded way of saying only the highest of elite women athletes deserve fairness in their sports.

Er no. Concise way of pointing out that Hyrox are ensuring fairness in their sport.

Hyrox is so popular they have to have a lottery for places in the competitions. Every comp that man took part in he took a place from a woman competitor.

Again no:

HYROX no longer uses a lottery or ballot system for general event entry. Places are now sold on a first-come, first-served basis through the official website.

He also still competes in the women's category in licensed running events despite UK Athletics rules now excluding males, including this year's Cardiff half marathon.

What does that have to do with Hyrox?

 

[AuroraSaab]

'No longer uses' .....Looks like they've changed it recently then because here's Gabriel himself saying how hard it is to get a place in the Hyrox comps.

The irony of him talking about people missing out when he's taking a place in the Women's category is lol.

What his breaking the rules in UKA races has to do with Hyrox is that it shows he is a man who ignores the rules.

The gymnastics you are prepared to do to justify men taking part in women's sports is admiral.

 

[monkers]

I ask again ... what rule has been broken?

 

[CXRAndy]

The accepted norms men compete with men

 

[AuroraSaab]

This discussion was about BBC reporting but here's you again saying it's ok because the rules allowed it initially. He's ignoring the UKA rules now. It's still wrong.

 

[monkers]

This discussion was about BBC reporting but here's you again saying it's ok because the rules allowed it initially. He's ignoring the UKA rules now. It's still wrong.

I understand and accept that in your opinion that it is wrong. But equally I see the conflation of two ideas that have been introduced as though the one thing is also the other, whereas in fact the one thing has dependency on the other.

On the one hand your position is that they cheated, they broke the rules. On the other hand you are saying that because they cheated that they should not be making commentary.

Therefore chronologically the precedent act has to be one of breaking the rules. If it is the case that rules were not inf fact broken, then the subsequent allegation must fall as the dependent act, meaning no separate determination is required.

This is why I need you to explain why you say that they cheated, since at the time of their competition, it was within the rules.

I think this may lie at @icowden's points, and if that is the case, and my hope is that he might say so, then my agreement must be with him.

 

[icowden]

I think this may lie at @icowden's points, and if that is the case, and my hope is that he might say so, then my agreement must be with him.

Well, yes. Like you I can't see that any rules were broken. So regardless of whether in was appropriate or inappropriate, there isn't any fault or rulebreaking as far as I can see, and the rules suggest no-one has been disadvantaged. It's hard to see a high horse in this case...

 

[AuroraSaab]

None of the women ranked below Gabriel were disadvantaged?

 

[monkers]

None of the women ranked below Gabriel were disadvantaged?

Respond to the points about the allegations you made concerning cheating. What rules were broken and who broke them?

 

[AuroraSaab]

Every man who competes in a competition set up for women is a cheat. Reports that ignore this contentious fact by presenting him as a woman are expressing bias. You can deflect from this all you want but it remains the case.

We're really just back to the I've got a certificate argument.

 

[monkers]

Every man who competes in a competition set up for women is a cheat. Reports that ignore this contentious fact by presenting him as a woman are expressing bias. You can deflect from this all you want but it remains the case.

We're really just back to the I've got a certificate argument.

Admissibility denied.

To allege a person is cheating, you have to make it stand up against the Rule book. You've been unable to do so.

 

[AuroraSaab]

If you could self identify into weight classes in boxing nobody would call a 300lb heavyweight boxer choosing to fight a flyweight a cheat ..... no, we'd all be fine with that cos it's in the rule book.

Also, you require the word 'cheating' to have a very specific meaning whilst expecting us all to accept the word 'woman' should mean anything, including 'men'.

 

[monkers]

If you could self identify into weight classes in boxing nobody would call a 300lb heavyweight boxer choosing to fight a flyweight a cheat ..... no, we'd all be fine with that cos it's in the rule book.

Also, you require the word 'cheating' to have a very specific meaning whilst expecting us all to accept the word 'woman' should mean anything, including 'men'.

The difficulty you are facing is that the contemporaneous rules were not to your liking. Stated that way I have no objection. However, stating that they were cheating is a false allegation. Stating that they would be unable to write about Hyrox in an unbiased way due to their exclusion under revised rules could have had validity, however you did not demonstrate such bias in the writing.

 

[CXRAndy]

Entering a division that you dont obviously belong in, is cheating, plain and simple