hmmm some interesting things there
View attachment 2141719
*The consensus appears"
appears to whom?Is there consensus? Is there a consensus statement by an organization or body? How have we decided on use a Frye or Daubert standard
"The converse would be those that have experienced a puberty would have an 'unfair advantage' in sport. Although there may be merit in this discussion, it is not a converstion we should be having in this space in this moment"
-As it is the converse, it is dealing with the same logical elements. So why would it not be part of the conversation? perhaps because it does not necessarily promote your ideology?
-Isn't it the "it's never time to talk about it/back burner" frustration that fueled BLM, Evergreen State College, etc? Would you, then, likewise allow for "this isn't the time for that discussion" regarding other social issues? say, transgender issues?
Why would YOUR SPECIFIC issue regarding hormonal/sexual development and its implications in sport be the only one to be discussed by your unanimous decree?
"Be able to participate in the sport of their choice among their gender peers"
-Why if, as you mention, "school sport is about health, social bonding...participating in physical contests in a healthy fashion/sportmanship" , would "gender peers"? Certainly it's not about any advantage as you yourself call talk about unfair advantage "nonsense" based on that purpose of sport.
-Given the asserted purpose of school sport, why is the notion of non-competitive sport NOT even acknowledged?
-working in a "gender peers" framework would be exclusionary. what if the individual has no gender peers (is agender, non-conforming, of a conforming gender with no available peer group)
It also FORCES the individual to DISCLOSE/DECLARE GENDER in order to participate
the whole presentation is EXTREMELY trans-centric and serves to further marginalize the already marginalized non-binary community and individual.