Skip to content

Well, yes

Catalano’s fear is that transgender players who switch from the men’s game to the women’s after transitioning will retain a sporting advantage that would force biological women out of the sport, yet they are immediately condemned as transphobic if they express their concerns.

It’s a club with which to beat you, so it’s used as a club with which to beat you.

11 thoughts on “Well, yes”

  1. I can’t see what advantage transgender snooker players would have over female snooker players….

    That there are men’s and women’s games should tell you there is a male advantage.

    And in the grievance leagues even the black-lesbian-one-armed-snooker-player gets thrashed by the transgender.

  2. I’m with the great JuliaM on this

    Surely as with Darts there’s no intrinsic barrier to Women succeeding. Indeed as far as I am aware there is no bar from women entering men’s tournaments in the sport.

    I object to Male athletes competing in women’s sports on principle (any of them) as it’s cheating and the militant trans lobby are basically genuine fascists. However as far as snooker goes the men’s tournaments are already theoretically mixed.

  3. “However as far as snooker goes the men’s tournaments are already theoretically mixed.”

    So the question is whether any women have competed in the open or mixed division that is named the “men’s”. If so, how did they do?

    I suspect the answer to what advantage men have in snooker can be found in their play.

    As far as I know the only sport where men do not compete are a couple of events in gymnastics (uneven bars?).

  4. I’ve always thought it interesting that men and women can compete in equestrian events. I assume, out of ignorance of horses, that men’s greater strength ought to give them an advantage but nonetheless the lassies seem to do pretty well.

    Or are the absolute best gymkhana riders male?

  5. Horse riders are (looking around our country lanes) ~99% female. But top-level equestrians seem roughly equally divided m/f. Perhaps greater physical strength and (possibly) endurance for men is cancelled out by the fact that they weigh more (on average).

  6. For equestrian sports what be more interesting is the injury rate for men vs women as even if they can compete equally the consequences may not be the same.
    I believe for rugby they used the safety angle rather than whether it was fair or not, which does seem a reasonable way to approach the issue in a contact sport

  7. @dearieme What I’ve been given to understand from equestrians around me ( mostly jousters, but the “pony’s” do get around in other disciplines as well.) it’s not about strength, but rapport with the horse so that you don’t have to use strength.

    There’s still strength/stamina involved, of course, but the level of both is not so demanding that male and female differences in capacity matter. Well into overlap territory, so no issue.
    If it were, the lady jousters I know couldn’t possibly handle the brutes they ride.
    !BIG! lumps of horse, height at the withers over 190 centimeters…

  8. My father is an excellent horseman.

    He thinks horses believe humans are considerably bigger than them, and so we can get away with bossing them about- or, as he puts it, ‘conning’ them.

    They can’t see much with both eyes at once, so they can’t judge distance, and hence can’t judge size.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *