Sunday, September 13, 2009

G is for 'Girl' ?

Apparently when it comes down to balls, Caster Semenya has them.

If you haven't heard this story, in a nutshell, here we have a world-class 'female' athlete, who was challenged because 'she' for all practical purposes, appeared to be a man.

But that wasn't as far as it went. No, in fact, when push came to shove, here we have a 'gal' who packs two testicles tucked away inside her body, and has essentially no practical girl-parts at all.

Now, I'm all for male-ness, and I think it is great that Caster is a guy. But in fact, she chose to identify as a woman. And mostly I'm also fine with that, too - you want to call yourself 'Wendy' or 'Sheila' or whatever and wear dresses and makeup sometimes, go for it.

But when you aren't honest about your true nature in places where it makes a difference - potential intimate partners or sports, for example, well, that's another matter.

I mean, who wants to discover at the point of groping, or getting down, or shagging, or whatever, that the person you are with is of a totally different gender than you thought, and has a completely different reproductive package going on than what you had hoped for. I mean that's just not fair.

And one would think that by the time one got to the world-class level in sports, one might have noticed, between all the physicals and such, that one wasn't really a girl.

Not that the 'shemale sports' angle is new. Back in the day Russia was famous for marketing things as 'women' in the Olympics whose bodies had seen more testosterone than most men could ever dream of their wee lumpkins producing.

But when you think about it, in this unisex world we live in, where silly politicians insist that genders be funded equally and have equal opportunity - unless it hurts the man - here is a prime example of a gender difference.

Why do we segregate the sexes in running, in swimming, in the various physical competitions?

It's because women, quite simply don't measure up. Our species is sexually dimorphic. Or in English - boys are different than girls. And not just in what we carry about in our pants. We are taller, stronger, faster, and for whatever reason, a bit sharper about practical things like geometry and math, when not held back by feminized schools.

And if women want to have any fun - if they want to win in competitive sports, men and things that are genetically male must be kept out.

Oh there is the occasional woman who can compete with the boys, and being all Aristotelean and stuff, these extrordinary women are often allowed to compete as an exception - at least at the high-school level.

But men aren't allowed to compete in women's events. That just wouldn't be fair to the poor ladies.

Because we're different. Because we're better.

And that's good to remember, while the state, the workplace and society tilt the tables again, and again, and again in favor of the woman - it's good to remember that there's a reason. It's because they can't compete in a fair fight.

Not that it isn't unfair to put us in the position that men find themselves in today.
It is unfair. Very unfair.

But it's good to be different. It's good to be male.

Now - back to finding a way out of the gynocentric rat-trap.

Your comments and thoughts are always welcome, - and do please hit the ‘Donate’ button, if you can.

My Best To You In Your Struggles



Elusive Wapiti said...

I've heard that Semenya is a hermaphridite. Does he-she have a vagina?

"It's because they can't compete in a fair fight."

Say this in a room full of women and watch them shriek. They'd rather believe in a fembot's pretty lie than own up to the facts and deal with them accordingly.

Note to fembots: just because men as a group are athletically superior doesn't mean that women are less in worth. Nor does it give you an excuse to oppress men. Your man-pression already results in men dying off earlier than women, a sure sign of a lack of male privilege.

MisAnDrope said...

Yeah, I read she was actually a hermaphrodite too. But the question is what does that mean to the folks who said that? She is supposed to lack a womb or ovaries. The examiner has some good data, and claims she has a vagina and labia, but doesn't cite any source for that info. Anyway, in my opinion, having balls and no ovaries makes you a boy. Sort of.

Glad I'm not her/him.

Larry G. said...

That's the most absurd case I've ever seen, the runner who's basically a man. How could it go on this long without being resolved? Then, when a man displays an elevation in the urinary nortestosterone to testosterone ratio, he's immediately stripped of his medals. There used to be questionable blood and urine tests for performance-enhancing drugs, as I remember. They never delayed in the enforcement of those rules.